Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 21:05:03 +1000
Subject: Re: the state and violence


Steve/All,

1) I don't know. Stopping arms sales and reducing inventories of all weapons
would be a constructive step.

2) The wealthy people who own the transnationals need the nation-states to
do
their dirty work just as those who own each nation-state need presidents,
ministers, legislators, to facilitate transfer of the wealth of a nation's
workers to its owners.

3) Nation-states, with or without the window-dressing of the U.N., are a
sort of Fight Club who sponsor sacrificial death as a sacred duty, and are
privileged to
wreak violence on others (including collateral killing of non-combattants)
by declaring, or informally waging, war that legitimizes murder.

Today, on TV, Secy. Powell described, how he asked Arafat to STOP the
violence, but left Israel's decision up to Sharon, the duly elected leader
of that nation.

Is bulldozing houses an act of violence?  Do the perpetrators wear soldier
uniforms?




violence with uniforms.


----- Original Message -----
From: steve.devos <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
To: <lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 1:47 AM
Subject: the state and violence


> All
>
> When I was very young we essentially believed that its was time for the
> state to be held accountable for the violence it committed and
> contained. At some point we accepted that the issue was not simply the
> state, but the socio-economic system as a whole, but not withstanding
> this it was not possible or sensible to retreat from the former position.
>
> Even allowing for the idea that the state was being superceded, in some
> circumstances by transnational and multinational corporations, an idea
> which attempts to ignore the reality of the socio-economic system, in
> which the state is but one extremely important and inevitable pole. For
> example in our capital/techno-scientific society the state in either its
> nation-state or the empire form is essential.
>
> Given our states behaviours over the past 50 years how should we respond?
>
> regards
>
> sdv
>
>
>