MSVU’s Peace and Conflict Studies Philosophy
Sue McGregor, 2002
In the early 1930s, peace was defined as the absence of organized war between or within nations. From this perspective, peace was conceptualized as "negative peace". If there was no overt war or organized conflict, we were at peace. In the early 1960s, Johan Galtung expanded the concept to include positive peace, taken to mean the presence of justice or the absence of structural violence. Structural violence refers to the barriers that are built into society that result in lack of adequate food, housing, health, safe and just working conditions, education, economic security, clothing, and family relationships. Worse, those adversely affected by this type of violence are not involved in direct conflict. Because they, and others, may not see the origin of the conflict, they feel they are to blame, or are blamed, for their own life conditions. They live a life of oppression, exclusion, exploitation, marginalization, collective humiliation, stigmatization, repression, inequities and lack of opportunities due to no fault of their own, per se. The people most affected by structural violence are women, children, elders and those from different ethnic, racial and religious groups and sexual orientations.
Conflict is defined as the perception that interests and goals are incompatible (conflict of interests) and threatened and that the pursuit of self interest occurs in a way that damages others, threatens their self interest or dominates their ability to pursue their own interests. Galtung (2000) shared a overview of the major fault lines in society that lead to conflict and suggested that structural violence is the most insidious. For example, direct actions and indirect actions can profoundly impact the current and next generations to the point that they are totally eliminated or are so severely handicapped in their efforts to reach their potential that they will be marginalized forever.
|
Fault Lines |
Direct Violence |
Structural Violence |
|
Nature |
slaughter of beasts and the wilderness |
depletion of resources, pollution (eco-violence), destruction of forests, etc |
|
Gender |
kill women, abortion, infantilism |
patriarchy and, sometimes, matriarchy |
|
Generation |
euthanasia, abortion |
schools in ghettos, segregation, declining middle class, wider gap between rich and poor |
|
Deviance |
controlling dangerous persons |
exclusion, shunning |
|
Race |
controlling races: eradication and slavery |
colonialism |
|
Class (military, economic, political and cultural) |
directly controlling classes |
exploitation, alienation, repression, marginalization |
|
Cultural and national identity |
genocide |
state run by majority |
|
Territory (geographic) |
war, killing for food, scarcity, sacrifice, conquest |
imperialism, isolating pariah state |
In the 1970s and 80s, the definition of peace expanded beyond the organized macro level of war and violence built into the system to include peace at the unorganized, micro level (individual and family relationships). Called feminist peace, this approach focuses on violence and abuse within the home and at the personal level (family, women, children, elders). In the 1990-2000's, a Holistic (Gaia) peace - an outer and inner definition of peace - is evolving and includes peace within the environment and peace within oneself as well as the previous conceptualizations of negative, positive and feminist peace. This is a very holistic and contextual approach to understanding peace and conflict (Groff, L., & Smoker, P. (1995). Creating global-local cultures of peace [Online]. Available: http://www.gmu.edu/academic/pcs/smoker.htm ). In keeping with this trend, the newest approaches to peace and conflict are called, respectively, transformative peace and transcending conflict. Both involve changes in consciousness at the personal, social, cultural and political level via transformation, creativity, deligitimizing violence and legitimizing peace and dealing with conflict using non-violent means. MSVU wants these dimensions of peace and conflict reflected in its program. To that end, the interdisciplinary, holistic program at MSVU also takes direction from Toh Swee-Hin’s conceptualization of peace studies (Note that the UNESCO Director-General awarded the 2000 UNESCO Prize for Peace Education to Professor Toh Swee-Hin). Toh suggests that a transformative, holistic peace and conflict studies program would include six overarching concepts: (S.H. Toh (1997). Education for peace: Towards a millennium of well-being [Online]. Available: http://www.peace.ca/educationforpeace.htm (18 pages)
|
Living with justice & compassion PEACE= P - participatory E - equitable A - alternative thinking and appropriate values and technology C - consciousness raising due to critical empowerment E - ecological sustainability |
Dismantle the culture of war Respect that conflict is a natural part of life and that it can be resolved using non-violent means! Also, education must debunk the myths of violence and strive to dismantle the cult of war leading to a culture of peace |
Lighting the candles of dignity - human rights Help ordinary people experience critical literacy and awareness so they can empower themselves to participate actively in building a strong civil society that holds states and private power accountable in the spirit of democracy |
Caring for seven generations - environment & ecosystems * Relate to the natural environment according to the ethic of inter-generational responsibility * challenge over materialistic lifestyles and the consumerist ideology of the growth-centered development model - replace it with a people/earth centered development model leading to a culture of peace |
Active harmony among cultures Foster intercultural respect and ties of solidarity by engaging in critical dialogue and collaborative activities such that people understand the roots of their differences leading to respect for respective beliefs and traditions so that healing and/or reconciliation can take place |
Renewing roots of inner peace (spirituality) Focus as well on inner peace in such a way that, as people gain a sense of who they are spiritually, they are transformed to take action to dismantle structures of violence and injustice (not just find inner peace and let it stop there in the form of self-centered satisfaction). The assumption is that peace starts within each person, leading to individual transformation first, followed by transformation of family, community, society and the world order |
|
Values, Attitudes and Aims of Peace Education |
|
|
Values and attitudes for peace education |
Aims of peace education |
|
Respect for others |
understand the nature and origins of violence and its effects on both victim and perpetrator |
|
Empathy (understand other’s points of view) |
create frameworks for achieving peaceful, creative societies |
|
Belief that people can make positive change |
sharpen awareness about existence of unpeaceful relationships between people and within and between nations |
|
Appreciation of and respect for diversity |
investigate causes of conflicts and violence embedded within perceptions, values and attitudes |
|
Self-esteem - accept the intrinsic value of oneself |
encourage the search for alternative non-violent skills within each person |
|
Commitment to social justice, equity and non-violence |
equip people with personal conflict resolution skills, respect for the notion of fairness and the concept of non-violence |
|
Concern for the environment and our place in the ecosystem |
no information provided in the British document but it relates to fostering a sense of connectedness and interrelatedness between people and their earth home |
|
Commitment to equality |
no information provided in the British document but it relates to treating people the same while equity means treating people differently until their situation is equal |
The emerging approach to peace is contextual, providing us the opportunity to appreciate that peace and conflict exist in a world characterized by globalization, raising power of transnational corporations, lessening of the state’s power and a rise in the involvement of civil society - non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) and not-for-profit organizations. There is a growing respect for the interface between the private, public and civil society sectors and the notions of governance, citizenship, participation, democracy, accountability, responsibilities, sustainability, etc.
On a closing note, the UNESCO 2000 International Year for the Culture of Peace evolves into the International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the Children of the World. Given the previous discussion of how MSVU conceptualizes peace and conflict, and given that the next 10 years are going to be shaped by the UN proclaimed decade for a culture of peace and non-violence, we want to grasp this opportunity to make our program as viable and dynamic as possible!!!
In conclusion, the Mount’s philosophy embraces the UNESCO’s concept of a culture of peace and non-violence, Toh’s notion of a holistic, comprehensive program, Britain’s aims and objectives of peace education, Galtung’s notion of transcending conflict, the emerging concepts of Gaia peace (inner and eco-peace) and transformative peace as well as the conventional notions of negative peace (no war), positive peace (no structural violence but justice instead) and feminist peace (no abuse and violence in the home).