Philosophy Now Forum

tbieter wrote:"Peace" in the context presented in this thread is ... an activity that rarely produces any concrete results ...

prof wrote:We get closer to achieving a peaceful world if we have the aim of preventing, managing, limiting and overcoming violence.


According to Johan Galtung, there are three kinds of violence:

Direct (overt) violence, e.g., direct attack, massacre.

Structural violence. Death by avoidable reasons such as malnutrition. Structural violence is indirect violence caused by an unjust structure and is not to be equated with an act of God.

Cultural violence. Cultural violence occurs as a result of the cultural assumptions that blind one to direct or structural violence. For example, one may be indifferent toward the homeless, or even consider their expulsion or extermination a good thing.

Ethnic cleansing, for example, entails all three.

tbieter wrote:Here we have "peacemakers" trying to prevent the former secretary of state, Condolezza Rice, from speaking on a university campus:
"Students for a Democratic Society will hold a rally outside the auditorium before Rice's speech ..."The university is "falling for a ridiculous repackaging of Rice as a civil rights and feminist hero," says a post on the website of the Minnesota Alliance of Peacemakers, a network of activists in the state."

And a "peacebuilder" is part of a profession? It would be more accurate to say a "peacebuilder" is probably just a paid political activist.

prof wrote:

tbieter wrote:Here we have "peacemakers" trying to prevent the former secretary of state, Condolezza Rice, from speaking on a university campus:
"Students for a Democratic Society will hold a rally outside the auditorium before Rice's speech ..."The university is "falling for a ridiculous repackaging of Rice as a civil rights and feminist hero," says a post on the website of the Minnesota Alliance of Peacemakers, a network of activists in the state."

And a "peacebuilder" is part of a profession? It would be more accurate to say a "peacebuilder" is probably just a paid political activist.

I sense some misunderstandings: If a rally is held before she speaks she still gets to speak, doesn't she?

But, the "peace-builders" tried to prevent her from speaking, thereby preventing others from hearing Ms. Rice.

From the editorial:
"A campus group -- challenging Rice's actions as secretary of state and national security adviser under former President George W. Bush -- made clear its objection to her presence.

The ensuing debate, during which University President Eric Kaler took a decisive stand, was useful.

"Our university must be a place that not only promotes, but aggressively celebrates free speech," Kaler said in a statement to the University Senate, which represents faculty, students and staff. "The University of Minnesota must be this state's headquarters for civil discourse and the boundless exchange of differing ideas."

The University Senate last week voted 122-21 to defeat a resolution that reportedly was toned down from an earlier version urging the U to cancel the invitation."

When I was in college we protested the speaker, but we did not try to prevent the speaker from speaking! We respected the right of the other students who wanted to hear the speaker. After our protest, we went to the auditorium and listened to the speaker.

Unlike many academics today, we respected the concept of the "marketplace of ideas" and free speech. WE RESPECTED THE RIGHT OF THE OTHER STUDENTS WHO WANTED TO HEAR THE SPEAKER TO HEAR THE SPEECH!

You academics, who today try to prevent speakers from speaking, manifest a TOTALITARIAN TENDENCY.

I fail to see how such a tactic promotes "peace". It promotes civil discord and suggests that the "peace-builders" are really just partisan political activists, just participants in a MOB..

From the standpoint of the clash of ideas, today's university is a decadent institution compared to the disputations held in the medieval universities.

And is it possible that there may be some truth in the website claim of the Alliance? Could the University fall for a repackaging? And was Ms. Rice a civil rights hero?

Was she not part of a campaign to sell us a war? Did she ever take seriously the warnings of those who said Bin Laden would soon commit an act of terrorism - or at least organize one? Did she contribute to the rationalizing that got us into the war on Iraq, and then defended it to the end? Is war a peaceful way to live?

Did you ever read the paragraph (under the caption 'Sustainable Solutions:') of Matthew Albrecht's article that I referred to in the first post? Isn't Mediator a profession that some attorneys pursue? Are you aware of the field of Remedial Law? It is a practice which includes negotiating disputes. Isn't the Law a profession? And did you google-search Restorative Justice to find out what that is all about? http://peacealliance.org/the-political- ... e-justice/

I agreed with you that 'peace activism' hasn't seemed to gain much toward getting us a peaceful world. Do you share that goal? Do you want a world without war or violence?

Could the picketing and protests by pacifists be a form of educating the public that there is an issue, a problem to solve? Did you ever check into the activities, an dthe accomplishments, of The Peace Alliance? Hasn't it called attention to the problem of school bullying? Is making that an issue an ethical thing to do?