Tag: Alice LoCicero

Peace and Contemporary Resistance: Cédric Herrou, and Us

Posted on by kathiemm
As you may have seen in Schindler’s List, it is customary to leave a rock to mark your visit to a grave. It would seem that this grave has been visited quite a few times. Picture taken at Tiberias (Israel) cemetery. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. Author: James Emery from Douglasville, United States.

by Alice LoCicero

In a tiny village in southern France, in 2017, lives a courageous contemporary resister: Cédric Herrou [1].

Herrou is a farmer who has helped African refugees along the treacherous route to Europe through Italy and France.  He has done this openly, publicly, in violation of the law, and despite much criticism. He has been tried in court and could be jailed for it, although he has not, so far.

Which of us would resist convention and law in order to help others who desperately need help in just to survive? How many of us have taken the safe, self-protective route, and advised others to do so as well? Are there ways we can increase the likelihood that we, or others, will be resisters? How can we teach selective obedience and selective disobedience? What does it take to disobey civil law, and comply with  moral, spiritual, and ethical mandates?

When we look back into history and consider well known Holocaust resisters and rescuers, such as Oskar Schindler, we celebrate them, and we are sure they made the right choice.[2]  But at the time they were making those choices, they were not celebrated; they were either doing so in secret, or were criticized harshly. They were disobeying the law and defying their governments. They were doing what they did at grave risk.

If we were to make the right choice today, we would face the same risks. We could be jailed. We could lose our jobs and standing. We could lose professional respect. We could be sued. We could be killed. What does it take to disobey?

Every psychology student and professor knows about Milgram’s studies of obedience and later partial replications of those studies—partial because contemporary research ethics would not allow researchers to put participants through what turned out to be an emotionally wrenching  experience. Most of the participants in most of these studies obey the person they see as an authority, even when it means applying what they are led to believe are painful and—in the early studies—what they believed were deadly–shocks to a stranger.

Most, but not all. What are the qualities common to those few participants who disobey? Some recent studies by Burger [3] answer that question. Those who resist in obedience studies are no more compassionate or empathic than those who continue to shock. That is not the common theme.

The common theme is that they believe themselves to be personally responsible for their actions. They do not, in other words, attribute responsibility to others. They take responsibility. This finding is consistent with a finding reported by Kelman and Hamilton in their classic text On Obedience. [4]

At the same time, we know from a well-supported principle of social psychology, that one person who breaks with convention is likely to lead to others doing so as well. And the more who do so the more likely others will join.

Honoring Resisters, Becoming Resisters

In Oslo, there is a museum dedicated to Norway’s many resisters during World War II. [5] Most of their names will never be well-known. Most of them died without anyone thanking them or giving them glory. Without their courage—had everyone taken the safe route, and had there been no resisters to the Nazi regime–we might already be living in a tyrannical, authoritarian society.

We face a very similar challenge today.  If we do not resist the anti-humanitarian, pro-war, xenophobic, white supremacist forces rampant in American society and its leadership in 2017, we will very likely be seen by future generations as complicit in the establishment of authoritarian and tyrannical rule and genocide. Silently standing by will not be seen, by future generations, as having been sufficient or acceptable.

Can we teach ourselves to take responsibility for our own behavior? Mentor others to do so as well?  How can we and others be prepared to resist and disobey when given unethical orders?

Had we done a better job of teaching psychology students to take responsibility and not obey unethical orders, psychologists might have put a stop to torture at Guantanamo and in black box sites during the Bush era. Had they publicly and openly refused, their actions might have inspired others.

If we teach current psychology students to disobey, we might have more humane treatment of those with mental illnesses who are currently detained in hospitals and prisons. We might have a system of incarceration that focuses on rehabilitation rather than punishment. And we might have a chance to prevent authoritarianism in the US.

References

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/10/defiant-french-farmer-cedric-herrou-given-suspended-fine-helping/

https://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/people/rescuer.htm

Burger, J. M., Girgis, Z. M., & Manning, C. C. (2011) In their own words: Explaining obedience    to authority through an examination of participants’ comments.  Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(5), 460-468.

Burger, J.M. (2014). Situational factors in Milgram’s experiment that kept his participants shocking. Journal of Social Issues, 70 (3), 489-500. doi:10.1111/josi.12073

Dr. Alice LoCicero is currently a visiting scholar at The Wright Institute in Berkeley, California, and president-elect of the Society for the Study of Peace and Conflict (Division 48 of the American Psychological Association.) Dr. LoCicero was the first president of the Society for Terrorism Research. She is author of two books and several peer-reviewed articles on terrorism. Her recent scholarship has documented the costs of the US counterterrorism policies, focusing on the flawed Countering Violent Extremism programs, and the American Psychological Association’s actions that supported torture of detainees at Guantanamo and other sites. Dr. LoCicero was shocked to see water protectors at Standing Rock, who were committed to non-violence, being treated as if they posed a threat equivalent to terrorists.

What we can learn from Standing Rock—Part One

Posted on by kathiemm
Standing Rock, North Dakota, December, 2016. Author: Alice LoCicero

by Alice LoCicero

North Dakota: At the daily meetings, anyone who wishes to speak can do so, for any length of time, on any topic. Others listen carefully, patiently, and respectfully, in order to learn from those who do, and those who do not, initially look like they have a lot to teach.

For non-natives, noticing the patience and listening attentively is the first lesson: That there is a different way to engage—that unwavering focus with determination to meet a known goal is not the only—and not always the best–approach. That pushing someone to get to the point might lead you to miss the point entirely.

