Home of
the National Tactical Invitational
To view us online, visit http://www.teddytactical.com/
Monthly
Lecture: 12-2006
WHY PEOPLE FIGHT
The Romance of Manly Virtue
By: Skip Gochenour
I.
Fighting
is distinguished from predatory killing by motive and behavior.
A. Fighting is the product of three
motives,
1. Honor
2. Fear
3. Economic self-interest
B. Honor motivated fighting is in
response to a threat or attack, usually verbal or situational, on ones image of
manhood, that if left unanswered will bring about unbearable shame, as viewed
by the offended party.
Honor fighting has at its
foundation a willingness to shed blood, yours or the offenders, rather than
face shame and disgrace attendant to the unanswered insult.
1. Honor fighting is probably as
ancient as social man. It is written
about in the most ancient texts.
2. All manner of social behavior
patterns have been developed to avoid creating “offense” to another person as a
means to reduce the fighting response.
3. These behaviors have some amount
of cultural significance that are obscure outside the particular culture.
4. When subjects are approached that
may be taken as offensive by the party addressed, it is common to offer
apology, followed by an assertion that no offense is meant, before addressing
the subject.
5. Even the law recognizes this
concept in identifying the concept of “fighting words”.
C. Fear motivated fighting is a
response to a gambit by another who threatens or offers violence.
1. This is the form of motive on
which self-defense fighting is predicated.
2. The fighting response to this
motive can, assuming the right conditions are met, complete the requirements of
legal justification.
3. Failure to follow accepted rules
of etiquette, especially in doing offensive actions including the use of
“fighting words” will likely have a negative impact on claims of legal
justification, even if self-defense is necessary at the moment.
D. Economic self-interest motivated
fighting is to preserve, proliferate or further acquire assets of economic
well-being.
1. Machiavelli said a man will
forgive you for killing his father, but, he will never forgive you for
destroying his property.
2. Proper apology may salve an
offense to honor and reduce the likelihood of a fight, but threatening economic
well-being of another man will not be answered with an apology.
3. The concept of “mine” is the
precursor to brutal fighting throughout the history of man.
II.
Fighting
is distinguished from predatory killing in that each party to the encounter is
willing to risk his physical well-being in the exchange.
A. Predatory killing does not always imply such
willingness.
1. Predatory killing is more usually
engaged in when the actor believes he has an advantage that obviates the targets
willingness or ability to perform in a way that would endanger the actor.
2. The predatory killer tends to
attack those he determines to be of a will that is too timid to fight or too
squeamish to fight effectively and/or without sufficient assets to overcome the
attack.
3. The predatory killer uses
artifice, subterfuge and/or cunning to mask his intention before the initiation
of the attack.
B. Fighters, to the contrary, usually
make plain their intention to fight sufficiently in advance that the other
party has some response time, however abbreviated.
1. Unlike predatory events, casual
observers are able to identify the respective antagonists and that there is
about to be an engagement.
C. Fights generally initiate when one
of the parties to the fight concludes, based on interactive interpretation,
that the other lacks sufficient deterrence quotient.
1. Deterrence quotient equates to
sufficient skill, determination and ruthlessness to carry the fight to the end.
2. Fights that are not concluded with
a clear and decisive victory to one of the respective sides, whether on a
school yard or a war zone, set the stage for a numbered sequence of further
engagements until a decisive outcome is acquired. (WWI & WWII)
3. Intervention by negotiators,
whether teachers on a school yard or diplomats in a war zone, merely assure
that there will be another engagement.
III.
The
romance of manly virtue is as old as cultured man.
A. The willingness to fight, as
derivative to these motives, is reinforced as a manly virtue through a process
of romanticization. Examples of
virtuously motivated fighting response to attack or threat are the subject of
stories, fables, mythology and history.
1. Examples include Knights and
“gunfighters”.
2. The search for historical accuracy
associated with individual events is important, but marginal to the purpose of
the romanticized version.
B. These motives of action are
closely associated with issues of “right and wrong”, “good and evil”. One party is seen as answering only to his
own conscience, the other is seen as answering to society’s conscience.
1. As with most lesson that use
mythology, historical fact is mixed with lessons of virtue in an effort to inculcate
proper motive and response in the group that selects these stories as morality
lessons.
2. The virtue of these motives and
actions are then made part of the reference frames, the imagination, of those
in the group. Hence, it is “civilized”
to engage in such actions – when properly motivated.
3. We find fighting for these motives
acceptable and, under the right conditions, legally justifiable.
