Lecture notes: First encounters

War on Palestine

Recent diplomatic events:

First encounters and IR theory

What can first encounters tell us about the nature of international relations?

  • I had a teacher, Alexander Wendt, who wrote about this …

Part of a critique of Realism in IR theory

  • anarchy: the world is a bad place and you always have to prepare yourself for the worst
  • good guys get killed
  • the tragedy of Realism

What this means for a first encounter …

  • you have to arm yourself and be prepared to defend yourself, or to kill

Constructivists

  • “anarchy is what states make of it” — famous Constructivist catchphrase — you need to interpret the situation — it means nothing by itself
  • the interaction at the time of a first encounter provides the basis for the interpretation

This creates a negative loop where everything is viewed in a suspicious light — and there are more conflicts than there have to be

Better:

  • positive loop

We go into the situation with:

  • needs given by nature
  • ideas regarding our role — conqueror/conquered — proselytizer/ potential convert

The interaction is a matter of imposing your interpretation on the situation

  • power is important here
  • but it is not necessarily a conflictual situation

Many kinds of outcomes are possible

Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics. 1999

Imagine an original encounter between Ego and Alter. In the beginning is ego’s gesture, which may consist, for example, of an advance, a retreat, a brandishing of arms, a laying down of arms, or an attack. For ego, this gesture represents the basis on which it is prepared to respond to alter. This basis is unknown to alter, however, and so it must make an inference or “attribution” about ego’s intentions and, in particular, given that this is anarchy, about whether ego is a threat.

The first is the gesture’s and ego’s physical qualities, which are in part contrived by ego and which include the direction of movement, noise, numbers, and immediate consequences of the gesture. The second consideration concerns what alter would intend by such qualities were it to make such a gesture itself.

Alter may make an attributional “error” in its inference about ego’s intent, but there is also no reason for it to assume a priori — before the gesture — that ego is threatening, since it is only through a process of signaling and interpreting that the costs and probabilities of being wrong can be determined. Social threats are constructed, not natural.

European rituals of possession

Spanish rituals of possession

The Requerimiento

“Therefore I beg and require you as best I can,” the conquistadors declared, in Spanish, to the puzzled locals, “…we will not compel you to turn Christians. But if you do not to it … with the help of God, I will enter forcefully against you, and I will make war everywhere and however I can, and I will subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and His Majesty, and I will take your wives and children, and I will make them slaves …

“The appropriate ceremony and words”

  • the right to rule was established through language
  • had to be officially done

Witnessed and recorded

  • derived from the pope
  • obligation to convert the locals

“Discovery” and naming as crucial

  • as a kind of baptism
  • read you your rights

The Spaniards started with a census

  • it was all a matter of control over labor
  • the Spaniards felt bad about all those people who died in the plague — also, they lost labor

English rituals

Take earth and small twigs

  • no proper rituals were required but only became real once they settled
  • built fences possession of land — but trade was always more important
  • cf. how the English never thought of themselves as “imperialists”

Derived from the king of England

  • powers from God —
  • religion supported the state but it was not a way to control the locals
  • says nothing about the obligation to convert the locals to Christianity

Naming not important the British

  • started by making maps

The English were really happy about all those people who died

  • that cleared the land for them
  • “a Wonderfull Plague” demonstrating God’s “great Goodness and Bountie towards Us and Our people.”

The Portuguese

Putting up stone pillars bearing the royal arms

  • directed at the Europeans not the natives
  • a way to show that “we have been here”

The English treated them as navigational devices, at best

  • refused to accept claims that didn’t come with a settlement
  • but the Portuguese were also very commercially oriented
  • no permanent settlements required

Dutch rituals

During an expedition to the uninhabited island of Mauritius

  • the Dutch vice admiral nailed a wooden board bearing the arms of Holland, Amsterdam, and Zeeland to a tree
  • an official declaration of dominion over the territory.

What conclusions can we draw

The English obsession with property rights

  • Biblical injunction to be “stewards of the earth”
  • they are not doing their job — we have a right to the land
  • “a land without people for a people without land”

From Seed’s examination of European rituals of possession, we can learn several important lessons about how cultural, legal, and religious frameworks influenced the actions of colonial powers in the New World. The differences in the rituals and practices among various European countries reflect their distinct views on sovereignty, dominion, and entitlement.

