Vengeance is Ours

I definitely found the article "Vengeance is Ours" interesting. It was amazing how many topics this particular article covered. The prevailing issue of course is vengeance and how these tribes went about in a horrible killing cycle that would never really end because of vengeance. However, there is also much talk about trust, loyalty, the effects of a different governmental system, and how sometimes these systems fail in giving justice. A few different parts of the article I found not only thought provoking but shocking..
1.) The author states, “In times of war, even modern state societies quickly turn the enemy into a dehumanized figure of hatred, only to enjoin us to stop hating again as soon as a peace treaty is signed.”
If any one has ever seen American war propaganda in the past century, this is incredibly true. It is scary to compare America to a place like the New Guinea Highlands where war was these people’s lives.
2.) They used pigs as currency for buying money.
This fact is just absurd, there is not much else to say about it.
3.) The fact that when someone killed another in a different tribe they were publicly decorated with medals and admired. “‘If you die in a fight, you will be considered a hero, and people will remember you for a long time,’ he said. ‘But if you die of a disease you will be remembered for only a day or a few weeks, and then you will be forgotten.’”
4.) Trust issues are also made clear in the article. Daniel talks about if you hire people to fight you need to make sure they are loyal, because they could always kill you and demand a reward for your death from the opposing side. Just the thought of living in a culture, where things like this actually happened, appalls me.
5.) However, Daniel also discusses loyalty in how the women who married into the opposing tribe would help him because they were born into the Ombal clan. Daniel proceeds to tell us that an “uncle” of his on the opposing side also once shot a blunt arrow at him to warn him that he was in danger.
6.) The part when Daniel tells the story of how Isum was paralyzed in a battle, and that this punishment was more satisfying than if he died is just crazy. It’s so hard to comprehend living in our society, that there are cultures where things like this are completely acceptable and vengeance is so imperative.
7.) I also liked the discussion on how the people in his clan are enjoying their new governmental system and how the change was for the better, for the most part. Historically, when a government steps in and tries to completely change a state, the new system isn’t exactly supported by the people.
8.) My favorite part of the article though was definitely Jozef Nabel’s story. Perhaps because it was more relatable, or his anguish is more understandable. Daniel was satisfied with his revenge, but Jozef was virtually robbed of his. Jozef did the right thing by turning in his family’s murderer, yet he did not get the justice he needed for such a horrendous act.


I thought the article made some very good points as well..
1.) “As I eventually came to realize, Daniel’s thirst for vengeance and his hostility to rival clans are really not so far from our own habits of mind as we might think.”
It’s scary to think that people can not much so relate to this story, but understand it.
As the author further points out..
2.) “We regularly ignore the fact that the thirst for vengeance is among the strongest of human emotions.” After discussing how we do not embrace this emotion he later states, “We grow up being taught that such feelings are primitive, something to be ashamed of and to transcend.”
3.) The author also states in regard to Jozef’s story, “I came to appreciate the terrible personal price that law-abiding citizens pay for leaving vengeance to the state.” However he later points out, “Yet, even if the killer had been properly punished, Jozef would still have been deprived of the personal satisfaction that Daniel enjoyed.”