Hugh Gusterson

In conclusion, through an elaborate display of paradoxes and real blends of two opposing cultures, Gusterson (1998) tells why there can’t be an end to “war” and a beginning to “peace” because of the fixated behaviors that each the nuclear scientists and the anti-nuclear activist observe to keep momentum within the context of their culture. Each group will inevitably be blind to the realities and illusions that barrage its members. This is even true inter-culturally. Conventions in culture specify where each group stands in its aligning discourse of supporting or deterring nuclear arms (Dillon 1989; Kenney 1985). When one is immersed into another exploit that is unfamiliar to the socialized experience that is normative, re-structuring and re-socializing occurs bringing the individual to a definite political and moral ethos. These ethoses have their own breaths and pulse rates; they will survive inter-dependently.… (meer)

I actually really enjoyed the book Nuclear Rites. It's a study on the socialization of nuclear weapons engineers from an anthropological perspective. *yawn* right? It turned out to challenge many assumptions I held on how we may come to end up on one side or another of the political spectrum. Gusterson talks about the "language of fear" and how it is possible for one person to be completely against nukes and another to firmly believe that they are viable deterrent. He keeps things very balanced and concludes with a statement on the ramifications of taking extreme sides.… (meer)