media – Page 2 – Engaging Peace

Two Paths in the Woods, Pt 2. Beyond Symbolic and Poetic Words By Guest Author Anthony Marsella

Posted on November 4, 2014 by kathiemm

The path we choose in our lives is not merely a symbolic or poetic path — one presented so eloquently by Robert Frost’s image of worn and less-trodden paths at a fork in the road. No! The path before us is an essential life-nurturing and sustaining path and each person must choose to renounce violence, destruction, war, and killing. In each of our daily habitual actions, we are making moral choices regarding the survival of our planet.

Humanity is at the point of extinguishing countless life forms and expressions. We engage in an unbridled assault upon each other and upon the natural world. Our appetites for destruction are endless in virtually every realm of our lives — economic, political, social, educational, and moral. Our global condition is well–known, and yet we are oblivious to the dangerous consequences of actions we are supporting. These facts are most visible in the United States of America, a nation once symbolized as a “beaming light-on-the-hill.” It is now a nation whose policies and actions — whose “choices” — are characterized by corruption, cronyism, exploitation, violence, inequity, prison population disproportions, and the sins of affluence (e.g., lobbyists, hypocrisy [hypocracy], contempt for citizen rights and participation [demonocracy], and slow deaths by obesity, malnutrition, racism, classism, poverty). We can do better.

The mass media, a potential voice for informing and educating citizens is a participant in destruction. Analyses of critical news events become opportunities to defame the “other side” — whatever that may be! Receptive audiences choose to watch and to listen to media supporting their existing views. Minds become closed to doubt and fall prey to gossip, calumny, half-truths, entrapment, stereotypes, falsehoods, and misrepresentations. We can do better.

*Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Hawaii. Dr. Marsella’s essay was originally published by Transcend Media Service at https://www.transcend.org/tms/2014/10/two-paths-in-the-wood-choice-of-life-or-war/ . We will publish excerpts from it intermittently over the next few months.

Does Nonviolent Resistance Work? Part 4a: The Curious Case of Palestinian Nonviolence

Posted on July 7, 2014July 6, 2014 by kathiemm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jV1BzE3C0i8

This is the first of three posts comprising Part IV of a series of posts in which Dr. Ian Hansen shares his thoughts on nonviolence.

See also Part 1a, Part 1b, Part 1c, Part 2a, Part 2b, Part2c, Part3a, Part3b and Part3c.

The majority of Palestinians these days prefer nonviolent strategies to violent ones, even if they hold ideologically to the right to use violence in self-defense. If those undertaking nonviolent direct action in the name of Palestinian resistance could get more camera crews and U.S. distributors for the films made from their work, I think the Palestinians would probably be making a lot more progress than they are. The de facto American media blackout on almost all acts of Palestinian nonviolent resistance likely diminishes the effectiveness of the tactic. Still the alternative—violent attacks on soldiers and civilians—is likely to be countereffective rather than just ineffective: worse than useless.

Talk of the uselessness of violence annoys revolutionaries schooled in violence-advocating ideologies, especially when they regularly see abusive governments and empires making good use of violence to serve their own interests. If I say violence is useless for the Palestinians, would I also say it is useless for the Israelis? Might Israeli goals be better achieved by nonviolence too, or does even asking that question make it seem absurdly rhetorical and thus expose how massively naïve and even system-justifying the nonviolent vision is?

I don’t think the question is rhetorical, though many would say Israelis could not achieve their goals nonviolently. I would argue that Israel has as much to gain from nonviolence (and to lose from violence) as Palestinians do.

What if large deployments of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers (including Jewish Israelis, Arab Israelis, Druze, and others) were trained to do their work in the West Bank without material weapons, learning only minimally violent martial arts like Aikido, survival skills, and Arabic language as well as strategies of effective communication, peacemaking, and nonviolent direct action?

Imagine this diverse troupe of well-trained, unarmed, nonviolent IDF soldiers going into West Bank villages to protect religious minorities (including but not limited to Jews) from attacks by violent religious fanatics. Imagine them also acting to protect Palestinians from attacks by Israeli settlers and keeping the peace at nonviolent Palestinian protests against the settlements there that are illegal by international law.

