Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Healing the Wounds: Transforming Our Culture of Violence
Whatever your political leanings, you’d have to be incredibly hardhearted not to be moved by the shooting in Tucson that claimed the lives of a federal judge and a nine year old girl, among others, and critically wounded Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Some will attempt to politicize this episode as emblematic of the poverty of the “other side,” whereas others will seek to depoliticize it as the work of a deranged “lone gunman.” Meanwhile, moderate voices will be raised aghast at the violence in our midst, both of the rhetorical and spectacular varieties, and many will attempt to draw a direct link between the two. And still, in all likelihood, all of this will soon fade into the collective rear-view mirror and slide down the news queue, as the “normal” state of business as usual adjusts to a new equilibrium that encourages a reestablished complacency. 
The inherent cynicism in this narrative is bolstered by its likely occurrence, given America’s reaction to previous calamities. Yet this episode seems different, more personal in its up-close intentions, and jarring in its depiction of innocent people gunned down at a neighborhood supermarket while practicing the elusive virtues of representative democracy in a way that will be largely unavailable going forward. For along with the victims on that Arizona tarmac lies our own innocence as well, replaced by the carefully avoided specter of our collective contributions to what Hannah Arendt once referred to as the “banality of evil.”
In this sense, we must acknowledge the blood on all of our hands. We blithely exist in a culture of violence at almost every level, from our food and entertainment to the economy and what passes for politics. The better part of our creative and pecuniary energies alike are expended on the ceaseless operations of a military machine that we service as human cogs rendered before an insatiable Moloch. As much as we are able, the cultural violence that we proliferate is exported, outsourced, externalized, and rationalized in the name of progress and exceptionalism. Within this rubric, few among us are truly evil, but are merely living our lives along predetermined lines of common virtue. There is nothing shocking or extraordinary about this; it is, after all, quite acceptably mundane.
Yet now, in this brief moment of engaged horror and empathy, it seems as if the consequences of our actions (and inactions) have “come home to roost,” so to speak. We can blame this solely on right-wing fanaticism and the irresponsible rhetoric that fans the flames of violence. We can attribute it to the overall climate that has taken hold in places like Arizona, that trial balloon of reactionary political hijacking that could portend the opening salvo in a new civil war. We can point fingers at everyone from Beck and Bush to Obama and O’Reilly, and even reserve special mention for Palin as a paragon of pusillanimous politicking. We can deliver recriminations upon the gun dealers, dope peddlers, media moguls, hate groups, and more. And we most likely will, in our search for sense where none seems to exist.
We will, in short, place blame on everyone but ourselves — even as we watch the programs and punch the ballots, buy the products and consume the cuisine, tell the jokes and repeat the slurs, drive the cars and close the gates. Moderates will call for peace and civility, and we will nod in thankful agreement. Moments of silence and memorial remembrances will bring a lump to our throats and a tear to our eyes, even as the flag of national expediency slowly subsumes the genuine emotions of compassion and fear. Most of us will say and do all the right things, except the one thing that most needs doing: healing the wounds, not merely by dressing them, but also by undoing the capacity and desire to inflict them again.
This is not a call for restoring the tepid peace of complicity. Nor is it a wishful longing that people will suddenly become nice and pathologies instantly cured. We are not going to dismantle all the weapons of war and melt down the multitudes of guns any time soon. Conflicts of all sorts will be with us as long as we draw breath, both individually and civilizationally speaking. No, this is not a plea for moderation and placidity — in fact, precisely the opposite.
What I am suggesting here is a sober assessment of the task and an honest appraisal of our shared wounds. The starting point must be a deep recognition that it is us — and not just “them” — who kill people, including ourselves, as surely as if we had pulled the trigger in a crowded public place. We do it silently, remorselessly, and without expectation of punishment (indeed, the better we are at it, the more likely we are to be rewarded). The cultural ethos of competition, domination, consumption, and disposability pits us not only against one another, but against the life-giving properties of the habitat itself. As such, our wounds of trauma and tribulation are largely self-inflicted, not the products of the deranged among us but rather those of the perfectly sane.