4. While these motives and responses
long existed and were celebrated in lore, (see Beowulf) the American West in
the late 1800’s provided a milieu that allowed these qualities to be explored
in a way that has captured the world’s attention.
IV.
Fighting,
Manly Virtue and the American West.
A. The American West in the late
1800’s provided a venue where the motives for fights were constantly available.
1. Primary among those motives was
economic self-interest.
2. At the end of the Civil War, the
3. Food production began a shift from
each person raising his own food, particularly beef, to a need for huge amounts
of stock raised cattle.
4. Men of determination moved into
the undeveloped parts of the west and claimed huge tracts of land or engaged in
free-grazing.
5. Herds were moved to locations
where they could be shipped by rail to major population center where they could
be butchered and sold as meat.
6. Men were hired to tend the cattle
on the open range and the drives to the rail heads. Cowboys!
7. In these sections of the country
there was little formal policing because there was no real political
entity. In instances where they were
political entities, they were small and without financial resources for
policing staff.
8. VCA were dealt with by those who
had an economic interest in curtailing their activities. That meant the cattle owners and other
business men in the community.
9. Movies and lore not withstanding,
thieves and “man-killers” were most often chased out of the area.
10. A similar circumstance arose with mining
camps.
B. Towns grew up to provide for the
needs of the cowboys and the miners.
Economic self-interest.
1. These towns, whether serving
cattle communities or mining communities had certain commonalities.
2. There were a lot of young men who
lived hard solitary lives with money.
They would pay for entertainment.
3. Drinking, gambling and
prostitution were commodities they would pay for.
4. People who traffic in these
commodities are not known for their virtue.
Miss Kitty and Calamity Jane Canary notwithstanding, there is no such
thing as a whore with a heart of gold.
Gamblers are no better.
5. Men who engaged these services
sometimes felt as though the service was not what it cost. Alcohol enhanced that feeling. That meant they felt “cheated” which was a
violation of their honor if they did not stand up for themselves.
6. This was a setting for a fight.
7. The towns had no real tax base
form of acquiring funds. Their money
came from license fees and fines.
Prostitutes were sometimes charged fees to operate. Common was $10.00 per month. For some towns this fee was their single greatest
source of income. Gamblers were
similarly charged fees.
8. This set the stage for some
entanglements between the customers of these services and the police in the
community.
9. It was in the interest of the town
fathers, who also were the moneyed interests of the community, to have a
relatively peaceful town. They hired or
elected men to keep order.
10. At the same time, the town’s largest source of
income was the fees charged to those who were often the object of a “cheating”
accusation. If the accuser. (cowboy or
miner) was too rowdy in pressing his claim, he was arrested for mis-conduct and
fined, providing the town with more revenue and the town marshal with income,
which was based at least in part, in a percentage of the fine.
11. The stage was set to be shamed again.
12. Add to this political factionalization of the
business interests, all of whom have large stakes in economic self-interest,
and the need for competing policing services was apparent and addressed.
13. For the most part, the office of city marshal
and county sheriff were filled by business men in the community as part of
their perceived public duty. These men
tried to use persuasion and accommodation to solve disputes.
14. There were times in the history of many of
these communities where the forces were so abraded that it was determined by
the business men on council or county politicos that police of a more direct
personality were needed.
15. These men were hired for their reputations and
for usually short periods of time. The
period of employment was generally short because their methods were problematic
and they were not amenable to taking direction.
16. These men were less manageable because they
realized that their employers were not willing to personally do what they were
hiring these “curly wolf’s” to do.
17. Often when these men of reputation were killed
doing dealing with the element they were hired to confront, the killer was not
prosecuted, but was often told to leave town.
18. Funeral expenses for the downed marshal were
sometimes not provided by the town council.
19. They marshal was, after all, just killed in a
fight where he played some role as an antagonist.
V.
Specific
incidents of fight motives in the American West.
A.
1. In the late 1800’s
2. The American side had a rail head
for the movement of cattle.
3. Cattle on each side of the river
were regularly stolen by Americans and Mexicans, each trying to increase the
size of their herd.
4. The vice traffic was creating more
problems than were acceptable, but the city council was unwilling to take
direct and strong action because of the income derived from the vice community
for the town.
5. George Campbell was hired as the
city marshal. He was not satisfied with
his salary so he entered into some objectionable arrangements with the saloon
keepers to supplement his income. He was
fired. A warrant was issued for him
charging corruption.
6. His replacement was a town
business man, but the replacement was unable to complete his obligations a
marshal so Bill Johnson, the town drunk was hired.
7. Among the political factions in the town were
the Manning brothers, George, Frank, James and Felix. They had a foreman at their ranch named John
Hale. In addition to a ranch, the
brothers owned bars and restaurants in town.
