Peace as a punctuation mark in eternal war
Evil isn’t hard to comprehend,
it is nothing
But unhappiness
In its most successful disguise - Franz Wright
'the danger of the practice of violence, even if it moves consciously within a non-extremist framework of short-term goals, will always be that the means overwhelm the end. If goals are not achieved rapidly, the result will not merely be defeat but the introduction of the practice of violence into the whole body politic. Action is irreversible, and a return to the status quo... is always unlikely. The practice of violence, like all action, changes the world, but the most probable change is a more violent world...' Hannah Arendt: Reflections on Violence
Peace as a punctuation mark in eternal war
In the latest round of terror and revenge (or revenge and terror, take your pick); between 'self-determination' and 'national integration', we are confronted yet once more with the reality of conflict and communalism as a mode of governance. I belong to a generation whose childhood lay in the immediate aftermath of Independence. Looking back, I must say that we were lucky. We enjoyed a happy childhood, there was hope and a relatively calm political atmosphere. The scenario worsened in the mid 1960's, but the communal strife of later years still lay ahead. I feel bad for the younger generation of today. For that reason I feel it necessary to convey a few thoughts to them. As Russell Jacoby, whose book is cited below, says, 'In thinking about the bad, we reach for the good'.
Some of my friends and students have expressed anxiety and dismay at the recent terrorist attack in Kashmir, and wondered how to face the accompanying tide of hatred. (Also note the activities that mark the RSS version of national integration). To get to the point, here are some opening remarks from an article I wrote in June 2017 to commemorate 50 years of Naxalbari. (Some readers might like to read it, as it is relevant to the matter under discussion).
I’ve heard the phrase 'peace process' from childhood - with reference to the Sino-Indian conflict, Vietnam, the Cold War, Biafra, Egypt-Israel, Palestine, India-Pakistan, Iran-Iraq, Yugoslavia etc. All were - or still are - embroiled in a ‘peace process.’ Not to mention the never-ending Hindu-Muslim peace process. Then there was Naxalbari. Thereby hangs a story which I have related elsewhere, so will not recount here. But to begin on a tangent - radical wisdom was that everything is political. We used to say everything has a class character. I gradually learned otherwise. Truth does not have a class character; nor do love, laughter, grief and conscience. If they are rendered political they cease being what they are; and we would already be in an Orwellian universe. Air and water and grass are neither Hindu nor Muslim, neither proletarian nor bourgeois.
But yes, extremist ideologies are fast becoming the opiate of choice for desperate people. If ‘the centre cannot hold’, it is because truth is fragile and of no use to anyone except in distorted bits and pieces. We refuse to stand on our own two feet. What sense may we make of this situation?
The so-called peace process is a chimera - an accommodation to popular impulses toward peace. For those who sense the need to step outside the never-ending spiral, here are some readings on violence:
George Orwell's ironical pamphlet (in his epic novel 1984) was described as the Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism. Here is an extract (the entire text is worth reading):
War, it will now be seen, is a
purely internal affair. In the past, the ruling groups of all countries,
although they might recognise their common interest and therefore limit the
destructiveness of war, did fight against one another, and the victor always
plundered the vanquished. In our own day they are not fighting against one
another at all. The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects,
and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but
to keep the structure of society intact. The very word “war,” therefore,
has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming
continuous war has ceased to exist..
Russell Jacoby, in the preface to his book titled Bloodlust: On the Roots of Violence from Cain and Abel to the Present; writes:
Despite an ocean of words about violence – its origins, course and prevention – something has gone virtually unrecognised: its primal form is fratricide. This observation contradicts both common sense and the collective wisdom of teachers and preachers, who declaim that we fear – and sometimes should fear – the “other”, the dangerous stranger. Citizens and scholars alike believe that enemies lurk in the street and beyond the street, where we confront a “clash of civilisations” with foreigners who challenge our way of life.
The truth is more unsettling. It is not so much the unknown that threatens us but the known. We disdain and attack our brothers – our kin, our acquaintances, our neighbours –whom we know well, perhaps too well. We know their faults, their beliefs, their desires, and we distrust them because of that. The most common form of violence is the violence between acquaintances or neighbours or kindred communities within nations – civil wars writ large and small. From assault to genocide, from assassination to massacre, violence generally emerges from inside the fold rather than outside it..
The Enemy System: John Mack (1929-2004); Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School
(Extract): Vietnam veteran William Broyles wrote: “War begins in the mind, with the idea of the enemy.” But to sustain that idea in war and peacetime a nation’s leaders must maintain public support for the massive expenditures that are required. Studies of enmity have revealed susceptibilities, though not necessarily recognized as such by the governing elites that provide raw material upon which the leaders may draw to sustain the image of an enemy. Freud in his examination of mass psychology identified the proclivity of individuals to surrender personal responsibility to the leaders of large groups. This surrender takes place in both totalitarian and democratic societies, and without coercion. Leaders can therefore designate outside enemies and take actions against them with little opposition. Much further research is needed to understand the psychological mechanisms that impel individuals to kill or allow killing in their name, often with little questioning of the morality or consequences of such actions.
(Extract): Vietnam veteran William Broyles wrote: “War begins in the mind, with the idea of the enemy.” But to sustain that idea in war and peacetime a nation’s leaders must maintain public support for the massive expenditures that are required. Studies of enmity have revealed susceptibilities, though not necessarily recognized as such by the governing elites that provide raw material upon which the leaders may draw to sustain the image of an enemy. Freud in his examination of mass psychology identified the proclivity of individuals to surrender personal responsibility to the leaders of large groups. This surrender takes place in both totalitarian and democratic societies, and without coercion. Leaders can therefore designate outside enemies and take actions against them with little opposition. Much further research is needed to understand the psychological mechanisms that impel individuals to kill or allow killing in their name, often with little questioning of the morality or consequences of such actions.
Philosopher and
psychologist Sam Keen asks why it is that in virtually every war “The enemy is
seen as less than human? He’s faceless. He’s an animal”.” Keen tries to answer
his question: “The image of the enemy is not only the soldier’s most powerful
weapon; it is society’s most powerful weapon. It enables people en masse to
participate in acts of violence they would never consider doing as
individuals”. National leaders become skilled in presenting the adversary
in dehumanized images. The mass media, taking their cues from the leadership,
contribute powerfully to the process. The image of the enemy
as less than human may be hard to dislodge. For example, a teacher in the
Boston area reported that during a high school class on the Soviet Union a
student protested: “You’re trying to get us to see them as people”
With some sadness, I can tell my young friends that nothing will come of revenge except more revenge, there will be no end to this eternal spiral. The partition of India began with fratricide, and the events of 1947 converted civil war into an international problem. There is no way out except to step out of the circle of war and terror and revolution. Self-determination and sovereignty are as ethereal as smoke; the sovereigns today are war, militarism and money. No matter what their religion or nationality, those who whip up hatred and revenge in the pursuit of power are the enemies of humanity. As George Orwell warned us, war is not meant to be won, its meant to be continuous. (Hear his final warning).
The way out is as simple as it is dangerous - step out of the circle. Refuse communal hatred; give up the habit of attributing collective guilt to entire peoples and communities.Take a lesson from the schoolchildren forging solidarity across frontiers to force action on the environment. Tens of thousands are demonstrating for government action on climate. In the 1980's a mass movement called European Nuclear Disarmament (END) mobilised on a continental scale to stop the installation of MX nuclear missiles in West Europe. Its successes were a major factor in the reform of the USSR; and the end of the Cold War. People of the sub-continent need to take similar action against the politics of eternal animosity and eternal partition.
In all communities and all countries there are millions who wish an end to the cycle of hatred. As Rev Martin Luther King said in his last speech on April 3, 1968, It is no longer a choice between violence and non-violence in this world, it is non-violence or non-existence. That is where we are today. All I can say to my young friends is this: resist the ongoing attempt to militarise civil society, to normalise violence and vengeful thinking. Think twice before ascribing blame to entire communities for the crimes of a few. Don't let the authorities off the hook when they function in a partisan manner and fail to protect the innocent. And most of all - leave the enemy system - it is a futile attempt to nationalise God. Time, water, air, the polar icecaps, the oceans, the rain forests, the Himalayas, none of these gifts may be nationalised, and attempts to perpetuate national conflicts are a danger to humanity.
Speak the truth
Stop the killing
NB: I have been asked by a friend to clarify the last couple of sentences; for which purpose I have added the paragraphs below:
Nation-worship is a form of right-wing atheism (somewhat akin to Party-worship, the Leninist equivalent of deism). It makes no sense for the Creator of the universe to cast special favour upon a ‘chosen people’ or a piece of land on a single planet. Nation worshippers try and cast their vacuous ideology in sacred light - their version of religion is a pious fraud. (Even the Chinese Communist Party indulges in xenophobia).