Thomas Merton reflected on this theme in the context of warfare, concluding that it is actually an overabundance of rationality more so than its lack that makes violence possible. When we suborn violence, either tacitly or overtly, as a mechanism for accomplishing everything from a good dinner to global dominion, we merely sanction its use by others as a tool for achieving whatever aim they may deem desirable. When we allow the structural violence of gross inequity and caste-based marginalization to pervade unchallenged, we thereby encourage others to divide and conquer as well. Rational beings will take heed as aggression is rewarded and cooperation denigrated, and duly note that success is measured by how much one possesses vis-a-vis others in the relentless zero-sum contest of modern life.
Despite this accumulated cultural baggage, we can and must heal the wounds of this violence in our midst — not by burying it or displacing it, but by owning it and learning to live with it. Just as the hardware of destruction will not be abolished in any short-term reality, nor will the software of hatred, fear, aggression, and despair suddenly vanish. The question is whether we can acknowledge these capacities without exacerbating them, and likewise whether we will be able to accept the challenge of keeping the literal and metaphorical weapons of violence with us always as reminders of that which we have consciously decided to reject. This, then, is the imminent and paradoxical task before us: to retain our inherent ability to inflict harm on ourselves, others, and the world, and yet in the process create a culture that renders anathema the utility and desirability of doing so.
Others before us have faced similar dilemmas. Now, with the virtue of clarity inspired by tragedy, we have a unique opportunity to embrace another vision. We can and must make this a great turning, away from a culture forever reacting to self-inflicted wounds and toward one that grows stronger and more mature with each passing challenge. It will be the greatest test ever faced by humankind, and it is entirely necessitated by the staggering power we have attained to undermine our very existence. Still as yet unrealized is an equally vast capacity to promote well-being at all levels through our compassion, innovation, and recognition of the other in ourselves.
Which path will we choose? Herein lies the cultural crucible broached by the Arizona shootings, namely the shared opportunity to avoid self-destruction and instead embrace mutually-assured survival. Our collective healing hangs precariously in the balance, and awaits our overdue engagement with its transformative potential.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



174 Comments so far
Show AllI don't think anyone can resist propaganda - especially by themselves. Group-think is also bad, in most cases - we need differing opinions if we are to find a happy medium. Bernays' work was used in propaganda to get the US involved in European wars - it's been perfected a lot since WWII. But I'm flabbergasted when I hear someone claim that they can expose themselves to propaganda and not be influenced by it - GIGO is all too real. I avoid it like the plague...
We don't have a 'society' in this country - at most we have an aggregation of disparate people. (I come to this site to keep my head on straight - I'm a conservative, like PCR, who is aghast as what the Right has evolved into - full blown fascism.) The propaganda is ubiquitous, and yet so many people willingly subject themselves to even more by watching, listening to, and readig MSM propaganda - it's mindboggling. There is no 'Left' in this country - the communist witch-hunt eliminated it - so there can be no balance. It takes a strong socialist Left to keep the Right honest. We traditional conservatives (Ron Paul is one, with Libertarian leanings) are out in the cold - trying to deal with the Liberal (and even many 'progressives') is like herding cats - exasperating. Even more so with so many people today who don't usually post and aren't well educated. (A common failing in the US - thank Dewey). Too many people in denial - too many people without a decent education - too many people who just don't care. Mordor has come, indeed. (I watched LOtR over the week-end.) It's downright scary.
(A bit OT, but): I don't think you can just blame Dewey. Chomsky went to a Deweyite primary school which he loved for one :-) And his books (especially Democracy and Education) are still awesome. Taking ideas and ideologies too strictly and seriously and too literally is a huge problem in education though, I agree with that.
Anyway, imo America's educational problems don't stem from problems methodologies and theories and ideologies. The problems are simple: internally, lack of money in public education and everything that comes with this; externally, a hostile and sometimes downright destructive cultural environment whose educational power is beyond that of schools now, and possibly beyond parents.
Lack of money means a lot: from bad food and not enough sleep (for pupils) and no way to remedy this in school to bad textbooks, low wage teachers and all this entails etc. There's not much to explain imo. The cultural environment includes mainly the mass media, the values which it transmits being completely contrary to pedagogical values (and general human decency); and of course other people (parents and other children). Learning comes not from textbooks but direct social experience and the contradictions between "official" values and actual operating ones: how children get disciplined by teachers and who gets disciplined; how bullying is handled in a school by teachers; how much hierarchy means and how strict it is; and of course the disconnect between officially stated ideologies and actual life etc.