They were also commonly believed to be part of a rustling ring that
often stole cattle out of
8. George Cummings moved to town and bought a
restaurant and bar. He was determined to
become an economic and political force to be reckoned with in the town.
9. Upon learning of the problems town
council was having with the vice trade and their marshals, Cummings suggested
the town hire his brother-in-law, Dallas Stoudenmire.
10. Stoudenmire had a reputation as a tough
character that had served in several towns as a police officer and had been a
Texas Ranger.
11. Stoudenmire was hired as marshal. He was told that Bill Johnson had the keys to
the jail. Johnson, who was not happy
about being replaced, said Stoudenmire was not up to the job of taking his
position from him. (Johnson) Stoudenmire
went to Johnson and demanded the keys.
When Johnson failed to respond quickly enough to suit Stoudenmire, the
new marshal manhandled Johnson and took the keys from him, in front of
witnesses.
12. Tensions in town grew when some Americans went
to
13. Mannings saw Cummings as a threat to their
economic future. That was made worse by
Stoudenmire as marshal and his clear willingness to run over anyone who did not
immediately comply with his orders.
Stoudenmire began to clamp down on the bars and vice operations. Mannings saw economic threat.
14. A substantial herd of cattle were stolen from
a Mexican rancher. There was some
evidence the cattle were at the Manning ranch.
Johnson was aligned with the Mannings and was staying at the residence
of their foreman, Hale.
15. 75 armed Mexicans crossed the border and
threatened to go the Manning ranch to recover their cattle. The leader of the group sought out
Spanish-speaking Gus Krempkau who was a former Ranger and was, at that time
serving as a constable.
16. In the meantime two Mexicans who did some
investigating on their own were murdered on the American side of the
river. Krempkau helped the Mexicans
recover the bodies. An inquest was held
and Krempkau served as interpreter.
17. Campbell, who was still smarting from losing
his job to Stoudenmire was drunk and standing in the street shouting that
Stoudenmire was incompetent for failing to arrest the Mexicans for appearing on
a city street while armed.
18.
19. Stoudenmire, hearing the shot, pulls his two
revolvers and runs toward Hale.
Stoudenmire’s first shot kills a passer-by but the second one kills
Hale.
20.
21. Cummings, armed with a shotgun, joins
Stoudenmire.
22. Two days later, Stoudenmire and Cummings were
walking along the street doing night rounds when Johnson, armed with a shotgun
and from ambush, tried to kill Stoudenmire.
The marshal charged Johsnon and killed him with revolver fire. Other men, from cover, began firing at
Stoudenmire from across the street.
Stoudenmire turned on them and charged them. They left.
23. Cummings and Stoudenmire were sure that
Mannings were behind the attempts to kill Stoudenmire.
24. Stoudenmire took a leave of absence to get
married. While he was gone, Cummings
confronted Jim Manning in Mannings bar.
He was killed in a shootout.
25. Stoudenmire swore vengeance. Town council intervened and had the Mannings
and Stoudenmire sign a truce.
26. Stoudenmire clamped down on the bars. He also started to drink heavily. He was summoned to council meeting. He was asked for his resignation. He began examining his revolvers in council
chambers. They took back the request.
27. Ultimately, he confronted the Mannings. He accused them of breaking the truce. They decided to discuss the matter. Jim went to get his brother Felix. George and Stoudenmire got into an
argument. As they each pulled their
guns, a friend of Stoudenmire stepped between tem to stop the action. Stoudenmire pushed the fellow out of the way,
which slowed his pulling of his weapon.
George shot Stoudenmire in the right chest, but the ball was stopped by
his wallet. Stoudenmire was then shot in
the left chest, high near the shoulder.
Stoudenmire shot George in the right arm, above the elbow, destroying
the bone. George dropped his gun, but
immediately jumped on Stoudenmire, pinning his arms to his sides. They wrestled into the street. Jim returned to see the struggle. He fired a shot that went wild and hit a
barber pole. His second shot hit
Stoudenmire above the left ear.
28. George seized one of Stoudenmires guns and
savagely beat his lifeless body about the head.
29. This series of incidents happened at about the
same time as the
30. Years later, a writer visited Jim Manning at
his home and tried to convince him to let the author write a book about Jim and
this episode. Jim refused, but offered
the writer a suggestion. He sent him to
see Wyatt Earp. The rest is history.
B.
This example shows all of the motives for fighting in operation in the
venue that explored the mythical manly virtue of fighting for what is
right. The facts are much more
interesting than the fiction.