How can we nonviolently prevent nuclear war? Part 1

Worldwide nuclear explosions. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic license. Author: Worldwide nuclear testing.svg

by James Manista

     1. Like so many in Congress we can ignore nuclear weapons and hope they go away—some in the new administration want to  restart talks—that’s progress

 2. The pope condemns war and nuclear weapons every so often but diplomatically hasn’t mentioned anyone by name

      3. Political oppositions must rise up in all nuclear nations and press   

          governments to reduce their numbers—zero’s a nice number.

      4. Convince the military to dismantle them—gotta include that one 

      5.  Wave a magic wand

No one knows how effective the new government will be. Obama promised to rid us of nukes and to close Guantanamo—still waiting. The pope has spoken for himself but most bishops are hardliners. Activist efforts continue despite setbacks. The fourth method is an outlier, but it has been tried. Ground Zero’s attempt last year to urge submariners to disobey unlawful orders (viz.,“Fire the missiles”) didn’t dent Trident. So keep waving that wand, Bubba. What do you do if writing your congress-person or upholding honkable banners is not yielding the desired results?

One method I didn’t mention is direct action (civil disobedience/ nonviolent resistance) which was first advocated by Henry David Thoreau against slavery and the war with Mexico. Ghandi employed it for civil rights in South Africa and against colonial rule in India. More recently Martin Luther King, Jr., and others used the same principles effectively in the struggles of the ‘sixties. However, the tactic has a risk not characteristic of the others of financial loss and/or incarceration.

It’s one thing to claim imprisoned heroes like Plowshares7 Jesuit priest Steven Kelly or Wikileaks’ founder Julian Assange or soldier and intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden, leaker of National Security Administration surveillance methods; it’s quite another to follow in their footsteps.

In May of  2019, the Ground Zero Center for Non-Violent Action (GZ) emailed me about their proposal to protest at the Bangor-Kitsap Trident Base the weekend of May 11. Activists were invited to perform brief gestures of non-violent civil disobedience. They scheduled a morning of inspirational talks by GZ leaders and a keynote by Kathy Kelly, a well-known war-crime protestor and Afghanistan activist. In the afternoon a lawyer sympathetic to the cause would present legal information and instruction. Replying I’d attend, I ordered an 8’ x 3’ vinyl banner and contacted other Olympians to rideshare that day. 

By scheduling the event the day before Mothers’s Day they wished to remind people that holiday had close connections to peace advocacy. Ann Reeves Jarvis of West Virginia used her Mothers Friendship Day in 1868 to reconcile former Union and Confederate soldiers. Two years later the suffragette and abolitionist Julia Ward Howe authored her Mother’s Day Proclamation urging mothers to unite in promoting world peace.  

At the entrance of the Trident Base a one-foot-wide blue line, labeled US Government brightly in white, has been painted on each lane of the highway at Trident Boulevard, the Navy property. Knowledge of this line is critical to the nature of the GZ protests.

After lunch GZ’s legal advisor clarified for us that protestors who stand (dance, read poetry, sing peace songs, etc.) blocking highway traffic on the state side of the blue marker who also refuse to disperse when ordered to do so by the highway police will be cited for blocking access on a state highway and must report to a state court as notified to answer the charges. Those protestors who cross the blue line onto the base and stand (dance, read poetry, sing peace songs, etc.), who refuse to return to the state property when ordered by base security (the Marines) will be cited for federal trespass and informed they must report to a federal court. He could not make it plainer the federal violation is regarded as more serious—occasionally much  more serious—than the state offense.

We were then asked as to what course we’d choose without judgment as to our sincerity or dedication to the cause: 1. to stand alongside the highway; 2. to violate the state law; or 3. to violate the federal law. Eight stalwarts opted for the state side; I chose the federal side: the rest, about fifty in number (and average age), chose to march, sing, witness, and cheer.

GZ and Navy base security had earlier agreed on the site and timing to avoid dangerous surprises. Banners and signs in hand we proceeded to the base as state police cars gathered on an overpass, and Marines with protective vests and weapons, parked their van near the blue line.

First the eight formed a line in front of the blue demarcator and began with a song, followed by each demonstrator via bullhorn presenting his or her rationale for blocking the road: citing international law, recounting other heroic stands, praying and announcing recent comments of the pope. Finished, they stood in place, and as each was approached by the highway police to move off the road, they refused, and were in turn politely taken by an arm and led off to the berm where individual citations were drafted and delivered. 