Kids learn from these things, and this is *real* learning, not memorising answers to checkbox questions. What they learn in this way will stay with them, even if they don't learn to read or add two numbers. If bullying is accepted and teachers leave bullies be, they learn, immediately and completely, that official "justice" systems can't be trusted and strength wins out in the end. If a teacher relies on authority and not intellectual honesty and integrity, children will learn that strength is worth more than being right, that truth is secondary and "winning" is what matters. Imo this kind of experience comprises the actual majority of the learning that goes on in schools, with the academic part itself being meaningless for most pupils anyway (except for the direct vocational stuff in better cases).
Thing is, this learning from actual experience and from mass media (over)consumption produces a pretty coherent view of the world and other people. Coherent, but also inhuman and sometimes downright evil, based on ill will, distrust, malevolence and abuse of power. But that's what children learn. How this all is organised formally is absolutely secondary.
from the article:
~ Within this rubric, few among us are truly evil, but are merely living our lives along predetermined lines of common virtue. ~
predetermined common virtues? determined by whom? when?
philosophically, anti-violence is as anti-gravity...
one still falls...
My country taught me that if I don't like a political leader, I am to use shock and awe to take them out, along with anyone who might be in the vicinity. If I choose to ignore the example set by my country, I can still understand someone who is just doing what they've learned from their president. My heart goes out to the innocent victims of Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Pakistan, and yes, Arizona. May God have mercy on this nation of evil.
Overall, reading everything above......quite a ride!
Sanity and wisdom wins out over sickness and stupidty....by a wide margin.....thank you!
Yes -- some excellent comments. The article and comments bear posting to Facebook for thoughtful consideration. Thank you, author and Common Dreams friends.
(And what one concentrates on expands. I choose to focus on peace and nonviolence -- and it isn't easy. I watch my words, and sometimes fail, but I keep trying. Let's all keep trying. Peace hugs!)
Even as we continue to blame others in the responses in this discussion we are guilty of exactly what the writer was trying to point out. In order to collectively change a society's mindset regarding violence, we must first be accountable ourselves. This would begin by leading by example and representing ourselves as individuals in a way we desire others to be.
I will not blame any individual for the actions of the AZ shooter except for the shooter himself since he alone pulled the trigger. I will also examine my own role in perpetuating violence in our society by evaluating my own behavior. This begins with this post to state my resolve to be personally accountable. I can do this without blaming or attacking anyone.
I believe that I have the freedom and ability to control my own behavior and do not need the government to create laws to tell me how to behave as I should know this innately since most individuals know the difference between right and wrong. Behavior that we would teach our children should be the standard in which we should all follow.
There is no place in our society for hate speech, finger pointing, bullying, labeling, unsubstantiated accusations or tit for tat. All it does is perpetuate further violence. We should value ourselves more then to accept the standards of a "Jerry Springer" society. Let's start by taking personal responsibility especially those in positions of authority and rise to a higher level of co-existence and actually evolve as human beings in a positive way.
The more people are commodified, the more their value as humans is reduced. With no value in depth, naturally, they are easily disposed of...in images, stories, video games...everywhere, including in real life. In fact, flat images replace actual people. IMO, as much as corporate culture would like everything to be commodified (for obvious reasons), there is a widespread feeling of anger and dismay (usually inchoate) at some level of the psyche that this reduction of humanity is outrageous and beyond our control. The anger gets mixed up with the seemingly infinite commercial and political images of human commodification that fill the brain and seem impossible to get rid of. Overwhelmed, the remnants of the moral system shut down in a freefall of imbecile simplification.
The U.S. is a wasteland such has never been seen before, and we need to deal with the root of the problem. As mcoyote posted on another thread, in dealing with it we might actually start to live; that is, we'll start filling in the humanity again. In fact, it may be the only way to do so.
Very good words Arry. One way to expose what is happening to American's now is to re-visit the American Genocide. American Indians are demonized and have been for five hundred years by Euro/Americans. We were regarded as no more than animals in the woods that could be wantonly killed if we did not accept the "Requirement," Christian beliefs. One good way to begin is to end the use of the word, "Redskins," a bloody scalp, in reference to American Indians. It is similar to the word, "Nigger," applying to African Americans. Yet, Washington D.C. is home to the Washington Redskins. Demonization leads to deep disrespect and expendability. Your words are prescient in the current American death culture.
