[Radix] Re: Vulnerability begets vulnerability ?

[Ilan Kelman]

With thanks to James Lewis for his stimulating thoughts on
"vulnerability begets vulnerability" at http://www.ecie.org/pipermail/radix/2009-January/000369.html and the interplay amongst
vulnerability, guilt, and wicked reaction to that.  But is the wicked reaction to the
vulnerability, to the guilt, or to their tumultuous mix?  Some immediate examples from humanitarian
relief and development are the cases of minorities oppressing and at times massacring
majorities.



 
At a simplistic level, the minority not only wishes to
retain power, but also fears their vulnerable position.  That is, actions are determined both by wishing
to retain power and by fear of what would transpire by giving up power--the
wicked reaction that at times, although not always, is tinged with guilt regarding
the oppression.  That oppression, of
course, instils vulnerability on the majority. 
Vulnerability begets vulnerability. 
And sometimes it is an individual, who had various vulnerabilities,
leading the oppression that begets large-scale vulnerability.



 
As well, it is important to interpret vulnerability beyond
the view of vulnerability being a simple metric; that is, a calculated result
giving a value that represents vulnerability as a snapshot in space and
time.  Instead, as many people on this
email list have taught us through their decades-long publications, vulnerability
is much more of a process, not only about the present state, but also about
what we have done to ourselves and to others over the long-term; why and how we
have done that in order to reach the present state; and how we might change the
present state to improve in the future.  From
where does vulnerability arise and where does vulnerability take us?  Guilt and wicked reaction could potentially
be considered as long-term processes as well, rather than as being described by
only observations at the present or by only one-off actions.



 
This interplay of vulnerability, guilt, and
response/reaction processes might be difficult to untie, even if it is useful
to consider conceptually.  But is it as
useful for policy and practice?  Or does
that turn out to be too difficult to apply, explaining the trend to neglect the
vulnerability process, instead preferring quick and inevitably superficial analyses
of the present state in order to define vulnerability?



 
Ilan
_________________________________________________________________