1. **European Rituals of Possession**: European explorers used a variety of symbolic acts to mark their presence or claim territories, which were regarded by their rulers as official acts indicating dominion over the territory. The Portuguese, for example, saw the placement of stone pillars as signaling their possession of territory, following the Roman tradition of stone markers. The French and Spanish envisioned the cross as a sign of having taken possession, and the Dutch regarded nailing the arms of the States General to a tree similarly【30†source】.

2. **Cultural Differences in Understanding Possession**: The English conception of taking possession was notably different from that of other Europeans. While the Portuguese, Spanish, and French emphasized symbolic acts (like placing crosses, shields, and stone pillars) as manifestations of dominion, the English focused on actual occupation and the construction of permanent edifices to prove possession. This difference in practice underscores a deeper cultural divergence regarding the notion of sovereignty and the means of establishing authority over new lands【30†source】.

3. **Symbolic Versus Actual Occupation**: Seed highlights that for the English, symbolic manifestations like crosses, shields, and stone pillars functioned merely as mnemonic devices or navigational beacons, reflecting a practical approach to dominion rooted in physical occupation and habitation. In contrast, other European powers imbued these symbols with official significance, reflecting a more ceremonial and declarative approach to claiming territories【30†source】.

4. **Competing Imperial Aims and Cultural Misunderstandings**: The conflicts over sovereignty and dominion between European powers were not only legal and political but also deeply cultural and linguistic. These differences led to inevitable conflicts over the meaning of sovereignty, as seen in disputes between the Portuguese and English over trading rights in Guinea. The English denied Portuguese dominion based on differing cultural and linguistic conceptions of “discovery” and “taking possession,” illustrating how imperial competition was intertwined with cultural and linguistic misunderstandings【30†source】【30†source】.

Seed’s analysis reveals the complexity of European rituals of possession and the cultural, legal, and religious underpinnings that shaped these practices. The study underscores the role of cultural and linguistic differences in colonial encounters and the ways in which these differences informed European imperial ambitions and conflicts in the New World.

Dancing with strangers

  • look at some actual cases of first interaction …

Dahomey

The traditional welcoming ceremonies of the kings of Dahomey, a historical kingdom located in what is now Benin, West Africa, were elaborate and rich in cultural significance. These ceremonies were not only a display of hospitality but also a powerful expression of the kingdom’s wealth, military might, and the king’s divine status. Dahomey was known for its highly structured society and for being one of the most powerful kingdoms in Africa from the 17th through the 19th centuries.

Dancing Dutchmen in Japan — Engelbert Kaempfer, 1729

The Emperor, who hitherto sat among the Ladies, almost opposite to us, at a considerable distance, did now draw nearer, and sate himself down on our right behind the lattices, as near us as possibly he could. Then he order’d us to take off our Cappa, or Cloak, being our Garment of Ceremony, then to stand upright, that he might have a full view of us; again to walk, to stand still, to compliment each other, to dance, to jump, to play the drunkard, to speak broken Japanese, to read Dutch, to paint, to sing, to put our cloaks on and off. Mean while we obey’d the Emperor’s commands in the best manner we could, I join’d to my dance a love-song in High German.

Vasco da Gama in southern Africa

Ravenstein, E. G. A Journal of the First Voyage of Vasco Da Gama, 1497–1499

On December 1, 1498, Vasco da Gama and his four ships made landfall in the vicinity of today’s South African city of Port Elizabeth. Spotting some natives on the shore, and eager to replenish their supplies, the Europeans launched their dinghies. After an initial exchange of goods, four or five of the natives began playing flutes ‘and they danced in the style of Negroes.’ Yet it did not take long for Vasco da Gama and his crew to respond in kind. ‘The captain-major then ordered the trumpets to be sounded, and we, in the boats, danced, and the captain-major did so likewise when he rejoined us.’ When the dancing ended, the European sailors returned to their ships with a black ox which they had bought for the price of three bracelets.

