Comments on: Newsline http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/2008/07/10/newsline/ Challenging the Zeitgeist Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:05:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Alun http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/2008/07/10/newsline/#comment-13325 Alun Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:22:04 +0000 http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/?p=1640#comment-13325 Sadly the World Archaeological Congress has no real power. It was set up in the 1980s because the big meeting, the International Union of Pre- and Proto-Historic Sciences, was inviting South African and Namibian archaeologists. Southhampton City Council refused funding for the event if those invitations stood. The invitations were withdrawn so the IUPPS withdrew from the conference as did a lot of archaeologists. The rump conference became WAC. The co-existence of IUPPS and WAC suggests there's no common agreement on ethics in archaeology. It's not that WAC = left-wing idealists and IUPPS = right-wing pragmatists, but there's quite a political spectrum in archaeology. My guess is no archaeologist would take part in a project to draw up a list of civilian targets. On the other hand I'm cynical enough to think many would jump at the chance to be funded to draw up a synthesis of settlement and economic activity in the ancient Persian empire. If that information is then used by the military then that would be <em>unfortunate</em>. What WAC does do it give notice that people won't be turning a blind eye to that behaviour. Sadly the World Archaeological Congress has no real power. It was set up in the 1980s because the big meeting, the International Union of Pre- and Proto-Historic Sciences, was inviting South African and Namibian archaeologists. Southhampton City Council refused funding for the event if those invitations stood. The invitations were withdrawn so the IUPPS withdrew from the conference as did a lot of archaeologists. The rump conference became WAC. The co-existence of IUPPS and WAC suggests there’s no common agreement on ethics in archaeology. It’s not that WAC = left-wing idealists and IUPPS = right-wing pragmatists, but there’s quite a political spectrum in archaeology.

My guess is no archaeologist would take part in a project to draw up a list of civilian targets. On the other hand I’m cynical enough to think many would jump at the chance to be funded to draw up a synthesis of settlement and economic activity in the ancient Persian empire. If that information is then used by the military then that would be unfortunate. What WAC does do it give notice that people won’t be turning a blind eye to that behaviour.

]]> By: Things for the USA to attack » Why Dont You Blog? http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/2008/07/10/newsline/#comment-13318 Things for the USA to attack » Why Dont You Blog? Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:01:26 +0000 http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/?p=1640#comment-13318 [...] last post referred to the New Scientist report that archaeologists are displaying common decency and refusing [...] [...] last post referred to the New Scientist report that archaeologists are displaying common decency and refusing [...]

]]>