|
|
Re: Budgets as cultural documents <debate>; Comanches, long
Michael Cahill (MCBlueline@AOL.COM)
Mon, 19 Feb 1996 11:08:26 -0500
In a message dated 96-02-18 18:44:08 EST, tkavanag@indiana.edu (thomas w
kavanagh) writes:
>The relation between political resource and resultant
>organization is not deterministic, leading unimpeded from resource
>variation to organization or disorganization. Rather, there are efforts,
>more or less successful, to manipulate and control that relation. For
>Comanches, those manipulations ranged from the Shakedown Danc--young women
>shaming their heros into redistributing the spoils of war... <snip>
Was the Shakedown Dance a lobbying effort? If so, were there similar efforts
by other groups to be included in the Comanche "budget?" The English term
"shakedown" implies the use of threat to pry something away from its rightful
owner. Does the Comanche term for the dance imply the same thing? If so,
was it used ironically?
>Finally, some resource variation was
>political-economic, based on human political and economic decisions.
I see your point here. My take on it would be that all resource variation is
based on decisions -- albeit decisions made in light of perceived
environmental, geographic, historic, and political-economic conditions.
>Since different Comanches had differential contacts with Euroamericans
>--Spaniards, Frenchmen, Mexicans, Englishmen, Anglo-Americans, Yankees,
>and Confederates--there were corresponding variations in the political
>resources available to the various Comanche groups, with corresponding
>variations in their political histories.
Was there differential success among Comanche groups due to differential
contact? Did such contact prompt fundamental changes in Comanche "budgeting
processes," and, if so, about when did those changes begin to occur?
Thnaks for this window into Comanche political-economic (and budgeting)
processes.
Regards,
Mike Cahill
mcblueline@aol.com
|