Charles Darwin in Tierra del Fuego

Charles Darwin, 1832

‘In the morning the Captain sent a party to communicate with the Fuegians,’ Darwin wrote in his diary on December 17, 1832. The natives, he reported, are a sad lot. ‘Their very attitudes were abject, and the expression of their countenances distrustful, surprised, and startled.’ Yet, luckily, they were excellent mimics. As soon as we coughed or yawned or made any odd motion, Darwin recalled, they immediately imitated us. This is how a face-pulling competition got underway. At first ‘some of our party began to squint and look awry,’ but before long one of the young Fuegians ‘succeeded in making far more hideous grimaces.’ Next, an old man patted Darwin on the chest and made ‘a chuckling kind of noise, as people do when feeding chickens,’ and this demonstration of friendship was repeated several times. ‘It was concluded by three hard slaps, which were given me on the breast and back at the same time. He then bared his bosom for me to return the compliment, which being done, he seemed highly pleased.’ This exchange soon led to dancing. ‘When a song was struck up by our party, I thought the Fuegians would have fallen down with astonishment. With equal surprise they viewed our dancing; but one of the young men, when asked, had no objection to a little waltzing.’

Other cases:

Transported English convicts and Aborigines

  • dancing together like children at a picnic

What kind of knowledge do we need?

We gain knowledge by means of our bodies — by interacting with each other

  • dancing is a good example

Welcoming ceremonies

  • how dancing features in welcoming ceremonies the world over
  • we get to see and interact — give and take — form a unit

“Carnal knowledge”

  • the bodies were getting on very well together
  • “like children at a picnic”

Later on — detached, rational, knowledge —

  • abstract and verbalized
  • putting things into categories

Famous categorization of India by British colonial administrators

  • no, they did not dance with the natives
  • detachment allows control — and control allows depersonalization
  • and destruction of local cultures — even genocides
  • there are no Tierra Fuegians left

Critique of Constructivism

Constructivists are correct of course

  • we do interpret situations based on gestures and movements
  • if we don’t share the language we have no other choice

But there is more to knowledge

  • carnal knowledge is far richer,
  • not verbalized, not verbalizable

The point is not to arrive at interpretations

  • the Constructivists are too Cartesian — clear division between body and mind —
  • interpretations happen in the mind
  • carnal knowledge continues to be important throughout …

Erdoğan and new world mosques

 

Read more here

Hernan Cortes on Tenochtitlan

The city is as large as Seville or Cordova; its streets, I speak of the principal ones, are very wide and straight; some of these, and all the inferior ones, are half land and half water, and are navigated by canoes. … There are all kinds of green vegetables, especially onions, leeks, garlic, watercresses, nasturtium, borage, sorrel, artichokes, and golden thistle; fruits also of numerous descriptions, amongst which are cherries and plums, similar to those in Spain; … Different kinds of cotton thread of all colors in skeins are exposed for sale in one quarter of the market, which has the appearance of the silk-market at Granada, although the former is supplied more abundantly. Painters’ colors, as numerous as can be found in Spain, and as fine shades; deerskins dressed and undressed, dyed different colors; earthenware of a large size and excellent quality

Uncontacted people

estimates from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the UN and the non-profit group Survival International point to between 100 and 200 tribes numbering up to 10,000 individuals …

The Joshua Project

John Chau Aced Missionary Boot Camp. Reality Proved a Harsher Test

dental forceps to remove arrows

also illegal — visits prohibited by the Indian govt

“Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

In the past few decades, mission work has soared. The number of American Christian missionaries going overseas has increased to around 130,000 today, from 57,000 in 1970,

He told his friends that he wanted to immerse himself in the culture and stay for years. He also reassured them he would take it slow, leaving gifts for the islanders and waiting for them to open up to him before he approached.

He told his friends that he wanted to immerse himself in the culture and stay for years. He also reassured them he would take it slow, leaving gifts for the islanders and waiting for them to open up to him before he approached.

He told his friends that he wanted to immerse himself in the culture and stay for years. He also reassured them he would take it slow, leaving gifts for the islanders and waiting for them to open up to him before he approached.

Where is the North Sentinel Island?

Read more at

Alien encounters

Wendt, “A Science of UFOs,” 2019

Taboo — taking UFOs seriously

  • you need to do more investigations
  • weird that no one studies UFOs

Make the case that UFOs are real

searching for little green men

Unexplained Areal Phenomenon

  • natural explanations — temporary UFOs
  • genuine UFOs — that don’t have a natural explanation

US Navy

  • pilot reports since WW2
  • but UFOs pose security hazards
  • Navy: different policy — require them to report
  • released clips

but are they ETs?

  • we have to listen to the pilots
  • extraordinary feats depending on areodynamics

very stupid not to investigate this

  • why are they here?
  • up-close contact would be disruptive

A science of UFOs

  • network of monitoring stations
  • monitor the skies looking for things

Why is this a taboo?

  • why don’t we study this the way we study everything else?
  • we are subconsciously afraid of what we would find

the people should find out first for themselves

David Grusch UFO whistleblower claims

Recent discussions in the US Congress regarding UFOs have centered around allegations of a cover-up by the government, specifically involving claims of a secret program to recover and reverse-engineer alien technology. During a hearing before a House Oversight subcommittee, retired Major David Grusch, a former Air Force intelligence official, testified about what he described as a decades-long program by the US government to retrieve and reverse-engineer alien craft. Grusch claimed that in his official duties, he was informed about a “multi-decade UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) crash retrieval and reverse engineering program” to which he was denied access. He also mentioned having spoken with officials who had direct knowledge of crafts with “nonhuman” origins and stated that the US government had recovered “biologics” from some of those crafts. Grusch suggested that the US has likely been aware of “non-human” activity since the 1930s and claimed he faced retaliation for coming forward with his discoveries【7†source】.

In response to these allegations, Sean Kirkpatrick, the head of the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), which is responsible for investigating UFOs, denied the existence of any such program to recover and reverse-engineer extraterrestrial technology. Kirkpatrick emphasized that AARO has found no credible evidence to support the claims of a reverse engineering program for non-human technology. He criticized the allegations as insulting to the officers of the Department of Defense and Intelligence Community who joined AARO, highlighting the career risks involved. Kirkpatrick also noted that the whistleblowers have never worked for or acted as representatives of AARO and that the central source of the allegations refused to communicate with AARO. Furthermore, he contested the notion that any individual had been harmed or killed as a result of providing information to AARO and encouraged anyone with information about UAPs to come forward【7†source】.

The hearing revealed tensions between lawmakers, some of whom accused the government of obscuring its work on UFOs, and Pentagon officials who deny the allegations of a cover-up. The discourse reflects broader global interest in UFOs and potential extraterrestrial visits to Earth, sparked by news reports and official acknowledgments of investigations into unidentified aerial phenomena. However, the Pentagon and AARO maintain that there is no verifiable evidence to substantiate claims regarding the possession or reverse-engineering of extraterrestrial materials【7†source】.

The Argument, “Should We Say Hi to Aliens?”

  • Unidentified Arial Phenomena, Pentagon report

SETI, Vakos

Will we ever be able to make contact with them

There have been attempts to send signals out

Cortes and the Aztecs

  • but Cortes was not invited

We have already made ourselves known

we might as well explain ourselves better

The movies are always about humans, not really aliens

  • why would they ever try to destroy us?

It doesn’t have to be Darwinian

any contacts would show us that we aren’t that special

we’ll have a greater sense of our uniqueness

treat us like Galactic lurkers

Michio Kaku

These could really be extraterrestrial

there are certainly lifeforms in other parts of the universe

all stars have planets

we shouldn’t try to communicate with these aliens

there are five reasons:

  1. technologically inferior civilizations always lost out — and that’s us!
  2. must start by figuring out what they have and what they have — stupid to assume that they are friendly
  3. evolution in action — survival of the fittest — anarchy out there
  4. we still haven’t broadcasted that much yet
  5. they might simply step on us

It is a Darwinian world — survival of the fittest is the law of life

they have probably been checking out our communications already

we have to figure out what they want

There are things that we can offer them

We shouldn’t assume they want to help us

Ronald Reagan — if they appeared they would help unite the US and the USSR

  • some would be trying to cut deals with them — in order to benefit themselves