Violence is a many-layered thing

Let’s smash the patriarchy. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license. Author: Quinn Dombrowski

by Kathie MM

“My partner never took responsibility for his own actions. He blamed me incessantly, even for his own abusive behavior. When confronted, he always had some excuse to justify himself. At his hands, I was subjected to insults, put-downs, shouting, threats and sarcasm….He typically ended his verbal assaults by accusing me of provoking his abuse or telling me that I deserved it. …” [i]

Every reader of this blog recognizes this type of guy—an entitled bully who considers himself right at all times and becomes enraged at any sign of “disrespect” or threat to his “authority.”  He’s the kind of guy whose behavior inspired the feminist movement–and more recently the “smash patriarchy” initiatives.  And he’s everywhere.

Clearly there are many men who have respect for others, and who feel compassion and empathy for all who struggle with life’s challenges, even those who differ in gender, sexuality, skin color, faith, and/or national origins.  But who is it that you see running, controlling, and bossing the “traditional families,” big corporations, military-industrial complexes, and governments? Who is it that wrote the laws, stacked the judiciaries, assumed control of the armies, and built the structures and shaped the cultures to ensure and strengthen their own power while enriching themselves? Not Sojourner Truth, not Harriet Tubman, not the Suffragettes, not Jane Addams, not Jeannette Rankin, not Rosa Parks, not Shirley Chisholm, not Medea Benjamin (and not Martin Luther King, Jr., or the many other male supporters of peace and justice, either).

So, if we want peace and justice, harmony and hope, to whom do we turn in these frightening times? The models for nonviolence and cooperation are everywhere too—it’s just harder for them to break through the Old Guard’s barriers without help from all of us who see the widespread injustices and looming catastrophes.

So, if you’re tired of seeing violence rewarded at every level of society while the rich get richer and just about everyone else gets poorer, don’t get in bed with the bad guys! Look for the people in your own community who recognize the threats to our environment and to humanity, and support their efforts.  Free yourself from the corporate media.

While you’re at it, take a good look at current members of Congress.  Identify, among both newer and established members of Congress, both female and male, Republican and Democrat, both those who are invested in the status quo, and those who will work to reform the corrupt structures endangering us all. Support the reformers, in and out of government.  Our freedoms, our rights, our very lives are at stake.

And, for further ideas and opportunities, investigate organizations like Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom   (and support engaging peace).

[i] Adapted from a case study published in Family Violence in the United States, by Hines, Malley-Morrison, & Dutton, 2nd ed.


The Epic Ideological Struggle of Our Global Era: Part 2. Multiculturalism versus Homogenization

By Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D.

Multiculturalism: A Competing Ideology

Statue titled, Monument to Multiculturalism by Francesco Pirelli, in front of Union Station, Toronto, Ontario
Statue titled, Monument to Multiculturalism by Francesco Pirelli, in front of Union Station, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. Author: paul (dex) from Toronto.

In my last post, I discussed homogenization, a dangerous ideology.  Today I discuss a competing ideology, Multiculturalism. An ideology is a systematic set of beliefs that  define a preferred or favored vision of a way-of-life or governance or social formation. In many known ideologies, specific assumptions, premises, and historical foundations and arguments are advanced to promote and defend the ideology’s adoption or empowerment. Uses are often made of symbols, myths, and historical events and forces to enhance the appeal of ideologies, sometimes bringing them to mythic proportions. Scores of ideologies exist, especially within the economic, social, and political areas of thought and action.

Examples of ideologies shaping individual and nation behavior include capitalism, communism, socialism, fascism, feminism, Zionism, Marxism, militarism, libertarianism, state-ism, and anarchism. These examples embody different disciplinary (e.g., philosophy, economic, history, theology) and societal sectors (e.g., government, judicial, military, education, religion/faith-based) areas.

Often times, ideologies co-opt religious/faith based, moral, and media resources to further favored goals and ambitions. Nothing is as powerful as beliefs rooted in self-righteous justification in the cause of god or a supreme being. The use of force, violence, vilification, valorization, and legal advantages to promote “causes” is not uncommon. The concentration of power in an ideology’s movement can lead to excessive control and domination, gathering force as they become “crusaders” buoyed by good intentions and purpose.

The ideology of Multiculturalism is based on an appreciation and promotion of diversity among various cultural, ethnic, and racial groups. Multiculturalism considers diversity an essential resource for survival because it adds the virtues of resiliency derived from variation, alternatives, and choices in belief, behavior, and world views. It keeps options open.

When Octavio Paz, Mexican Noble Prize winner in Literature, claimed, “Life is diversity, death is uniformity,” Paz was calling attention to the fact that diversity is the very nature of life — an expression and revelation of life’s abundant manifestations and displays. I share this view, and have written of Lifeism, an ideology positioning “humans” as a part of life, rather than life’s dominant and preferred expression.

Multiculturalism as an ideology evolved in response to the events, forces, and personalities of the turbulent years and tears of change and social upheaval between 1950 and 1980. The post WWII years witnessed major socio-political changes and upheavals in the United States and the world, converging and consummating in new awareness and appreciation of the importance of diversity, justice, inclusion, political correctness, and the politics of identity. All found support in a multicultural ideology respecting human rights, equality, and dignity.

Multiple and Varied Cultures

These years experienced major cultural changes and massive social movements. There was a rising awareness — consciousness — that “culture” was a critical concept, and a major force in shaping individual and collective behavior. It became clear that “culture” was too critical to be reserved for esoteric studies of exotic tribes by anthropologists. Culture was present in the lives of all human beings, both internally and externally.

Table 1 lists some major social, economic, and political events, forces, and people shaping the emergence of contemporary Multiculturalism as an ideology.

Table 1:

Examples of Forces, Events, and People Associated with Multiculturalism

(Circa Post WW II Period – alphabetical order)

  • Assassinations and Overthrows
  • Civil Rights Movement
  • Consciousness of Ideologies
  • Counter-Culture Movements
  • Developments in Information and Communication Technologies
  • Drug Subcultures (e.g., Marijuana, Cocaine, Hallucinogens)
  • Ethno-Cultural Conflicts/Ethnic Cleansing
  • Fall of Berlin Wall
  • Feminist Revolution
  • Globalization
  • Liberation Psychologies
  • Massive International Migrations Waves
  • New Political Alliances and Unions (e.g., EU, NATO)
  • New World Order Efforts
  • Post Modernism
  • Racial Protests and Riots
  • Post WWII Colonial Wars and Liberations (Africa, India, Indonesia)
  • Refugee and IDP Problems
  • Vietnam War, Balkan Wars,
  • Wars and Conflicts in Middle-East and West Asia
  • War on Poverty (Johnson Era)

Understanding Culture

Although culture had long been a topic of study, especially in anthropology and history, social upheavals of the 1950-1980s brought an acute awareness of the socio-political contexts of culture. Colonialism was revealed not as an inevitable unfolding of change as “civilized” progress but as invasive and exploitive abuses to control and suppress mind, behavior, and social position formations. Minority populations, conquered people, and occupied nations understood the cultural relativism, and the possibilities of release and escape from the chains of dominant social, political, and economic orders.

The term “culture” became applied with accuracy and regularity as a noun/adjective: the culture of poverty, the culture of racism, the culture of violence, the culture of oppression, the culture of colonialism, the culture of war. Culture was no longer confined to an ethnic tradition or identity; it was recognized as a complex clustering of self-perpetuating historical, societal, and moral forces, shaping and being shaped, by hidden ethoses, institutions, and definitions of personhood (e.g., “institutional racism”).

Culture was now to be studied, understood, and scrutinized as an explanation for understanding past, present, and future. Social, political, and economic leaders with insights into the abuses of history maintained in dominant cultures challenged sources of domination and control. Leaders became lightning rods for social change – voices crystallizing protests, and illuminating abuses and violence inherent in power asymmetries. It was a time for change in the social fabric and the moral order.

The tolls of raising consciousness regarding marginalized people brought violence and death to many leaders. Consider the examples of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Caesar Chavez, Che Guevara, Malcolm X, Black Panthers, Ignacio Martin-Baro, as well as elected national leaders considered threats to existing Western social orders, including Mossadegh in Iran, Allende in Chile, Mandela in South Africa, Zapata in Mexico, Patrice Lumumba in the Congo. Here William Blum’s (2004) book, Killing Hope, Stephen Kinzer’s (2006) book, Overthrow, and Chalmers Johnson (2010), book, Dismantling the Empire, become essential reading – harbingers of our future, by acknowledging past crimes and offenses. The social, economic, and political roots of “culture” became the path to for understanding injustice and resisting oppression. Multiculturalism became an ideology for correcting for history’s abuses. Colonization is always colonization of mind (Goodman & Gorski, 2014).

