Tag: Conflict Transformation

25 March 2008 (Journal entry #3 – part of an assignment for “Key Issues in Peace and Conflict Studies”)

“War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength”

It’s our Easter vacation and I just watched George Orwell’s  ‘1984‘ for the first time. Propaganda, ‘big brother’ and ‘thought crime’. Wow! What a movie!!!

1984 illustrated many causes of conflict and violence that in the past have led to major world wars, and to this day continue to cause psychological and physical violence personal, inter-personal, inter- group and inter-national levels.

It was Galtung’s article on “Cultural Violence” that motivated me to rent this movie.

Galtung discussed the concept of ‘true believers’, who focus on the right belief, not just on right deeds. I understand the application of this concept.

In my Christian upbringing, I was taught that to go to heaven all you had to was believe the story that Jesus lived, died and rose from the dead in physical form, before ascending to heaven. He did all that to save my sins. I was told that I was very “lucky” to have been “chosen” by God to be become a Christian. I was told that thinking a sin is as bad as doing it. Sound’s a lot like Orwell’s ‘thought-crimes’ to me…

Galtung examined some theological distinctions between religions: the difference between a transcendental God outside us and an immanent god inside us; and the different of belief that we are born into original sin (as in some Christian theologies ), original blessing (as others claim), both (Hindu- Buddhist kharmaist) or neither (Athiest).

Galtung’s table below demonstrates the severe consequences of beliefs about being ‘chosen’:

God chooses	And leaves to Satan	With the consequences of
Human species	Animals, plants, nature	Speciesism, ecocide
Men	Women	Sexism, witch burning
His people	The others	Nationalism, imperialism
Whites	Colored	Racism, colonialism
Upper classes	Lower classes	Classism, exploitation
True believers	Heretics, pagans	Meritism, Inquisition

Zimbargo talks of ‘false pride’  – people who say “Not me, I am different from those kinds of people who did that evil deed”.

The world is thought to be  Black and White. The Milgram Obedience Experiments presented in Zimbardo’s article, describe 10 ingredients authority use to gain control over people to do the unthinkable:

1. Presenting acceptable justification – cover story/ ideology etc

2. Arranging some sort of contractual obligation

3. Giving participants a meaningful role to play

4. Presenting basic rules

5. Altering semantics – not hurting victims, but helping learners

6. Diffusion of responsibility for negative outcomes

7. Starting the path toward the ultimate evil act with a small insignificant first step e.g. only 15 volts

8. Gradually increasing the level so not noticeable

9. Gradually changing the nature of Influence Authority changing from Just to Unjust, rational to irrational

10. Making the ‘exit costs’ high, and the process of exiting difficult

1984 was a good illustration of these ingredients. It was interesting to see propaganda and brainwashing in action: the justification of violence through the appeal to law and idealism.

I think it is interesting to compare 1984 and these 10 ingredients, to tactics used by the Bush administration to get Americans to support the war against Iraq.

Throughout history, and continuing as I write today, brainwashing and indoctrination are a major cause of violence on all levels. I think it has to be stopped. This I wish to investigate further in my dissertation.

Follow up note:

I did further investigate this for my dissertation “An Ethical Dilemma: Childhood Conversion in Christian Fundamentalism.” I discovered “stopping indoctrination” is not as black and white as it sounds… I shall some of these findings as soon as I figure out how to upload a voice recording to this website.

Picture:

Found on Google Images – from http://aneighth.com/ – I would ask approval from the creator but I couldn’t find contact details. If subject to copyright please let me know.

11 March 2008 (Journal entry #2 – part of an assignment for “Key Issues in Peace and Conflict Studies”.)

Tonight when I arrived home my Opa was watching the channel 7 news. Two stories of conflict caught my attention.

The first was ‘cyber conflict’. Personal attacks, defamation, and gossip occurring on the Internet. The story featured a guy who had taken revenge on his ex-girlfriend, verbally abusing her and her friends on his MySpace website. She took it to the police/court, and yet even after that, he abused her with more text messages.

There are many new conflicts arising with technology developments. Children bullying no longer stops when a child leaves the playground, they can be tormented 24-7 via the Internet and mobile phones. Crime on “second life”, a popular web based life simulation, include rape, murder and other perversions. It seems that behind a computer screen, inhibitions disappear and repressed emotions are set free.

Where do these desires come from?

In class today we  looked at Situation vs. Personal causes of violence.

We discussed the Cain and Abel story from Ruberstein (2003) in our readings. Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve, tell a story of the “first murder”. While this story is allegedly symbolic of the movement from nomadic life (Abel) to agriculture (Cain) – with God’s preference for the nomad, and agricultural life destroying nomadic life – that is not the aspect I wish to discuss today.

