by Kathie Malley-Morrisonm, Joe Kandra, and Pat Daniel
Thu May 27 @ 7:00 pm – 8:30 pm at Mass Peace Action
The field of peace psychology has given considerable attention to the dynamics of moral and immoral thinking as expressed in peaceful or violent behavior. Waging war violates the most universal moral code ever evolved by human beings—the Golden Rule. Yet ruthlessly, through the centuries, humans have been persuaded to commit atrocities such as warfare while viewing themselves as moral beings. How do they do that?
One answer is moral disengagement—ways of thinking that allow people to convince themselves that it is moral to promote war against others who are portrayed as less than human, a threat to future peace, troublemakers, etc. Unscrupulous leaders have known for centuries how to feed into those self-deceptions to justify violently taking the lands and resources of other people. However, throughout the centuries there have also been people who have fought violent tactics, people who are morally engaged on behalf of peace and social justice.
In this webinar, psychologist Kathie Malley-Morrison will provide brief examples of both moral disengagement and engagement offered in posts in the Engaging Peace archive. She has published many books and articles both on family violence around the globe and on the views of ordinary people from around the globe on the issues of war and peace. She will be followed by Joe Kandra, the cartoonist for Engaging Peace, who has already begun creating cartoons for MAPA. He will provide examples from the Engaging Peace archives of the ways in which political cartoons can be used to educate and engage for peace and social justice. Pat Daniel will moderate the session.
This webinar features key posts on the psychological underpinnings of engagement in warfare, as explored in the blog of Engaging Peace Inc.— a non-profit begun in 2010 by Kathie Malley-Morrison and Pat Daniel to promote peace and social justice. Kathie and Joe are now bringing their peace advocacy to MAPA, and MAPA is expanding the resources available to its members by acquiring the blog archives of Engaging Peace.
I have just published a richly detailed comment from LB, a frequent and valued contributor to the Engaging Peace [EP] comment section. She is concerned that a major subtext of EP posts is a subtle but deliberate promotion of the Democratic Party rather than “the perceived higher value of peace, social justice, and moral engagement.” Horrors!!! If LB has reached this conclusion after years of reading EP, others must have done so as well. So today I am publishing my reply to LB (and all others) as a full post. Please read her comment first ,
LB, the purpose of Engaging Peace is precisely the promotion of the higher values of peace and social justice, which I think requires moral engagement. I am horrified that you would reduce our efforts to trying to help elect Democrats. Aaaaack!
The motto for Engaging Peace is “From study to action,” which is shorthand for “From research and ethical considerations to activism on behalf of peace, social justice, and human rights.” We believe that despite the creation of vast destructive technologies threatening life on the planet today, not all science is evil, not all research is evil, and not all progress is evil. Some of what researchers have achieved can benefit all of humanity and not just the privileged classes. Such benefits can come not just from developing remarkable medical interventions and preventions to fight pain, disability, and premature, agonizing deaths, but also from recognizing and promoting the benefits and wisdom of behaving humanely with each other.
A genuine democracy, as conceived by those of us who believe in universal peace, social justice, and respect for human rights, seems like the political system with the most potential currently for the greatest good for the greatest number. However, in this country and most others throughout history, people have failed to achieve genuine democracies; mostly, let’s face it, the “democracies” primarily have served particular groups of privileged men.
Right now, our “democracy” seems pretty much a mess, a mess that is sliding rapidly into another brutal fascism. I think hand-wringing and opting out of any active effort to find ways to join with others to resist that slide is not a path to greater peace and social justice, and certainly does nothing to foster human rights.
From its beginning in 2010, EP has promoted engagement—engagement through demonstrations, resistance, protests, petitions, and yes, even through looking for and supporting like-thinking, peace-seeking individuals willing to engage in an imperfect political process to the point of seeking office. Such people are not totally nonexistent–and are not necessarily either Republican or Democrat.
To promote peace and justice and human rights, EP has spoken out on behalf of replacing a corrupt two-party system with a genuinely multiparty political system, and ending the Electoral College, which is a serious impediment to true democracy. In the past (hold onto your hat!), I have on occasion voted for and/or otherwise supported Republicans who I viewed as people of principle and integrity and not just mouthpieces of the military-industrial complex,. Today, it seems to me, most politicians of both parties serve the military-industrial complex and the power elite; however, I also see some advocates of resistance and positive social change emerging. How will they be able to fight the “old boys” (female as well as male) without support? How will things get better without active participation in any efforts undertaken to reform our system, however daunting that effort is.
I find fault with most members of both political parties because they have contributed to getting us into the mess we’re in. (I was enraged at the way the Democratic National Committee rigged the last primary.) I think it’s tragic that sometimes the only alternatives to truly horrendous political candidates are either the lesser of two evils or an opting out of what may be the last best chance for trying to make things better. Call me a naïve, cockeyed optimist trying to feel good about myself if you want, but please don’t assume my real goal, or the goal at EP, is the promotion of the Democratic Party.
Truly, you are correct that you and I share a general horror at the ruthlessness and corruption of the political system ruling our country (and most others in the world today), but that system is not what I call democracy and is not the democracy we are fighting for at EP. In my view, you and I are part of the same sisterhood with the same ideals, even if we have very different ideas about how to promote those ideals.
P.S. I was crazy about my biological sister, as she was about me, but we sure had a lot of differences between us in how we approached life.
Today, August 6, 2010, is the 65th anniversary of the dropping of the world’s first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan. This U.S. military action instantly killed over 70,000 Hiroshima residents, almost entirely civilians.
“I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” Thus spoke J. Robert Oppenheimer, one of the principal architects of the bomb.
Despite that condemnation, many Americans still believe that bombing Hiroshima and then Nagasaki was morally justifiable and that maintaining a nuclear arsenal is a sensible policy.
During the Second World War, the Japanese people were demonized and dehumanized by the media. Many Americans, already racist, believed the Japanese all deserved to die. Yet today–and indeed for several decades–Japan is and has been a major ally of the U.S., viewed as an essential partner in maintaining stability in Asia.
In a world with rampant armed conflict and many apparent threats to individual and family security, it is important to search for pathways away from death and destruction. We have chosen today to launch our new blog, dedicated to the promotion of world peace.
The blog has several specific purposes:
1. Promote optimism concerning the possibility of peace.
2. Explore how people in power and the mainstream media persuade citizens that various forms of government-sponsored aggression, such as war and torture, are justifiable.
3. Present examples of serious conflicts that have been resolved without warfare.
4. Demonstrate that a major pathway to peace is through responsible activism.
5. Translate into user-friendly language the best of relevant scientific and academic work contributing to the understanding of war and peace. In particular, we will periodically mention some of the major findings from the work of our own international research team.
6. Help readers find useful tools and important resources to support their own efforts to seek and promote peace.
7. Encourage readers to share their opinions and contribute their own stories and examples of “engaging peace.”
Please join the dialogue about Engaging Peace. We welcome your comments.