Imagine troops of IDF soldiers being ready to lay down their lives if necessary to do something decent, without taking any “enemy” lives with them. This might be a first step towards ending the expansion of settlements and eventually dismantling them and fully ending the occupation of the West Bank—something that most ordinary Israelis claim to want as the end point of any peace deal with Palestinians.

Ian Hansen, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences at York College, City University of New York. His research focuses in part on how witness for human rights and peace can transcend explicit political ideology. He is also on the Steering Committee for Psychologists for Social Responsibility.

USA: A culture of violence

Posted on December 6, 2012December 7, 2012 by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today’s post begins a series on the culture of violence in the United States.]

By guest author Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D.

As the immediate emotions of the presidential elections pass — the euphoria and elation of the winners, the grief, despair, anger of the losers — the harsh realities of daily life once again emerge. Among these is the widespread violence that exists in the United States—many examples of which are displayed in the graphic.

As demonstrated, the manifestations and consequences of violent acts are extensive. In the U.S. (and elsewhere), a “culture of violence” is generated, sustained, and promoted by acts that arise from both individual and collective impulse and intent. These acts all too often find tolerance and approval across political, economic, educational, military, and moral policies of institutions.

The diagram is neither comprehensive nor explanatory, aside from recognizing the reciprocity of the different acts and sources of violence. Each act of violence is both a source and consequence of other acts of violence—the inverse of an ethic of reciprocity.

What do you think of this model of a culture of violence? Can you see the ways in which animal cruelty, bullying, gangs, and the American media may be related to poverty, racism, inequality, and our high rate of incarceration in this country? And vice versa?

We will be writing more about these issues over the next few weeks and welcome your comments—including your suggestions for additions to or subtractions from this model of a culture of violence.

Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii, and Past President of Psychologists for Social Responsibility (PsySR)

How many deaths will it take?

Posted on July 30, 2012July 31, 2012 by kathiemm

“How many deaths will it take?” In how many places within the United States and abroad?

Aurora, Colorado? Tucson, Arizona? Virginia Tech? Columbine? The University of Texas tower?

Nagasaki? Korea? Vietnam? Grenada? Panama? Iraq? Afghanistan? Pakistan?

NRA headquarters. Photo by Bjoertvedt, used under CC Attribution 3.0 Unported license.

The answer, my friend, according to the corporate media, is that the number of deaths and injuries inflicted on Americans by Americans will grow without end because the National Rifle Association owns the government.

Another answer is that the number of deaths–mostly civilians–that Americans inflict around the world will grow without end because of

Fear promoted by the power structure
Glorification of violence in the media
National enthrallment with punishment, and
Belief in American exceptionalism to be defended at all costs.

How many roads must people walk down before they will choose civility and discourse over violence? Peace over war? Justice over guns? Humanity over profits?

For people who profit from the weapons business and gain power from manipulating fear, the rewards for making weapons available to individuals, groups, and nations far outweigh the costs.

According to The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), in 2010, Lockheed Martin, the biggest arms producer and military service company in the world, grossed $35.7 billion from arms sales.

Among the 100 top arms producers, 44 US-based companies accounted for over 60% of all arms sales (The Guardian DataBlog, March 2, 2012). Those are powerful incentives for pretending not to see all the gun-related deaths.

The NRA receives millions of dollars from online sales of ammunition and related products, as well as enormous donations from Smith & Wesson (manufacturer of the M&P15 assault rifle used in Colorado). Those are powerful incentives for not hearing the cries of victims and their families.

And what does the ready availability of weapons do for ordinary Americans? Among 23 high-income countries, 80 percent of all gun deaths and 87 percent of all gun deaths of children younger than 15 occur in the United States. (See Children’s Defense Fund report.)

If you are appalled by the loss of life, become an activist. To learn more about gun control, the NRA, and ways of promoting change, check out the following resources:

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology