I think David Levy puts his finger on a key question when he says


"Hugh Willmott writes: "I find it hard to believe
that they did not experience some disaffection (to put it mildly) if not
angst and disillusionment prior to their recruitment" - well, I find it
hard to believe this too, but we have to face the possibility that
various forms of violence would persist even in the absence of
occupation, and alienation, and humiliation. This has also been true of
the West, of course, for long periods of history -- it's hard to
attribute the violence of the Inquisition, the Holocaust, or the
destruction of native Americans to humiliations and alienation suffered
by the perpetrators. So the troubling question remains, what do we do
about fundamentalists/nationalists of all stripes who want to impose
their beliefs by force? Are we so sure that violence and hatred are
caused by patriarchy, capitalism, and nationalism? Is it not a form of
ideological elitism to assume that if everyone adopted our (CMS?)
values, the world could live in peace and harmony?

My response to this is :

1. There is a danger of generalizing and universalizing. What helps to 
explain the Inquisitiion or Holocaust, for example, may be particular to the 
pursuit of that terror.

2. In the case of contemporary suicide bombings, I think we need to better 
understand martyrdom :  the egoism (?) of  (heroic) death as personal 
salvation (ticket to a better live in the world beyond). [I suspect that the 
mystery of  death is intriguing/beguiling/seductive in most cultures - video 
games and films are a contemporary manifestation of fair ground rides, etc. 
But there is a step change to the belief that violence is a means of 
personal salvation. Sigificantly, mystery is replaced by certainty - a 
highly attractive proposition if you can embrace it].

3. I am not so sure that there are `CMS values', nor am I sure that I would 
like there to be. Discussion on this list suggests a degree of diversity, 
and I suspect that it may be greater if `lurkers' are included.

4. It seems plausible to say that `only if we take for granted liberal/left 
values of tolerance, dialogue, democratic decision-making and cooperative 
resolution of conflicts that we find ourselves looking for explanations of 
"aberrant" violence'; and that that `not everyone agrees that peace and 
harmony is a goal to strive for'. Without essentialising or absolutising 
these values and goals, it is nonetheless possible to  argue/live for them - 
and hopefully in ways that are more capable of listening to the Other than 
is apparent in recent opinion-forming pronouncements of Western `leaders'. 
How does/can CMS contribute to educating the educators?

Hugh



  Hugh Willmott

  Director of PhD Programme
  Convenor of Human Resources and Organization Group

  Diageo Professor of Management Studies
  The Judge Institute of Management
  University of Cambridge
  Trumpington Street
  Cambridge CB2 1AG
  www.jims.cam.ac.uk

  Home Page : http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/close/hr22/hcwhome

  4th Critical Management Studies Conference to be held in Cambridge in July 
2005.
  See www.cms4.org for details

Critical Management Studies : A Reader, OUP, 2005
Chris Grey and Hugh Willmott
Available now through all good bookshops, or direct from Oxford University 
Press at:
http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-928607-8









----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Levy" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: Switching Perspective


> I've been interested in resistance for a long time, and it's certainly 
> enticing to see suicide bombing as an extreme form of violent resistance. 
> My family and I have had several close shaves, from Netanya to Jerusalem 
> to London. While these experiences have pushed most of my family to the 
> extreme right, they have led me to be more active in anti-occupation 
> activism - I have understood Palestinian violence and anger as arising 
> from the humiliation and despair of occupation and harassment.
>
> A nuanced analysis needs to view the development of suicide bombings in a 
> subsector of some Arab societies as part of the historical development of 
> specific cultural political and religious formations, in which local and 
> indigenous elements interact with Western influences - Palestinian society 
> has obviously been constructed in relation to the Israeli occupation, and 
> the Iraqi resistance seems to take this as a template.
>
>            At the same time, I'm uncomfortable with our invocation of 
> Western ideals and values (honoured mostly in the breach, of course) to 
> try to understand the motivations and culture of jihad and martyrdom. 
> Perhaps it is only if we take for granted liberal/left values of 
> tolerance, dialogue, democratic decision-making and cooperative resolution 
> of conflicts that we find ourselves looking for explanations of "aberrant" 
> violence. Hugh Willmott writes: "I find it hard to believe that they did 
> not experience some disaffection (to put it mildly) if not angst and 
> disillusionment prior to their recruitment" - well, I find it hard to 
> believe this too, but we have to face the possibility that various forms 
> of violence would persist even in the absence of occupation, and 
> alienation, and humiliation. This has also been true of the West, of 
> course, for long periods of history -- it's hard to attribute the violence 
> of the Inquisition, the Holocaust, or the destruction of native Americans 
> to humiliations and alienation suffered by the perpetrators. So the 
> troubling question remains, what do we do about 
> fundamentalists/nationalists of all stripes who want to impose their 
> beliefs by force? Are we so sure that violence and hatred are caused by 
> patriarchy, capitalism, and nationalism? Is it not a form of ideological 
> elitism to assume that if everyone adopted our (CMS?) values, the world 
> could live in peace and harmony?
>
>            And not everyone even agrees that peace and harmony is a goal 
> to strive for. Some (elements of?) societies like to think that hierarchy, 
> heroism, nobility, discipline, honor, courage, sacrifice, and national 
> glory are far more important. Dulce et decorum est, and all that 
> nonsense....but can we write it off as "false consciousness"?
>
> and by the way, has anyone taken a look recently at the values and 
> discourses embedded in the medieval mystical fantasy worlds of our youth, 
> in video games, films, comics etc.? the totalitarian discourse of violence 
> and chivalry seems to be very enticing and seductive....
>
> David
>
> -- 
> David Levy Professor, Department of Management University of 
> Massachusetts, Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd., Boston, MA 02125, USA Tel: 
> 617-287-7860 http://www.faculty.umb.edu/david_levy/
>
>