Multiculturalism in Counseling, Psychology, and Psychiatry

It was only a matter of time before revolutionary thinkers–including Paulo Friere (1997) in his volumes on pedagogies and Ignacio Martin-Baro (1994), in his volume Writings for a Liberation Psychology– recognized the inherent abuses associated within Western psychologies of political domination, repression, and control. Tod Sloan (1997) acknowledged this reality when he concluded Western psychology was a source for perpetuating “Westernization” as an ideology, replete with its ill-suited values and methods for a changing world.

Multiculturalism acknowledges and emphasizes the role of the distribution of “power” in every domain of human activity. All relations are ultimately about power and its distribution. Even those areas claiming immunity from political interference and power distribution are, in fact, subject to it by guiding thought and practices according to the preferences, wishes, and concerns of those in power.

The term “inclusive” became popular to describe to the importance of “including” people – giving them access and acceptance – because they had been ignored or denied a spectrum of opportunities and services. The playing field was being expanded, but it did not guarantee those in power would yield their largesse. We know that “absolute power corrupts absolutely,” and this was the case in our nation and around the world as Western political and economic dominance pursued hegemony.

With hegemony came abuses of invading and occupying another nation — often a third- world nation — by imposing and infusing cultural values and traditions. It was a new way to conquer and control using American popular culture as the strategy for control and domination (e.g., individualism, consumerism, commodification, competition, materialism, celebritization, corruption, technology). This was now the pathway for forcing a “homogenization” of world cultures. Differences existed, but efforts were made to deny them because they challenged the hegemony of those in power. The task for the government/corporate system was invasion by “cultural” conquest, and “colonization of mind” (e.g., Goodman & Gorski, 2014).

Amidst an ocean of ideological struggles in a global era, it is clear “Multiculturalism” was, and is, the essential ideology for a global era! Accepting and implementing this ideology among individuals, groups, and nations remains the task of our times. In contrast to homogenization, the preferred ideology of those in power and position seeking control and domination, Multiculturalism embraces the reality of life’s diversity and differences – the beauty of variation. All other ideologies “pale” in complexion, complexity, and comparison.

Author:  Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D., is Professor Emeritus, University of Hawaii, Manoa Campus, Honolulu, Hawaii, 96822. He is the author and editor of twenty books, and more than 300 publications noted for challenging the ethnocentricity and biases of Western psychology and psychiatry, and for advocating peace and social justice.

Can they call YOU a terrorist?

During the Cold War, people–particularly those who called themselves conservatives–often accused individuals they didn’t like of being “dirty Commies.”

The Senator Joe McCarthy era was a scary time for socialists, liberals, artists, writers—anyone who intimidated the right wing, or made conservatives feel inferior. (A chilling treatment of this era can be found in Barbara Kingsolver’s novel, The Lacuna.)

The Cold War is over, but the U.S. government, with the help of the right wing, has given us new epithets for people distrusted by the right wing. You know the label—“terrorist.”

Consider the wording of the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act (the Ag-gag laws), passed in Missouri, Iowa, and Utah, designed to stop animal rights and environmental activists from reporting abuses on factory farms:

“Special interest extremists continue to conduct acts of politically motivated violence to force segments of society, including the general public, to change attitudes about issues considered important to their causes. These groups occupy the extreme fringes of animal rights, pro-life, environmental, anti-nuclear, and other movements. Some special interest extremists — most notably within the animal rights and environmental movements — have turned increasingly toward vandalism and terrorist activity…to further their causes.” (quote from pdf document from corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council)

How about YOU?

  • Are you concerned about the treatment of animals in factory farms?
  • Are you concerned about the environment?
  • Do you oppose nuclear weapons?
  • Do you consider yourself a feminist? Beware: that’s all it takes for some people to call you a terrorist.

Don’t let the name-callers intimidate you. Joe McCarthy left Congress in disgrace. Follow the lead of the Montreal Raging Grannies  and support nonviolence, humane behavior, and social justice. Better yet, tell us what you are already doing to make a positive difference in this country and in this world, both now during the season of non-violence and throughout the year.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology