Negative peace sounds pretty good, right? Signing truces and other agreements to end all the dirty little wars in which our government involves us, and putting a stop to terrorism, gang wars, domestic violence, and the other forms of violence haunting our lives today—wouldn’t that be heavenly? Yes, but wouldn’t it be even better to help peace endure at all levels of society?
Unfortunately, at the international and national levels, the history of peace treaties, ceasefires, nonaggression pacts, and truces is not very encouraging. Treaties and truces have been made and broken repeatedly, at the cost of millions and millions of lives, as greedy governments have used increasingly sophisticated armaments to seize land and resources from resistant others.
At the family level, despite innovative truce bellsand family truce intervals, marital cease-and-desist agreements often fail to produce lasting marital peace, leading instead to the negative peace of separation, divorce, and angry children, with all parties smoldering with a sense of unfair treatment.
As for gang violence, truces among violent gangs are relatively commonplace, but like those between nations, also commonly broken. Some evidence indicates that while truces may work for awhile, gang warfare usually resumes in the absence of efforts to address fundamental political and social welfare challenges like marginalization, unemployment, and lack of equal opportunity.
Such concerns are very much the purview of positive peace advocates. Positive peace, by definition, addresses the roots of violence. As conceptualized by Johan Galtung and other peace advocates, positive peace means cooperation for mutual and equal benefit. It means reform of the political and social structures that create and reinforce inequality. It means genuine respect for human rights. It means that women’s voices matter, that people of color don’t need to fear entering their churches, that people of non-Christian faiths can walk fearlessly on our streets. It means that war profiteers are not enabled to put their pursuit of profits ahead of the well-being—indeed the lives—of everyone whom they can “other” for their differences.
Positive peace may sound like the impossible dream, the delusion of cockeyed optimists, but if we don’t strive for it, what kind of future will the world have?
Image licensed under CCA-Share Alike 4.0 Internatl. Culture Jam activism sticker mentored by Avram Finkelstein, Center for Artistic Activism. Author: BettyTkao.
“They’re Devious and Dishonest.” From condemning
labor activists to vilifying racial justice advocates, one-percenters will
portray their adversaries as treacherous, devious, and evil in intent. With
this mind game, they’ll encourage us to be suspicious and unsympathetic toward
those who are facing difficult circumstances or insurmountable hardships. When
this appeal works, we’re more likely to turn our backs on the victims of the
self-aggrandizing rich and powerful.
“They’re Different from Us.” Whether they’re stigmatizing
immigrant groups or progressive reformers, the 1% will describe those they
deplore as unworthy of our trust, casting them as different and out of touch
with what most Americans want. Whenever this deceitful ploy is successful, it
leads potential allies to view each other as adversaries. In this way, natural
coalitions that could develop among individuals and groups opposed to today’s
plutocrats are squelched or destroyed.
“They’re Misguided and Misinformed.” From the
corruption on Wall Street to the further militarization of foreign policy,
one-percenters will argue that their critics are misinformed and unreliable,
and that their judgments are not to be trusted. Whenever we’re persuaded by
such defensive appeals, we discount or entirely disregard important voices of
dissent. Crucial opportunities for tackling inequality and advancing the common
good are lost as a result.
“Trust Us.” Whether it’s billionaire union-busters or lobby-backed politicians, the 1% will promote themselves as paragons of integrity. They know their efforts and policies will be much harder to counter if we mistakenly view them as trustworthy and selfless in word and deed. The weight of evidence doesn’t support this favorable image, but that reality doesn’t matter if we fail to recognize their devious misrepresentations, hollow promises, and corrupt enterprises.
Superiority
“They’re Losers.” From reviling the homeless to
disparaging the unemployed, today’s plutocrats will portray those who are
down-and-out as inferior to the rest of us. With this mind game, they’ll
encourage us to stand aloof from decent people who deserve our compassion and
solidarity. And by boosting our own sense of self-worth, they’ll aim to
discourage us from recognizing that the massive concentrations of wealth and
power in this country reflect ruthless exploitation and unconscionable
disregard of the needy.
