DISCOURAGING AGGRESSION: ‘Mere words…not always enough’

The USA could learn from the history of the Maasai tribe (Kenya, Africa).

Even those who have not studied cultural anthropology might have heard that the Maasai have historically been characterized as fierce warriors among the thousands of tribes on the “Dark Continent.” And for good reason they were so considered.

The Maasai were not intent on promoting conflicts with other tribes. They were merely intolerant of those who would jeopardize their livelihood and/or invade their territory. Neighboring tribes knew not to provoke the Maasai. Apparently that knowledge was based upon the understanding that doing so would result in suffering a “disproportionate response” — and achieving an appreciation of the concept of “risk-reward.”

Multiple sources note that the Maasai depended on their herds of cattle/cows and other animals for their food and their livelihood through trade. Accordingly, the Maasai were very protective of their animals and the land upon which they were raised. And so, beginning at a relatively young age, Maasai males were groomed to be warriors. They learned to be proficient in the use of spears and an assortment of unconventional weapons with reported deadly accuracy of up to 100 yards.

So, the lesson that the USA (and others) could learn is fairly evident from the above. Mere words discouraging aggression are not always enough. For instance, telling potential waves of illegal immigrants “don’t come” will/has been roundly ignored. Feeding and housing them is the exact opposite of what (I call) the “Maasai Doctrine” demands: an overwhelming response that emphasizes the fact that the risk of a reward is too great upon which to gamble. Call it “peace and prosperity through strength.”

TOM NEILL

Coeur d’Alene