Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!looking!uunet!bu.edu!dimacs.rutgers.edu!rutgers!shelby!neon!Neon!jmc From: jmc@DEC-Lite.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) Newsgroups: trial.talk.politics.peace Subject: Re: Peace? Yes, fight for peace, among other things. Message-ID: Date: 1 Mar 91 03:43:16 GMT References: <58120@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <2247@njitgw.njit.edu> <1991Feb19.060633.11270@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <10913@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> <10358@ncar.ucar.edu> <1991Feb25.170244.2091@visix.com> <10383@ncar.ucar.edu> <1991Feb28.201052.3648@visix.com> <10433@nca Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System) Distribution: na Organization: /u/jmc/.organization Lines: 10 In-Reply-To: gary@neit.cgd.ucar.edu's message of 1 Mar 91 05:28:29 GMT Gary Strand is right in explaining many conflicts to tribalism. The concept even applies to many controversies on the net. A person develops such loyalty to one group that he thinks up arguments rather than tries to discover the truth. However, in many political controversies, people are more motivated by their hostilities than by their loyalties. To us conservatives and to us American patriots, some people defend Saddam Hussein, e.g. by repeating as truth all his accusations against Kuwait, not out of love for him but out of hostility to American society as currently represented by George Bush. This doesn't seem to be quite the same as tribalism.