Is it not better to speak for oneself rather than challenge another to speak for you?
Here's one incredible way to turn away from hatred/negativity and 'enemy images'.
Admittedly it feels a little goofy to actually talk this way, but I find it to be an effective way to mentally analyze ANY human interaction, and eventually get at what seems to be the core of the words or actions.
I drive a truck, and am around some real characters on a daily basis for many hours. I keep an apartment in the downtown area where I work. The surrounding neighborhood is just a cut above third-world with it's reliable electricity, paved roads, and closed sewage system; although the crime, prostitution, drug dealing, and killing in the streets around me resemble most of the many slums of the earth. There are multicultural issues, interpersonal issues, communication issues, intelligence level issues, socioeconomic factors, etc. etc. etc.
http://www.nonviolentcommunication.com/meet_marshall_rosenberg/mbr-video.htm
"Which path will we choose?"
This question is directed to conservatives. Liberals already chose (see Jesus, Buddha, Gandhi, Lennon)
"The struggle is in the mind. We must bury our own monsters and stop condemning people. We are all Christ and Hitler. We want Christ to win. We're trying to make Christ's message contemporary. What would he have done if he had advertisements, records, films, TV and newspapers! Christ made miracles to tell his message. Well, the miracle today is communications, so let's use it."-John Lennon
This little sister who is a Christian Anarchist with a dose of dervish is doing that!
Eileen Fleming,
Founder of WeAreWideAwake.org
Staff Member of Salem-news.com
A Feature Correspondent for Arabisto.com
Producer "30 Minutes with Vanunu" and "13 Minutes with Vanunu"
Author of "Keep Hope Alive" and "Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory" and BEYOND NUCLEAR: Mordechai Vanunu's FREEDOM of SPEECH Trial and My Life as a Muckraker: 2005-2010
http://www.youtube.com/user/eileenfleming
It's good to have you back Eileen. I respect your personal Christian path even though I disagree with it. I believe that the teachings of Christian dominion exploit both people and Mother Earth and therefore are destructive. I do however believe that there are Christians whose personal path appears to reject dominion. Please do not take my words as a criticism of you, they are not.
We are both Christ and Hitler, but is there any advantage to ignoring that those who favor their Hitler side have taken over and are oppressing the rest?
Good and Evil are within ALL human hearts and FREE WILL means we get to choose which rules!
I had been cogitating on a run for House of Representatives since 2005 when I made my first of 7 trips to Occupied Palestibne, but I made the commitment just hours before one lone mad man chose violence to express himself and "You can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won't back down."-Tom Petty
And So it Begins for this Citizens of Conscience:
http://wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1971&Itemid=242
“To tell you the truth” empirePie January 12, 2011
“To tell you the truth”
or a prelude for a little untruth
delivered eye to eye
“To tell you the truth”
unflinching for compensation
like a tooth for a tooth
or a rule of law
or a ‘born free’ ...in a ‘law of the jungle’ jaw;
the maw in the void
for the ‘huddled masses’
expressionless and lonely
‘lonely like honesty’
needing a eulogy, a dirge
so .....
“To tell you the truth”
here’s a prelude for a little untruth
delivered eye to eye
‘War is peace’
‘War is peace’
‘War is peace’
for freedom
guns and violence and automobiles are one grouping
about 250,000 persons are killed on the roads and streets because of automobile accidents. Millions are injured.
Automobiles create horrendous stress in our habitats.
Notice the discourtesy.
Notice the habits.
Notice the lifestyles and crime that come from the use of them
They poisonous.
They make sooo much noise.
Making pedestrians share passageways with motorists is enormously stressful
Even environmentakists drive too much.
Automobile companies spend billions to convince people they need them.
They are our Weapons of Mass Destruction.
This is civic and national violence.
My life is threatened daily.
As are the lives of my children and grandchildren.
We need to stop the DENIAL on this.
Armed citizens is just as bad.
Every day thoughtful essays like this, many articles, books and letters are published denouncing violence and elaborating ways to curb it and reasons for it in the trendy lifestyle we show but none address the deep causes of such a collective suicidal behavior.
