Display:
What I have in mind is the universally recognised, more narrowly defined kind of unorganised crime that (for example) makes people fearful of others on the street, afraid to go out at night, etc.

Well, peasants were afraid when feudal lords cruised up with their troops, or just tax collectors. While 'all politicians steal'/'all bureaucrats are corrupt' are more real and pressing concepts of crime for many (especially poor) people than a general fear of being robbed. BTW what you describe is not 'universally recognised', I'd think it is not valid in at least some isolated cultures.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Nov 15th, 2006 at 05:02:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm not arguing that there are no other reasons for people to fear one another, nor that the other reasons aren't often stronger, nor that "officially approved" forms of repression and extortion should be seen as OK. I think we agree here.

I do, however, think that there are universally recognised crimes (or equivalent severe wrongs in societies where the concept of "crime" doesn't quite fit), at least in societies that aren't in the process of destruction. One might, however, have to specify that the victims have a status that we'd regard as irrelevant (e.g., preferred race, higher class, virginity), and that the perpetrator likewise lacks a status that we wouldn't regard justifying the action (e.g., father, noble).

Words and ideas I offer here may be used freely and without attribution.

by technopolitical on Wed Nov 15th, 2006 at 11:22:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series