Warriors and Peacemakers Quotes

“Thus, the deeper problem in honor disputes is nearly always that of respect, and respect is vital when a reputation for strength or vulnerability quickly becomes public knowledge and largely determines how others will treat one. (For this reason, as the historian Edward Ayers [1984: 274] has noted, a white
southern aristocrat of the nineteenth-century would probably better understand the violent conflicts of young, lower-income males than do most middle-class people today.)”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence

“As in days gone by, maintaining a public reputation for fearlessness is a central consideration for those located within a modern culture of honor (see, e.g., Horowitz, 1983: chap. 5). An honorable person must display heart, must not only be prepared to fight but be seen to, for in the competitive world of honor others will create tests: “There are always people around looking for a fight to increase their share of respect” (Anderson,
1994: 88). Turning the other cheek does no good, avoiding confrontation now will only attract more later. Word that somebody can be taunted or pushed around will inevitably spread. It is therefore far better in the long run to fight and lose than not to fight at all (Canada, 1995: 16).”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence

“A culture of dignity expects people to ignore rather than to confront insult, to cultivate inner strength rather than outward display, and to let the state rather than the aggrieved prosecute violence.”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence

“Honor is the morality not of the bureaucrat or accountant but the warrior and aristocrat.”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence

“Insults can be much more subtle, posing dangers for the visitor unschooled in local custom as well as dilemmas for the insider familiar with the etiquette of honor. Part of the give-andtake of honor cultures, their “dialectic of challenge and riposte” as one sociologist puts it (Bourdieu, 1966: 197), is that people issue ambiguous affronts that force the recipient to choose between appearing excessively sensitive, on the one hand, or insufficiently manly, on the other (Pitt-Rivers, 1966:28).”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence

“Honor also makes people verbally aggressive. Just as status can be lost by accepting insults, so it can be gained by issuing them. The Montenegrans, for instance, are said not only to have “a low personal tolerance for insults” but also to exhibit “a
strong tendency to insult other people in the name of manly fearlessness” (Boehm, 1984: 103). Verbal pugnacity is a feature of most honor settings.”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence

“In honor cultures, people are shunned and criticized not for exacting vengeance but for failing to do so.”
― Mark Cooney, Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence