Men of U.S. 64th Regiment, 7th Infantry Division, celebrate the news of the Armistice, November 11, 1918. In the public domain. Author: US Army.
by Kathie MM
Most people (not the war profiteers, but most people) say they want peace. Most people can see the benefits of peace, and wouldn’t mind sharing them with others.
But beware: Peace comes in many sizes and shapes, and what some people call “peace” may not be what you’ve been hoping for.
The major classification for types of peace differentiates between negative peace and positive peace. Negative peace, as discussed previously on this blog, refers to the absence of war, or armed conflict, or other forms of violence—especially structural violence (i.e., the kinds of violence built into the economic and political structures that keep some groups at a disadvantage). Negative peace is what prevailed in Europe after World War 1—and look where that led us (World War 2).
Negative in this context does not mean something bad—it’s not like negative vibes. It simply means absent, such as a negative medical test result showing that you don’t have the flu, or pneumonia, or cancer, or some other wretched and potentially deadly
disease. However, while it’s good to be free of bad symptoms (especially if you’ve been misusing your body), that’s not the same as having positive health. Seekers of positive health often need to get more exercise, give up smoking, eat better, etc.
Negative peace is one of those multi-layered phenomena. Within and between families, within and between communities, and within and between nations, negative peace benefits more people and saves more lives than violence. Violence today is probably more deadly than the most dangerous diseases, and negative peace doesn’t protect people (or the environment) from renewed attack.
We can have truces at every level. We can have agreements not to harm or kill each other, at every level, and those truces and agreements can help save lives and improve the quality of living. But none of those truces, none of those agreements, none of those live-and-live pacts is the same as positive peace. They’re not the same as cooperation, collaboration, and harmony, and not the same as the social justice and respect for human rights that are essential for a healthy society and a healthy planet. {More on that coming.)
P.S. The father of peace studies and the theory of positive and negative peace is Johan Galtung; see, for example, this recent article.