We are citizens of the the Western Christian Culture, of a society with deep racial, religious, political, cultural, legal, economic, historical and Scientific roots, all that MUST be enough for us to built and live in a model society far from the some atrocious societies that are in our background. But we imitate the atrocities of those societies instead of the valuable experiences and behaviors that they have inherited to us and that we carry on.
What is wrong with us? Religions, politics, economics some of or all of them? Religious ideologies tend to divide humanity developing separate groups that tend to hate all others, religious people say: my god is the true god so, convert or die, Christians did it for millennial and reduced it just a few decades ago, almost all many wars Europeans fought along last 20 centuries were some how religious wars. Political reasons for wars have also blended with religious reasons to fight wars and economic ideologies hasn't been shy in this issue but religious ideologies have been by large the more fertile in such atrocity.
So, we should start looking at it more closely to find out what really is going on there.
The guy obviously doesn't read the news. We're in process of perfecting our scorched earth policies. Robotic drone aircraft that can turn any wedding celebration anywhere into a massacre. If only Kit Carson could see it!
WHAT IS WRONG WITH US?
Short version:
Immense leverage to guide, modify and execute national policies on war, media and education by well placed psychopaths.
ZERO leverage by the great suffering mass of humanity both here and abroad being propagandized, impoverished, raped or killed because of the 'profit for the rich' business model codified in Orwellian legal-speak by the above mentioned psychopaths.
As a student of human behavior, I am absolutely flabbergasted at how much cruelty and undeserved punishment humans can take without rebelling. The Rovian mindf__kers think it's their 'brilliant' use of propaganda.
I think that, over all, humanity has figured out that violent revolt just changes one tyrant with another. We are in the process of trying to come up with a new way to govern ourselves which does not involve actual or implied coercion and exploitation of humans or nature.
Will we succeed?
It doesn't look good.
Actually, taking to the streets and physically doing something is the ONLY way there will be real change in the system. Maybe no one here is old enough to remember the race riots during the Equal Rights Era? Or how our country came into being in the first place? Governments don't change by their citizens getting angry at them, unless YOU do something physical about it and in numbers they cannot ignore or cover up.
Do you want your kids to end up living in the streets, begging or stealing to eat? How about their families living in shacks in back alleys or along polluted drainage ditches with no electric or even windows or doors? Or you or your parents trying to live on a continually shrinking Social Security payment where it is a choice of food or medicine?
The Wealthy elite don't care if we all die just so long as there are enough of us left to bleed to keep them in the lifestyle they believe they should have.
I currently live in a 3rd world country where all of the above symptoms exist. but, guns are NOT in the hands of the populace. Billionaires here are constantly trying to wring more and more out of the masses at any cost. That is America's future if we don't grow a backbone and soon. Gun confiscation is not far off. Then you will be like the people here. Helpless...
Are they indeed helpless because they do not have guns?
Were the Poles under Lech Walesa helpless when they shut down the Gdansk shipyards? They did not have guns.
Were the poor of Bolivia helpless when they took to the streets in Cochabamba and other cities and launched massive general strikes?
Were the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo helpless under the brutal Military Junta of Argentina?
The police had guns...the protesters did not.
The peoples in both cases rallied together to HELP one another. The strength of "solidarity" is people helping one another. If people help one another they can never be helpless.
Important contribution. Few people can even imagine anything between what we are doing now and the dreaded "violent revolution." Yet the entire range of possibilities for political action can be found between those two poles.
Means ( buy a gun ) Motive (anger generated by media and stresses of life) Opportunity. (attend a public rally). Which of these needs a little more control?
Means ( buy a gun ) Motive (anger generated by media and stresses of life) Opportunity. (attend a public rally). Which of these needs a little more control?