As the last was led away I stepped forward with my banner held chest high, got to the center of the road, and took two steps behind the blue line. A Navy security officer told me to step back to the state side. I stood still and did not answer. Then he asked if I knew the meaning of the word trespass. I acknowledged I did and was approached by two guards, one who took the banner out of my hands while the other led me behind the van out of sight of the crowd.

They took several photographs (presumably for Navy and NSA records) while a guard asked for my ID and address. 

One guard, fearful I might faint, inquired if I preferred to sit on the van floor where the side was open. I did and gladly accepted a paper cup of water besides. Despite our training to remember carefully everything we were asked and said, there was some casual conversation before they returned my banner and took me back across the blue line. My allies cheered my return. The citation told me I would be advised within ninety days of my court date. 

The United States of America: A “Culture of Violence”

by Anthony Marsella *

Charting a “Culture of Violence:” Causes and Consequences

As the immediate emotions of the presidential elections pass — the euphoria and elation of the winners, the grief, despair, anger of the losers — the harsh realities of daily life once again emerge. Among these is the widespread violence that exists in the United States as displayed in Figure 1. As Figure 1 demonstrates, the manifestations and consequences of violent acts are extensive. This suggests the existence of a “culture of violence” that is generated, sustained, and promoted by acts that arise from individual and collective impulse and intent, and that too often find tier tolerance and approval across political, economic, educational, military, and moral policies of institutions.

Regardless of our wishes that this was not the case, the United States of America is a “culture of violence.” The Figure 1 (i.e., chart) offers a quick visual display. It is neither comprehensive nor explanatory, aside from recognizing the reciprocity among the different acts and sources of violence. There is an obvious interaction across the acts displayed in which simple cause-effect relations disappears amidst the complexity. Each act is both a source and consequence. A cultural ecology of violence.

Figure 1: A Culture of Violence

The Omnipresence of Violence

Violence abounds in American society, touching everyone’s life as victim, perpetrator, or anxious observer and witness of the endless violent acts committed locally, nationally, and internationally. Ultimately we are all victims and perpetrators through acts of intention or acts of silence and indifference that support a tolerance of the situation. There is no escape from this reality. How much more violence can we view on TV, how much more violence can we cheer and applaud in entertainment, how much more violence can we experience before we are faced with a constant state of stress, anxiety, anger, and/or moral indifference?

There is a widespread fear, anxiety, and stress that leaves citizens of all ages feelings vulnerable and insecure, awaiting the possibility of violence touching their lives, and bring with it grief and sorrow. It is clear violence is widespread in the world. Every person — regardless of location — is compelled to live with daily reminders of risk and danger. What is distinct about violence in the USA, however, is the existence of a national culture of shared, learned behaviors and meanings transmitted across generations via ethoses, values, attitudes, and ways-of-life that are violent. These inform and guide our institutions resulting in the socialization of a culture of violence.

USA Foreign Policy: Driver of National and Global Violence

The foreign policies and actions of the United States of America over the course of the past 100 years are rooted in intentions to control and dominate international order of nations and cultures. These policies and actions have proven destructive to national and global peace, and have served and empowered the interests of a limited number of individuals and groups. Ultimately, under the guise of protecting “national interests” these policies and actions are major sources, carriers, and promoters of violence nationally and globally. They are asymmetrical and hegemonic in nature, and sustain the status quo in consequence. While all are announced as intentions to bring democracy and freedom, they have too often resulted in occupation, oppression, and repression of human rights. An obvious result — visible in virtually every nation caught in our efforts – is the costly growth of a vast USA network of: (1) military bases and operations, (2) massive fortress embassies/consulates, (3) encampments/prisons, (4) death squads, (5) cultural disintegration and decline.

These policies and actions do not promote cooperation and admirations, rather they encourage instability via reflexive protests, insurrections, rebellions, revolutions, and acts of domestic, state, and international terrorism. Table 1 display the spectrum of USA foreign policy and action choices, options, and alternatives. All nations act in their own interests, The issue, however, is that in a global era, in which the understanding of the causes and consequences of violence and war are now better known, selfish national interests result in direct and indirect opposition. For many nations who feel victimized and humiliated by the USA, revenge is considered just and appropriate. This creates an endless cycle. Who benefits? Table 1 displays a spectrum of USA foreign policy and action practices — they are used as needed.