They also require a designated Enemy, without which they cannot maintain ‘the unity of the Nation’. This is the history of nationalism – a European invention dating back to the French revolution and its aftermath - although the nation-state as an institution received its major impetus in the global geopolitical structure set up by the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. The concept of a 'national homeland' for an ethnically homogenous population soon fostered the impulse toward ethnic cleansing and mass transfers of population. The vicious events of the 1930's, culminating in World War 2 are an example of the poisonous character of ultra-nationalist ideologies. A detailed account of this, with especial reference to India may be read here: The law of killing: a brief history of Indian fascism
see also
The way out is as simple as it is dangerous - step out of the circle. Refuse communal hatred; give up the habit of attributing collective guilt to entire peoples and communities.Take a lesson from the schoolchildren forging solidarity across frontiers to force action on the environment. Tens of thousands are demonstrating for government action on climate. In the 1980's a mass movement called European Nuclear Disarmament (END) mobilised on a continental scale to stop the installation of MX nuclear missiles in West Europe. Its successes were a major factor in the reform of the USSR; and the end of the Cold War. People of the sub-continent need to take similar action against the politics of eternal animosity and eternal partition.
In all communities and all countries there are millions who wish an end to the cycle of hatred. As Rev Martin Luther King said in his last speech on April 3, 1968, It is no longer a choice between violence and non-violence in this world, it is non-violence or non-existence. That is where we are today. All I can say to my young friends is this: resist the ongoing attempt to militarise civil society, to normalise violence and vengeful thinking. Think twice before ascribing blame to entire communities for the crimes of a few. Don't let the authorities off the hook when they function in a partisan manner and fail to protect the innocent. And most of all - leave the enemy system - it is a futile attempt to nationalise God. Time, water, air, the polar icecaps, the oceans, the rain forests, the Himalayas, none of these gifts may be nationalised, and attempts to perpetuate national conflicts are a danger to humanity.
Speak the truth
Stop the killing
NB: I have been asked by a friend to clarify the last couple of sentences; for which purpose I have added the paragraphs below:
Nation-worship is a form of right-wing atheism (somewhat akin to Party-worship, the Leninist equivalent of deism). It makes no sense for the Creator of the universe to cast special favour upon a ‘chosen people’ or a piece of land on a single planet. Nation worshippers try and cast their vacuous ideology in sacred light - their version of religion is a pious fraud. (Even the Chinese Communist Party indulges in xenophobia).
They also require a designated Enemy, without which they cannot maintain ‘the unity of the Nation’. This is the history of nationalism – a European invention dating back to the French revolution and its aftermath - although the nation-state as an institution received its major impetus in the global geopolitical structure set up by the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. The concept of a 'national homeland' for an ethnically homogenous population soon fostered the impulse toward ethnic cleansing and mass transfers of population. The vicious events of the 1930's, culminating in World War 2 are an example of the poisonous character of ultra-nationalist ideologies. A detailed account of this, with especial reference to India may be read here: The law of killing: a brief history of Indian fascism
This focus on enmity as a defining
feature of nationalism is at odds with the requirement of economic and
political cooperation in a global economy. It is reflected in the massive
expenditures devoted to armaments. Readers interested in investigating this
further may take look at these links:
Nationalism is also detrimental to the
health of the environment. Ecological issues are global, but nationalism makes
us think that natural resources like clean air, water and forests are somehow
the property of 'nations'. We have forgotten that the national state is a
recent phenomenon.
In the last chapter of The Rebel,
Albert Camus reminded us that 'real generosity toward the future lies
in giving all to the present'. This was the clue he gave us for
understanding ideologies - thought systems that motivate us to focus on an
ever-retreating Glorious Future, while we destroy the Present. (It is also
related to the obsession with reducing presence to transience, as in 'being is
becoming).
We must also be alert to the misuse of
this warning, to its nationalist distortion. Ideologies like those of Trump and
Bolsonaro can also, in the name of respecting the present and
the interests of their voters, play havoc with the very possibility
of a sustainable future. The trick is to pretend that not only
cultures and peoples, but even space and time are 'national'; that we can have
global warming in one country, and healthy climate in another. The health of the Amazon delta, the
Tibetan plateau, the Arctic ice and the Himalayan river systems is not merely
the business of the countries that exercise sovereignty over these places.
Rather, their health concerns all the species that depend upon them. Nuclear
contamination and the ozone hole are not national phenomena. If entrenched political systems and interest groups cannot hold these precious resources in trust for the global population, it is clear that such interests must be removed if we are to survive. To give all to the present becomes
meaningless unless the idea of the present embraces all of us who live in it,
not just those who voted for these mindless demagogues.
Time is life. Life encompasses all species and all of us, those alive now and those yet to come.
We cannot nationalise time. Give up this nonsense while we still have some of it. DS
Mukul Kesavan - A daily plebiscite: Kashmir,
the Northeast and India
'In solidarity with all Kashmiri students': An appeal by a group of Kashmiri Pandits
'In solidarity with all Kashmiri students': An appeal by a group of Kashmiri Pandits
