Medical University of South Carolina.
Am Anthropol. 2010;112(4):563-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1433.2010.01276.x.
Here I detail violence in South Sudan by first discussing a specific Dinka Agaar practice alongside existing discourses on the social aspects of violence and universal human rights, then I show how these acts had meaning and purpose using data from personal accounts of violence. I posit that the violence described was consistent with Dinka Agaar concepts of justice and basic human rights and that it cannot be judged against any universal human rights standard, devoid of local context or of an overarching metanarrative. These events highlight conflicting subjectivities, ethical norms, and the painful difficulties inherent to advocacy in areas of conflict. Viewed from the perspective of the larger social unit, it is easy to see how violence was required to end violence. However, witnessing punitive violence purposefully enacted on innocent individuals to achieve peace has the potential to create conflicting positions that modern anthropological discourse cannot reconcile.
在这里，我首先讨论了一个特定的丁卡·阿加尔（Dinka Agaar）习俗，然后结合关于暴力的社会方面和普遍人权的现有论述，详细介绍了南苏丹的暴力行为，接着我展示了如何使用关于暴力的个人叙述中的数据来赋予这些行为以意义和目的。我假设，所描述的暴力行为符合丁卡·阿加尔的正义和基本人权概念，并且不能在没有当地背景或总体元叙事的情况下，根据任何普遍人权标准来评判。这些事件凸显了冲突地区倡导工作中相互冲突的主体性、伦理规范以及固有的痛苦困难。从更大的社会单位的角度来看，很容易理解为什么需要使用暴力来结束暴力。然而，目睹有针对性地对无辜个人实施惩罚性暴力以实现和平，有可能会造成现代人类学话语无法调和的冲突立场。
