Skip to main content
Politics and Violence
- When it comes to the rules of killing other people and also the punishment for breaking those rules, the system is different from the Yanomamo versus western cultures in general. On the side of the Yanomamo, it states in the article that their judical system does not consist of actual laws or even people like judges or chiefs to carry out the law. Their way of a judical system relies on the behavior of their people based on their customs and beliefs that act as the law. The consequences for breaking their customs also result in revenge fights or killings. On the side of western cultures in general, it is the complete opposite. The judicial system has a strict set of laws and also people to carry out the laws in written language. When someone is convicted of killing, their reasoning of why is taken into consideration. The consequences of breaking the law may result time in prison or jail or probation in other cases.
- The process of revenge killing is simple to the fact that it mostly is giving the killer a taste of their own medicine and feeling the pain that was felt by the loved ones of the people that they have killed. In the article it states that the loved ones of the killed would kill others while in pain and grievance in memory of ones who have become ill. The article also states that instead of believing in natural death, the Yanomamo believe in magic and also that the reason why a loved one has passed was the doing of the shamans from the enemy villages. The enemy shaman is also blamed for causing the mortality in infants across the village.
- The definition of the Unokais are those who have killed. In order to obtain this title, there has to be a killing and then afterwards there is a special ceremonial ritual. This ritual is performed on the killer to rid them of any supernatural harm or threat that maybe be brought by the spirit of their victim. When the status is obtained, their status is known throughout the village and others and the killer is also tied to their reputation. Being a non-unokais means staying low profile, which is beneficial to the point where there is no target on your back and no one will be coming after you for revenge on the death of a loved one. A man may choose to be a unokais instead of a non unokais because a unokais shows valiance and aggression which is rewarded in the culture.
- Political structure
- This structure is determined by kinship. At the top are the leaders or patas who are the main determination on which killing is considered a revenge killing or not. Depending on their decision on whether or not to show mercy, this can determine their reputation or have them seen as a weak leader. This is primitive as being seen as weak goes against their culture values.
- Social Status
- The Unokais are treated with deep respect and courage among the people. They are also treated very highly. When one kills multiple times, it is seen as a strong sense of power and their reputation is boosted and it is seen as an improvement among those who have killed once.
- Kinship
- Being accepted into the membership of the village is determined by kinship. Among the village, when a loved one is killed, the revenge made turn into a raid. The higher the kinship is of the leader of the raid, the more likely others will join in and support. For those who choose not to raid, they are then condemned and seen as sinners.
- Marriage and Reproduction
- Polygamy is seen very commonly among the village especially among the Unokais. Because of the mere popularity of the Unokais, they are seen as more attractive and therefore attract more women and produce more offspring. Unlike the non-Unokais, whose reputation is not as popular, they are more likely to lose their woman to the Unokais and seen as unattractive. In the case that a child is seen as the tragedy kill of a revenge killing, producing more offspring becomes a plus.
- If laws were not put into place by the judicial system, havoc and chaos would wreck anywhere and there would be no true rules. Laws are seen as a way of keeping the system and the community and the killing thoughts balanced. For example for the the Yanomamo people, if there were no laws in place, then killing would be seen as a target on anyone's back. There would be no sense of safety and no rational thinking. With the laws in place, the people are then forced to think rationally and not act on the emotional or physical urges and there is a sense of safety and somewhat peace.
While I agree that the details of how both populations address killing are different, how different are they really at their core? Both populations have strict rules regarding killing, correct? Ours are written down and are called "laws". You call the Yanomamo's rules "customs" but functionally, are they really different? There are repercussions of breaking both sets of rules, correct? How different are these systems, really?
ReplyDeleteYou emphasize the issue of shamans in your second section, but let's not forget that this practice occurs as a result of actual killings. Can you describe the process of a raid? What determines who will participate and who won't?
Very good comparison of the benefits of the unokais vs. the non-unokais status. Keep in mind that while a non-unokais might not be a target for a revenge killing, they might be a target for having his wife stolen from him since others will know he is not inclined to take part in revenge killings. They also lose the support of others, so if he is a victim, few may defend him.
Good political discussion.
You discuss the high status position but don't forget the low status. We need to understand how the culture itself is organized, not just the high status individuals.
Good discussion of kinship and marriage/reproductive influences.
"...there would be no true rules..."
What are "true rules"? I get the point you are trying to make in this last section, but this actually needs to be explained. Are their "non-true rules"? Not being facetious here. When you say something, be prepared to explain it.
At the same time, this doesn't really answer the question: Why do we need laws against something no one should want to do?
We are creatures of biology, regardless of how "civilized" we might want to think we are. Killing can benefit an organism if they gain resources or a mate or defend their offspring in the process, correct? So that benefit is still there in humans, whether we like it or not. Understand that this isn't excusing the behavior. It just explains it. But we need laws against this behavior, not because no one wants to do it but because sometimes people can benefit from this behavior. Laws protect us from selfish actions of others, acting to their own benefit and the harm of others.