The wisdom the speaker has to share might come in the first sentence or the last paragraph, or throughout the comments. You cannot know in advance. You must remain engaged.

In the meetings I attended, some who spoke had traveled—some by foot– hundreds of miles to share their experiences and their hard-won wisdom—from other actions in other times.

Grandmothers led the communal prayers that began each meeting, and ended it, and their prayers of gratitude, of memory, of humble request, and of hope, were enhanced by drumming and singing, done by men—usually young men. Those prayers reminded us we were all in this together now—indigenous people, immigrants—voluntary and forced–and the descendants of immigrants. All races and ethnicities.

We all share this one, beautiful, earth. And every meeting left me in hope and awe, as I watched privileged young men and women—the descendants of colonizers–who had opted to learn, for now, from their indigenous relatives, rather than from their college professors.  And oppressed young men and women who had committed themselves to stand up and lead others in non-violent actions to protect the earth.

Everyone there was ready to stand with all willing relatives—we are all relatives–putting our bodies and souls on the line to protect the water for future generations.

This experiment in democracy, sustainability, justice, egalitarianism and community was not viewed favorably by the larger community. It was viewed with suspicion, hatred, and condemnation. And the response of the authorities in the nearby non-native communities, with the support of non-native community members, was unbridled, unjustified, absurd levels of violence, both direct and indirect. Violence toward the water protectors and toward the water itself.

Indeed, for hundreds of years, the democratic, egalitarian, spiritual, communal societies of indigenous western hemisphere natives have been viewed by non-natives with fear and hatred.

Natives have consistently been treated with absurd levels of violence, because, for all this time, the settler/colonizers did not—and probably could not–see the indigenous groups as human.  If they had, it would have posed a challenge to the colonizers’ values and way of life, with its central assumption that it is normal for humans to be driven by greed, competition, and individualism. With such values, respect is given not to those who share, but to those who own land, animals, and people.

Respect Action Principles, Standing Rock, North Dakota, December, 2016. Author: Alice LoCicero.

Dr. Alice LoCicero is currently a visiting scholar at The Wright Institute in Berkeley, California, and president-elect of the Society for the Study of Peace and Conflict (Division 48 of the American Psychological Association.) Dr. LoCicero was the first president of the Society for Terrorism Research. She is author of two books and several peer-reviewed articles on terrorism. Her recent scholarship has documented the costs of the US counterterrorism policies, focusing on the flawed Countering Violent Extremism programs, and the American Psychological Association’s actions that supported torture of detainees at Guantanamo and other sites. Dr. LoCicero was shocked to see water protectors at Standing Rock, who were committed to non-violence, being treated as if they posed a threat equivalent to terrorists.

 

Nonviolence: The powerful antidote to youth recruitment to gangs, terrorists, and the US Military

Posted on by kathiemm
bYoung people protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. File is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. Author: Pax Ahimsa Gethen.

by Alice LoCicero

Terrorists, gangs, and the US military recruit youth and train them to be violent. Each time a young person is recruited to violence, one or more adults benefit, but the youth and their families pay the price.[1]

The US military, for example, recruits in high schools—typically high schools serving poor families. The myth perpetrated is that the youth have no other options—or that this is their best option.

However, even the distant benefits that may accrue after the youth have put themselves in harm’s way with one or more deployments to one of the current wars, the rosy picture presented by recruiters is often not fulfilled. About 21% of those discharged from the military in recent years did not receive honorable discharges[2], leaving them at risk of not getting all of the veterans’ benefits expected.[3]

Many communities and organizations work against youth being recruited to violence.[4] While these organizations hold a moral high ground in their respect and advocacy for youth, they lack the power and financial resources of the US military. That power and those resources enhance recruitment through formal advertising and informal infiltration of schools, video games, and community events– including family and sports events.[5]

Perhaps the most powerful antidote to recruitment to violence is not resisting recruitment, but instead welcoming recruitment to non-violence. This became clear to me recently during several days at the Standing Rock encampment.

Hearing young people speak about their experiences there, I reflected on the power of nonviolence in a variety of 20th and 21st century movements: The US civil rights and anti-war movements, the nonviolent civil disobedience by Gandhi and his followers, and now the nonviolent actions at Standing Rock.

To fully understand this alternative, one must realize that nonviolence is not simply the absence of violence, which might seem to be associated with weakness. Rather nonviolence is a positive approach, requiring strength, training, and discipline based on a positive philosophy of resistance to injustice and insistence on change.

What would it be like if non-Native communities in the US followed the lead of the Water Protectors at Standing Rock?

 What if there were groups recruiting youth to set things right with society through active non-violence? Surely there are youth all over this country who are well-aware of the injustices in their own communities. What if there were elders from those communities who were prepared to lead resistance groups?

Let’s start a discussion about this.

References

[1] LoCicero, A. (2010) The hidden economics of youth violence. The New Renaissance.

[2] http://www.scpr.org/news/2015/09/29/54696/minor-infractions-in-uniform-keep-thousands-of-vet/

[3] https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/1039945/dod-announces-new-outreach-efforts-to-veterans-regarding-discharges-and-militar (The Department of Defense has recently recognized that some of the veterans who received less than honorable discharges had behavioral infractions associated with PTSD, and has proactively reached out to those veterans and others to inform them of the possibility of review of status.)

[4] For example, the American Friends Service Committee and the National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth.

[5] LoCicero, A. (2016) Resisting Recruitment, Unpublished presentation to the American Psychological Assocation.