My advice to you Professor is this. I have been considering what you and I were discussing over the Chris Hedges article. I understand you are part of the Anti-War movement. I'm not sure who decided it would be in their best interest to stop war and thus create peace by calling what they were doing Anti War. War this, war that. In the end the feel of the movement is war. No matter how much we act like violence is the order of the day, I believe that people are at base attracted to peace and happiness and good times more than war. There is a part of us that we are trying to do away with that seems very attracted to war or what I would prefer to call conflict, which war is a huge part of. This attraction to peace and happiness and good times is collective and it's polar extreme, conflict and hate and bad times are also attractive. I would hope that those who want to start a movement against war and for peace are thinking along the lines of what their best strategy really is. I have not seen or read that leaders of this potential movement such as Chris Hedges are as of yet using peace and happiness and good times to sell their movement. I know, it may sound crass to talk about selling it, but I think it is just plain out good common sense. If I were to sell anti-war or pro-peace after thinking about it for a day or two, I would sell it on the merit of calling it the good war. War in and of it's self is not bad, but it is how it is waged that is bad. Since we have an attraction to war as well as peace and lets face it our reality is still rife with war, dismissing it is not a good idea, but neither is attacking it. Instead we need to embrace it so we can tame it. I would call my movement the good war. I have not heard this tried out yet and to be perfectly honest there is something in me that feels very good about calling it just that. Lets face it we need to fight sometimes and we need to protect and defend right and that often leads us to conflict and even war, but lets call that war what it is, good so we can seperate it out from what is bad about war.
Most of the time, the comments here are the real game - the lead-in article is just a jumping-off point. We sort of try to keep to a single issue, but that is hard when dealing with complex problems - after all, there are no easy solutions, or we would have employed them already!
most humans are hardwired for revenge at any perceived/real threat or act of aggression. responding to such threats or acts without resorting to the filter of the urge to exact retribution would go a long way to attaining peaceful resolutions to conflict.
what then is justice? eye for an eye? blindness anyone?
what is the real meaning of loving one's enemies? to me it means that "getting even" is transformed into "getting real".
reconfiguring the wiring. wirelessness. "other" does not exist. even extreme "other" or enemy is just a construct.
think of the "golden rule" - do unto others as you would have them do unto you - close, but still no cigar. care instead about how to feel more deeply. regardless of what others (that don't really exist) do or think.
none of this can simply be proclaimed to be real. the ego has to die - then all heaven/love/liberation can break loose.
This is a good comment. just to add a little more to what you have started. 'The other' percieved in and of it's self is not what leads to acts of revenge. It is the other percieved and then the other determined as my enemy that leads to acts of revenge. When the other is seen illusion or no and that illusion is seen as something that is to help us on our way rather than to hurt us, then illusion or no, the need for revenge on the other is broken loose from the dynamic. What is then birthed is the need to keep the other as a dear and beloved friend and partner in direct co-operation to better one's chance for survival. Maybe this is still illusion but it is a greater illusion.
That golden rule becomes then not a rule that must be followed but an experience that everyone will want to have. This is a golden place to be human within.
The thread that runs through most of the comments is a rejection of violence. That is good.
The other good news is that the past 100 years has seen a significant lessening of violence, and with America being the agent of that macro view of less violence among humankind.
The 20th century was the most horrendous and murderous in human history. Two hundred million humans were violently killed or purposely starved by their own leaders. At the same time most of the planet's 194 nation states have adopted the political and economic forms that are most fair and that lean toward non violence and equity -- democracy and free enterprise.
Since the end of WWII and the death of Mao, each subsequent “holding action" has been less violent. Nations are reducing their atomic stockpile and America is reducing her military and changing military weaponry and strategy from mass killing to targeted killing of known belligerents and the avoidance of killing non combatants.
The major military conflict of the 20th century was the world conflict that lasted from 1914 to 1945. About 70 million were killed during that war. At the same time the totalitarian leaders of about 40 nation states murdered and starved about 130 million of their own citizens. As mass murderers, Mao came in first with about 70 million dead from murder and starvation, Stalin came in second with about 30 million killed. So the road to communism consumed a hundred million lives - on the quest for a failed experiment in governance and economics. The Great War resulted in about 70 million deaths and the remaining 30 million were the intranational genocides by the other totalitarian mass murderers.
Again, since the end of WWII and the death of Mao - history's top mass murderer - each subsequent "holding action" has been less costly of human life.
Korea and Viet Nam were fought to stem the communist quest for world domination - and a continuation of their mass murder. America was the leader in standing against that real and present danger.
The total deaths in Korea were three million, in Vietnam about four million, in Iraq about 150 thousand, and in the nine years in Afghanistan about 20 thousand. These are average estimates and include all civilian and military deaths. That is a total of a little over seven million deaths in these four "holding actions."