“We’ve Earned It.” Whether CEOs are defending their
astronomical pay or claiming the mantle of indispensable job creators,
one-percenters will fraudulently argue that they’ve earned everything they have
through determination and fair play—and that they deserve our praise rather than
criticism for their actions and choices. These assertions of superiority go
hand in hand with the pursuit of ever greater dominance. As long as their
self-glorifying narratives go uncontested, extreme inequality will remain a
disturbing fixture of our society.
“Pursuing a Higher Purpose.” From promoting
inequality-boosting right-to-work legislation to defending human rights abuses,
the 1% will insist that their actions embrace and protect the values we
cherish. But prioritizing big-money interests subverts the vision of a nation
of equal opportunity, where people from all walks of life join together for the
common good. Despite this glaring contradiction, greed-driven appeals often
succeed because they tap into our sense of pride over our country’s accomplishments
and influence in the world.
“They’re Un-American.” Whether they’re railing against desperate immigrants or kneeling football players, one-percenters will stoke intolerance by presenting their critics as inauthentic and unpatriotic Americans. They recognize that their rule will be jeopardized if unwelcome change-seekers gain broad support. So they’ll condemn those individuals and groups that refuse to silently accept hardship and mistreatment, characterizing them as ungrateful outsiders who fail to appreciate all that’s good about the United States.
Helplessness
“Change Is Impossible.” From catastrophic climate
change to inequality-boosting globalization, the 1% will insist that the world
is shaped by forces much too powerful to be tamed by human intervention. Closer
analysis, however, reveals that they lack the motivation—not the capacity—to
exert influence over these disturbing phenomena. Indeed, even when they’re not
the direct cause of others’ misery, too often they’re bystanders unwilling to
use their enormous resources to benefit the common good.
“We’ll All Be Helpless.” Whether they’re opposing gun
reform measures or minimum wage hikes, one-percenters will warn us that changes
will produce harmful repercussions that we’ll all be powerless to combat. The
goal is to frighten us into accepting a status quo that serves their own
interests but causes widespread damage to the public good. They hope that
concerns about future helplessness will lead us to turn our backs on those
suffering under the current system.
“Don’t Blame Us.” From environmental disasters at
home to reckless militarism overseas, the 1% will be quick to claim there’s
nothing they could do when circumstances take a turn for the worse. Given their
inordinate wealth and power, these cries of helplessness and blamelessness
merit careful scrutiny. Although they strut the stage boasting about their
purported talents and accomplishments, today’s plutocrats head for the shadows
when it’s time to accept responsibility for their policy failures.
“Resistance Is Futile.” Whether it’s protecting tax cuts for billionaires or flooding political campaigns with cash for future favors, the 1% will try to convince us that we’re helpless to wrest our lives and our country from their control. If we believe we’ll never succeed, our change efforts grind to a halt. But we should remember that one-percenters are susceptible to the disempowering effects of perceived helplessness too—if we can demonstrate our own collective power.
Resisting the 1%’s Mind Games
To reiterate: Any effective strategy for turning the tide on the
1% in 2019 depends upon countering and neutralizing these mind games. Concerns
about vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness deserve
to be important guides in policy debates and in efforts to advance the general
welfare. But today’s plutocrats cunningly exploit these concerns solely for
their own benefit, disregarding the harmful consequences that befall everyone
else.
What, then, can we do? First, we should understand that the 1%’s
mind games are much like a rampant virus that can infect unsuspecting people
with false and democracy-endangering beliefs. Second, we should take the steps
necessary to psychologically inoculate ourselves. That’s best accomplished by
learning to recognize these flawed, manipulative appeals wherever they
appear—in the media or in our neighborhoods—and by preparing forceful
counter-arguments to them. And third, having become skilled “first responders,”
we should organize others in our communities to do the same. The mission starts
now.
