development – Engaging Peace

At least that’s what the politicos are telling us.

By now, everyone must have heard something about the debates about the new U.S. budget. You may know that to address the deficits that have accrued since former President Bill Clinton created a budget surplus, powerful forces in Congress seek, among other things, to

Gut the Environmental Protection Agency
Block spending for health care
Cut food and other assistance programs for children, the elderly, and the disabled

U.S. Institute of Peace building — U.S. Institute of Peace, Washington, D.C.

But did you know that while declaring funding for the Pentagon off-limits for budget considerations, a majority in the House of Representatives also voted to eliminate funding for the United States Institute of Peace (USIP)?

The USIP, established by Congress in 1984, conducts research and training designed to prevent and end wars and to promote international peace, stability, and development. In recent years it has engaged in mediation and conflict resolution activities in Afghanistan, the Balkans, Colombia, Iraq, Kashmir, Liberia, the Korean Peninsula, Nepal, Pakistan, the Palestinian Territories, Nigeria, Sudan, and Uganda.

Despite the fact that the U.S. spends as much on what is euphemistically called “defense” as the rest of the world combined, Congress wants to end this independent nonpartisan organization with a budget that is only one tenth of one percent of the State Department budget.

The previous budget for USIP was minuscule compared to the spending in Iraq and Afghanistan (approximately $42.7 million every 142 minutes according to Congressman Dennis Kucinich).

What message is Congress sending to the American public? To the rest of the world? Why is there so much more commitment to the arms industry than to peace?

Please send us your answers—and consider becoming an activist on behalf of peace and justice.

For inspiration, check out this BBC video and consider how we are all one people and if we want to survive in all our commonalities and all our uniqueness, we need to support efforts for peace.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

Jared Lee Loughner, caught at the scene of the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the murder of six other people, has been repeatedly described as crazy, a nutbag, disturbed, and mentally ill—labels that put the blame for the violence on him as another “sole gunman” who has committed a heinous act.

Gabrielle Giffords shooting scene — Tucson shooting scene. (Photo by Steve Karp, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported. From Wikimedia Commons

But heinous acts take place within contexts, and Loughner grew up within contexts where the spreading of hate and calls for violence against various groups have become rampant.

To understand fully the factors that contributed to the violence in Tucson and similar incidents, one must do an ecological analysis.

As described in our post on August 23, 2010, an ecological analysis assumes that the character and behavior of adult humans are shaped by forces at different levels:

The individual level (e.g., genetic predispositions, brain functioning)
The microsystem level (primarily the family)
The exosystem (e.g., the neighborhood)
The macrosystem (broad cultural values and mores)

Also important is the chronosystem, which focuses on changes in the individual’s environments over time that may affect his or her development.

In today’s post and the following ones, we examine how factors at each level could have contributed to Jared Lee Loughner’s attack on Congresswoman Giffords and others.

At the individual level, there is considerable evidence that Loughner may suffer from some sort of mental illness. There are also many reports that he abused drugs. Far too many people suffer from severe psychological symptoms, and far too many abuse drugs, but the vast majority of these people do not try to kill other human beings.

What other factors may have contributed to Loughner’s deadly behavior? We will return to this question in our next two posts.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

The federal budget: Invasions, yes! Peace, no!

Violent behavior in context: Tucson and beyond