As the story goes, Cain is the crop farmer, Abel the shepherd; and God is portrayed as a father-like character. Cain kills Abel out of jealousy, for God rejected his offerings and favoured Abel’s. Ruberstein makes the point that Cain’s “forbidden anger” is a taboo – one can not hate their parent, and thus the anger is repressed, that is, denied entry into consciousness. Freud (1915/1957) believed repressed emotions do not simply disappear, after time they return to consciousness detached from their original object. Cain, the rejected child, substitutes the Abel, favored sibling, for his anger against God, the parent. As a result, Cain kills Abel. Is Cain’s fault? Or is it God’s fault, for favouring one child over the other? … Is Cain inherently evil? Or was it the situation that provoked the violence?

I think that while a response may be conditioned, a personal choice must be made.

Is this what is happening on the Internet? Is cyber conflict a manifestation of repressed emotions? Scapegoats for other problems. It is the root cause of these forms of psychological violence that we must identify in order to help both the offenders, and the victims.

The model in this weeks readings presented by Fierie (1970/2000) applies to oppressors and oppressed. I think that these victims may then turn into attackers later on in life. The possibility of violence carrying through from cyber-world to the real-world, is a scary thought. These conflicts really need attention. NOW. Before they manifest into something even worse.

Looking into the future, I wonder what kind of cyber conflicts may occur, whether this trend will increase, the implications this will have on real life, and what can be done to prevent it?

The second news story that caught my eye was about Britney Spears and the Paparazzi. The story featured a photographer discussing the public’s obsession with celebrity, and the way interest in celebrity is replacing interest in world news.

I can’t help feel sorry for Britney Spears. In the spotlight since childhood, promoted as a 16 year old sex symbol, with “Christian morals” publicly declaring her virginity she was ‘saving for marriage’. Now look at her: a couple of husbands, a couple of kids, drug addiction and a mental breakdown or two. She seems to have completely lost her sense of identity.

In today’s class we looked at different forms of violence: psychological, physical and cultural.

It is my observation, gathered from gossip magazines and TV shows over the years, that Britney has suffered psychological violence, potentially coming from her mother; manifested into physical violence she brings onto herself. In applying Galtung’s dimensions of violence, I would say that this violence is not intentional. Yet it is violence all the same.

Is there also a cultural violence being faced in this situation? The paparazzi stripping away her every bit of self and privacy. Why? To fill the gossip magazines with pictures, in order to satisfy the mass culture celebrity addiction. Something seems wrong here…

The concept of celebrity currently embedded in popular culture, is one to ponder. Many people constantly compare themselves to false ideals set by the media’s presentation of these people. The frustration being unable to buy a house as magnificent as Tom Cruise, or being unable to have the skin of models on magazine covers… is this causing depression, dissatisfaction, insatiable materialism, anorexia etc? I can’t imagine living in a poor countries and catching a glimpse of a Hollywood movie, imagining that this is how everyone in the Western world lives.

Relative deprivation refers to resentment caused by situations where one’s “perception of discrepancy between their value expectations (goods and conditions of life believed to be entitled to) and their value capabilities (goods and conditions they think they are capable of getting).” (Gurr 1970). Does Hollywood fill us with dissatisfaction because we will have the luxuries we perceive others to be enjoying?

But fame and celebrity are not without their positive points. Fame is something many people aspire to, and I believe aspirations are important. Celebrities can do a lot of good too, Angelina Jolie’s humanitarian work for example.

I happen to LOVE movies, reading magazines, and the odd bit of Hollywood gossip. Is there any harm in that? I don’t think so – not if we need to keep things in perspective. Celebrities are only human, admiring and aspiring to them is ok… but treating them like gods, encouraging an obsessive paparazzi, and wishing ourselves to achieve a photoshopped ideal – is not healthy for anyone. At the end of the day we all breath the same air and will finish up in the same place: resting in peace.

Photo:

Whether you are in South America, India or Japan – if you are 6 foot with ridiculously blonde hair you’re sure to get the celebrity treatment. This shot was taken in Lima. No autographs please.

Welcome to Peace and Conflict Studies. First assignment: to write write five journal entries that reflected on the learning process throughout the first half of semester. Written on the first day back at university, after five years of working,  travel and a six months teaching myself everything I could at my Opas place, this is what I wrote:

3rd March 2008

Some quotes that stuck with me from today’s class:

“Peace is an active process”

“While hunger rules peace cannot prevail”

“The real weight of peace starts in everyone’s mind.”

In the PACS hallway a picture grabbed my attention: a dove in jail with a ball and chain, and blue sky shining through the window. Peace behind bars. What are the bars? Why has human civilisation led such a violent path? Why are we still living in conflict? What is standing in the way of peace? Who is standing in the way of peace?

Peace exists, it is alive, it is possible – why are humans preventing it? Man-made barriers hold back peace from prevailing. Man can free the dove. Peace is possible, and it’s up to us to identify the barriers, and develop ways to break them down.

Barash (1991) describes the scenario of lifeboat with sufficient resources for everyone. Squabbling breaks out among the occupants, and resources are thrown overboard, including the compass. Is that what we are doing to our planet? How can we prevent our boat from capsizing and losing our resources altogether?

Conflict occurs in many forms: within an individual, between individuals, within groups, between groups, within nations, and between nations. Each of these forms of conflict is inter-connected. Conflict between nations may be driven by a conflict within the individual, which may be driven by conflict with another person for example resentment towards an abusive father may influence a leader to respond aggressively towards another nation. Similarly conflict between individuals may be due to conflict between nations, for example argument over food due to hunger due to poverty caused by war.

What are the core motives of conflicts? Money? Power? Status? Fear? Desire for “happiness”?

Do we continue to live in conflict simply because we haven’t envisioned anything different? Have we just accepted that conflict is part of life?

…

On the bus home, a rather large man squeezed into the vacant seat beside me, and I started thinking about obesity. Is obesity a form of conflict?

Is there an ongoing battle inside this man’s head that says: “Shall I eat this donut, or an apple… eat the donut!!!” Or does this thought not even enter his mind. Does he eat out of depression, or maybe is it addiction? Depression and addictions must also be forms of personal conflicts.

Galtung (2006) says “Violence, insults to the basic needs of body, mind and spirit, is caused by unresolved conflict and polarization.” Obesity must involve some kind of conflict between the Mind and Body.

What does obesity reflect about the inequality in our world? There are so many people dying from lack of food, yet growing numbers are dying from excess of it. Can what was once a sign of wealth, now be considered a sign of lacking self-worth or self-control? If only we could share it around, maybe everyone could be a whole lot happier and healthier.

Is obesity a reflection of a structural violence in our own society?

Galtung (2006) discusses structural violence, saying it is typically built into the very structure of social and cultural institutions. He says that when people starve or go hungry, suffer from preventable diseases, or are denied a decent education, housing, opportunity to play, grow, work, raise a family, or express themselves freely – violence is occurring. I do think that obesity is a reflection of structural violence in the world.

Just look at the popularity of McDonalds and KFC – food soaked in fat and thick salt layered on top. To make things worse, due to the ‘low fat’ revolution, now even when think we are eating ‘healthy’, we are being tricked. Processed packages of preservatives labeled ‘low fat’. Diet coke – ‘cancer in a can’. Man-made chemicals that the body doesn’t know how to process. Should this food be legal? Is this a form of legal genocide? Does it remain legal only due to economic reasons? Greed. And due to the fact that death is drawn out over a number of years rather than immediate gun, trigger, death. Is there a lack of education – do people not know how to eat properly, following their parent’s habits who followed their parent’s habits, creating a line of obesity in their genes?

What are the consequences of obesity? Of course there are society pressures on the health system, which I suppose means higher taxes for everyone else. If obesity is a cause of unhappiness and a lack of satisfaction in people’s lives, could the flow-on affect go as far as influencing people’s daily choices that in turn impact on the world as a whole?

I know when I’m feeling down, or lacking energy, my passion for helping others and helping the environment fades away- not that I don’t care anymore, it just becomes second priority to thoughts about myself and my own unhappiness. Kind of like in Maslow’s needs hierarchy – I have to have my lower needs met – physical security & belonging needs met first, before I can think about higher needs like helping others.

Obesity is not only a barrier to positive peace like in these examples, but it’s not much good for negative peace either: will people care about preventing war, if they are in the middle of their own war, with themselves?

The percentage of obesity in Western society is growing rapidly, and as fast food makes its way into China and other developing countries, they face obesity problems too. Doesn’t this prove to the government that fast food is structural violence – slowly killing their population? Shouldn’t this be stopped?

What is going to happen in the future? Obesity causes low immune and many diseases, and ultimately shortens the life of the individual. Deutsh (2000) discusses Darwin’s ‘survival of the fittest’ and Marx’s ‘directly antagonistic classes: bourgeoisie and proletariat.’ Could the future of humanity see a class split based on healthy vs. obese? Or will they find it difficult to reproduce, and in the end just die out and leave our society with healthier fit people left? Maybe I’m taking this train of thought a little too far …

Are there any solutions? Is an obese person, now faced with a large burden-of-a-body, do they just give up? It would seem quite an impossible task, to get healthy again. I wonder what it would take for them to get them on the right track. Still Rupenstein (2003) says that destructive conflict ‘which destroys or injures valued lives, psyches, institutions, and possessions’ is by no means inevitable. I do think there are solutions to every conflict, we just have to find them and implement them. It all starts with understanding the problem.

In conclusion for today’s thoughts, I consider the concept of conflict. Is conflict something we can not escape? Its existence throughout history does show conflict as a part of human evolution. Conflict is good – it is the conflict in my life that has led me to be who I am today.

Is peace realistic? Of course it is. Peace does not mean the end of conflict, but the end of all forms of violence.

In order for our Earth to have a future, we must make peace with our environment, with other nations, and we must come up with ways we can keep harmony and peace and allow everyone the opportunity to live this way. How? That’s what I’m in this course to discover!

Photo: Photo of the back of the KFC uniform in Bombay, India. I thought it strangely appropriate for this student of peace’s journal on obesity…