The result was the stop of communist world domination until it has all but died of natural causes. The Iraq action resulted in the removal of a murderous and genocidal thug, Saddam Hussein, who had murdered one million of his own people. The action in Afghanistan has resulted in denying worldwide terrorism a safe haven in which to train and plan for attacks against the free world. Since 9/11/01 there has not been one successful terrorist attack with our borders.
More good news is that the formers mass murderous nations, China and the Soviet Union, have come into the family of non-belligerent nations working towards world peace, prosperity and addressing the global ecological challenges.
Even accepting all the posted conspiracy theories and the dangers and inequities that do exist - we live in a safer world.
We still have a long way to go, but the long arc of the moral universe bends towards justice.
Thank you, thank you, thank you and thank you. This brings the balancing force for better perspective on war and society today. Many like to try to claim todays war and violence are the culmination of all evil. It is the opposite, we are part of the slow deculmulation of war as we continue to arc towards peace. However as you state this does not mean our challenge is any less, no just because we have less war and violence and evil does not mean all is well. Can any of us help this process along a little better, especially than those in the past were able? Yes. Yes because with less war comes more peace and with more peace comes more power to further peace. Few seem to have realized this latent power that has accumulated very recently. All of us need to understand we have this new power for peace so we can activate it and set it in motion full force so we may continue the hard work of building a new peace movement that will once again lessen the grip of war and violence and yeild new days of peace and prosperity, for us, all peoples on this planet. All will not be well until we have no war and violence and evil. None.
Yeah wtf is with that sentence? The USA is a normal empire, not in any way more humane than previous ones. This bullshit about "moral evolution" is retarded and untrue. And does this person believe the bullshit he's spouting about Vietnam?
"The total deaths in Korea were three million, in Vietnam about four million, in Iraq about 150 thousand, and in the nine years in Afghanistan about 20 thousand. These are average estimates and include all civilian and military deaths. That is a total of a little over seven million deaths in these four "holding actions." "
Total direct deaths, not all deaths. And you're conveniently forgetting that America has already did more harm to Iraq, way more harm, than Saddam Hussein (even if you don't count the fact that he was supported by America). You're forgetting the long term results of the Vietnamese attack ("holding war?" what a disgusting self-satisfied prick) and the rest. Jesus Christ, what an infuriating and disgusting post to make. You're forgetting Cambodia also, which America is responsible for, because Pol Pot would never have happened without the US bombing that country to shit in secret. You seem to have no fucking idea how utterly disgusting these "arguments" are.
Also, indirect violence and economical abuse and exploitation kills millions yearly, not even mentioning the probable consequences of our overconsumption and waste, which will kill tens of millions in time (probably a lot more).
This self-satisfied moral evolution bullshit comes up again and again and it's really disgusting and infuriating. I especially love the total disregard for the two world wars, which were, the obvious and clear result of our civilisation. One was an imperial war; the second was an imperial war coupled with disgusting ideology. The relative peace in the second half of the XXth century was there because Europeans still remembered the second one, but we're already forgetting about it again and starting to behave exactly as idiotically as we did then. Seriously, wtf. Shithead.
This isn't a 'culture of violence' - it's a 'culture of brutality' - of abuse. There is a difference. Violence is part of the natural world, but no other species (that I know of) brutalizes another - they use 'violence' to survive - not to subjugate, satiate, or terrorize. Even herds of zebras settle down once the lions have made a kill - humans are driven by other motives, and there is where we need to look for solutions.
Actually the main point of Miller is that violence perpetuates itself: you'll do to your kids (statistically) what your parents did to you - it's not just particular forms of pedagogy and practices she doesn't like, but more about the general way a cycle of violence perpetuates itself across generations through the repetition of particular patterns (forms of pedagogy and parental practices). Pretty powerful stuff.
She focuses a lot on sexual abuse in the family too as a part of this issue, although what she's writing is pretty extremely scary (and kind of unbelievable). Really like her stuff though, along with Laing and Erich Fromm.
Well reading Laing is pretty interesting, a very controversial person: an excellent psychiatrist with a fucked up family life, but his books are pretty stimulating. Not very deep or intellectual imo though. Too close to all that "counterculture" feeling for me, but still, some of his basic ideas are very nice.
Fromm was a much more normal person, a scientist (psychologist), pretty left wing (democratic socialist), active in politics and especially the peace movement (in the 60s-70s). Escape from Freedom is his famous book, but he's written a lot :-)