Table 1: USA Foreign Policy and Actions Choices, Options, Alternatives

  •  Assassinations/death squads/drones,
  • Bounties for info/capture
  • Bribery/blackmail/entrapment
  • Celebration of national “morality”/necessity of torture
  • Collaboration/contracts with universities, scientists, professional organizations
  • Contingent “humanitarian” aid
  • Contingent foreign aid
  • Control UN via vetoes
  • Control IMF and World Bank
  • Cooperate with foreign nations (e.g., military, intelligence)
  • Development of domestic crowd controls (militarization of police)
  • Diplomacy
  • Drug wars and corruptions
  • Disproportionate support of “allies” and enemification of others,
  • Establishment of military bases [more than 900 known foreign bases],
  • Exportation of popular American culture
  • Foreign student/faculty/consultant exchanges
  • Fund development of disguised/pseudo-organizations (e.g. Human Ecology Fund)
  • Glorification of war, militarism, warrior mentalities
  • Hegemonic globalization
  • Infiltrate peace and anti-war groups
  • Mass surveillance, monitoring, and archiving of data,
  • Massive government/private intelligence security agencies/organizations
  • Media influence and control
  • Military intervention
  • Mind control technologies (e.g., drugs, EMR)
  • Negotiation/conflict resolution
  • Non-Prosecution of connected military, government, civilian law violators/abusers
  • Occupation
  • Promotion of nationalism/pseudo-patriotism
  • Propaganda and promotion of USA exceptionalism,
  • Purchase and installation of pro-American leaders and dictators,
  • Recruitment of spies, informers, collaborators, agents
  • Use surrogate nations and forces
  • Use false flags incidents
  • Use major philanthropic foundations to influence policy and actions
  • Vilification of domestic/international critics.
  • Weapons/arms dealer/sales
  • Witness protection programs

Closing Remarks

I have published two articles in recent years regarding war and peace. The first article is entitled: “The United States of America: A Culture of War” (Marsella, A.J. [2012]. The United States of America: A “culture of war.” International Journal of Intercultural Research, 35, 714-728.This article documents the long history of war in the United States, and the American cultural ethos that has spawned and nurtured wars. The second article is a please for nonkilling and an end to violence. It is entitled “Nonkilling psychology and lifeism” (Marsella, A.J. (2011). Nonkilling psychology and lifeism. In J. Pim & D. Christie (Eds.) Nonkilling Psychology (pp. 361-378). Honolulu, Hi: Center for Global Non-Violence.). This article calls for humanity to move beyond unbridled national identities to an identity with life itself, the very force that animates our world and universe.

In both of these articles, and in this article, it is clear to me that we are headed for a “dreadful reckoning” (Grieder’s term) if we do not come to an awareness of the many sources and consequences of violence in our lives, particularly the perpetuation of “cultures of violence” that are sources of endless suffering, destruction, and death. The answer resides in the necessity of non-violent activism to prevent violence. This is the timeless answer of every great peacemaker.

*Originally published on TRANSCEND Media Service, November 9, 2012

Anthony Marsella, Ph.D., a  member of the TRANSCEND Network, is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii, and past director of the World Health Organization Psychiatric Research Center in Honolulu. He is known nationally and internationally as a pioneer figure in the study of culture and psychopathology who challenged the ethnocentrism and racial biases of many assumptions, theories, and practices in psychology and psychiatry. In more recent years, he has been writing and lecturing on peace and social justice. He has published 15 edited books, and more than 250 articles, chapters, book reviews, and popular pieces. He can be reached at marsella@hawaii.edu.

Ending US wars

by Michael Knox

If, like me, you are sick of our country’s involvement in endless wars, but you think there is nothing anyone can do to stop the murder, an article I recently published in Truthout can change your mind. The piece is an excerpt from my book, ENDING U.S. WARS by Honoring Americans Who Work for Peace.


The old cliché about a fish not knowing it’s in water has survived for a reason. Our cultural currents can drive us toward normalizing or, worse, glorifying what we might otherwise find objectionable….

The U.S. honors its military and reinforces warrior behaviors with holidays, ceremonies, parades, Hollywood movies, TV shows, and memorials to soldiers, wars, and wartime presidents. Individual military members/veterans enjoy medals, promotions, vanity license plates, tax exemptions, free admissions, reserved parking spaces, airline boarding preferences, veteran discounts, and other privileges. These honors and privileges reinforce militarism in the U.S.; no other group of citizens is as revered.

Joe Biden ended his inauguration address, presidential victory speech, and his Democratic National Convention nomination acceptance speech with the words “And may God protect our troops.” Donald Trump usually ended his speeches with “God bless our great military.” Patriotic ceremonies and public recognitions of the military are so commonplace that few Americans even think about, much less question, them.”

To enjoy a rich discussion of the steps countless Americans have taken to resist and overcome the normalization of war, you can read the whole book, available at major bookstores.