Title page of A Century of Life, Health and Happiness by C. L. Blood , an American con artist and self-styled physician (with no credentials) who operated in Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, and Chicago. Accused of blackmailing, tax evasion, and fraud, among other things. 1880. In the public domain.
Smooth-talking con artists are familiar figures in American folklore. The well-dressed hustler arrives in an unsuspecting town. He pitches some miracle cure or get-rich-quick scheme, door-to-door or from atop a soapbox. Then before his customers realize they’ve been duped, he steals away in search of his next mark. It’s a risky vocation, one that demands quick feet, a keen understanding of human nature, and a talent for telling stories that both arouse and reassure.
But when it comes to profiting off people’s hopes and fears, by far the most successful purveyors of lucrative lies and false promises are some of the denizens of this country’s palatial estates, corporate boardrooms, and corridors of political power. And unlike their small-time counterparts, they’re never on the run — despite the misery they leave in their wake. Enter Donald J. Trump, soon to be the 45th President of the United States.
In a country beset by extreme and distressing inequality, America’s premier hustler sold the electorate a wagonload of beguiling and deceptive tales about what’s gone wrong, who’s to blame, and how he’ll make things better. He persuaded not through rational argument, analysis, and truth-telling, but rather by manipulating our imperfect reasoning and our unreasoning emotions. Although this playbook has been around for a long time, Americans have never witnessed this level of mastery before. Trump’s unanticipated success dramatically illustrates the importance of understanding the “mind games” that allowed him to win, despite breaking almost every rule of evidence, logic, and propriety.
In my research as a psychologist, I’ve found that the psychological appeals used by those eager to maintain or extend their extraordinary wealth and power tend to target five key concerns in our daily lives: issues of vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness. Each is a fundamental lens through which individuals and groups make sense of the world, evaluate their circumstances, and decide what actions, if any, to take. Each is also linked to a basic question we ask ourselves every day: Are we safe? Are we treated fairly? Who should we trust? Are we good enough? Can we control what happens to us?
In my next post on engagingpeace, I consider several examples of how Trump targeted these concerns in charting his path to the White House.
Originally published in Counterpunch, December 22, 2016. Reprinted with permission.
=Roy Eidelsonis a clinical psychologist and the president of Eidelson Consulting, where he studies, writes about, and consults on the role of psychological issues in political, organizational, and group conflict settings. He is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, former executive director of the Solomon Asch Center for Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict at the University of Pennsylvania, and a member of the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology. Roy can be reached by email at reidelson@eidelsonconsulting.com and on Twitter @royeidelson.
Pope Francis visiting rehab hospital Photograph produced by Agência Brasil and published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Brazil License
I am not a Catholic in the Holy Roman Church sense, and indeed have long had a distrust of organized religion because of its historic role in perpetration of and tolerance for violence—the infamous bloody Crusades not being the only such example in the annals of the Catholic Church.
HOWEVER,
I have been wanting for some time to write a post on the remarkable new leader of the Catholic Church—Pope Francis I. As another Easter approaches—a holiday celebrated by millions around the world, Catholic and otherwise—I find myself longing to hear that people are really listening to his messages of peace and social justice.
Here are just a few excerpts from his recent APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION, “to the bishops, clergy, consecrated persons and the lay faithful on the proclamation of the gospel in today’s world”
*Just as the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say ‘thou shalt not’ to an economy of exclusion and inequality….
*Today in many places we hear a call for greater security. But until exclusion and inequality in society and between peoples are reversed, it will be impossible to eliminate violence. The poor and the poorer peoples are accused of violence, yet without equal opportunities the different forms of aggression and conflict will find a fertile terrain for growth and eventually explode.
These messages are catholic in the sense of “universal’ and “wide-ranging” and what a miracle it would be if they could spark a renewed commitment to the sense of brotherhood, and sisterhood that are essential to peace and social justice.
