Violence and Its Alternative~

An Interdisciplinary Reader

~dited by ~lanfred B. Steger and Nancy S. Li

'li ctCf
 and non-violent cacrics, abour rhe advantages of socieries wirh a low level
lally sancrioned violence, and rhe appe,d as a social ideal ot~ whar Gaining
:'111, negarive peace.
usr of course be conceded rhar rhis ideal does nor have equal weighr wirh
consider ir. Alrhough anyone can recognise rhe disrincrive facrs rhar un­
rhe concepr of violence I have been defending, nor everyone will have
Ie reacrions ro rhem. There will be variarions in both personal and culrural
lere even amongsr men and communiries who are in no ohvious way cor­
wicked. There are individuals who are much more sensirive ro and worried C HAP T E R 4
'io/ence rhan orhers, jusr as rhere are whole groups, such as warrior casres,
>m violence is, [() some degree, an accepred and even welcome parr of
ves. Such groups may be less enrhusiasric rhan orhers abour projecrs ro Cultural Violence
Ie scope of violence wirhin and berween communiries and an argumenr
em would involve exploring furrher rhe value of peace in comparison wirh By Jahan Galrung
alues as well as conducring a debare aboll[ cerrain empirical issues. Such
:e musr awair auorher occasion; I hope] have done somerhing here ro
rhe ground for ie..l o

1. DEPINITION

By 'cuI rural violence' we mean rhose aspecrs of culrure, rhe symbolic spherc of
our exisrence-exemplified by religion and ideology, language and art, <:mpirical
science and formal science (logic, marhemarics)-rhar can be used ro jusrify or
Iegirimize direcr or srfllcrural violence.' Srars, crosses and crescenrs; Rags, anrhellls
and milirary parades; rhe ubiquitous portrair of rhe Leader; inflamm'lrory speeches
and posrers-all rhese come ro mind. [However, ler us posrpone rhe eXclmples
unril secrion 4 and srarr wirh analysis.] The fearures menrioned above are 'nspecrs
of culture', nor enrire culrures. A person encollfaging a po(enrial killer, shouring
"Killing is sclf-realiwrion!" may prove (hnr rhe English language is capable of
expressing such rhough(s, bur nor (har rhe English language as such is violene.
Enrire culrures can hardly be classified as violenr; rhis is one reason for preferring
rhe expression "Aspect A of eulrure C is an example of culrural violence" ro
cui rural stereorypes like "culrure C is violene."
On rhe orher hand, culrures could be imagined and even encounrered wirh
nor only one bur a ser of aspecrs so violenr, exrensive and diverse, spanning all
cillrural domains, rhar rhe srep from talking abour cases of culrJlfe violence ro
violenr culrures may be warranred. For rhar, a sysremaric research process is
needed. This anicle is part of rhar process.
One place ro srarr would be ro clarify 'culrllfal violence' by searching for irs
negarion. If rhe opposire of violence is peace, rhe subjecr marrer of peace re­
searcb/peace srudies, rhen rite opposire of culruml violence would he 'culrural
peace', meaning aspecrs of a culrure rhar serve ro jusrify and legirimize direcr
peace and srfllcrural peace. If many and diverse aspecrs of rhar kind are found in
a culrure, we can refer ro it as a 'peace culrure'. A major rask of peace research,
and rhe peace movemenr in general, is rhar never-ending search for a peace
culrure-problemaric, because of rhe remprarion to insriwrionalize rhar culrllfe,
making ir ohlig~l[()ry wirh rhe hope of inrernalizing ir everywhere. And r!l:n would
already be direcr violence,2 imposing a culrllft:.
CulCilral violence makes direcr and srrucwral violence look, even feel, righr­
or ar leasr nor wrong. Jusr as polirical science is abour rwo problems-rh<: use of

4(}
.10It{/ IJ (;0/tit Itg
Table I. A Typology of Violcnce
SURVIVAL WELL-BEING IDENTITY FREEDOM
NEEDS NEEDS NEEOS NEEDS
Direcr Violencc Killing Maiming Desocializarinn Repression
Sicge, Sancrions Resncializarion Dercnrion
I\lisery Secondary- Expulsion
Cirizen
Structural Exploitation A Exploitation B Penerration Ivlargiualization
Violence Segmentation Fragmentation
power and the legitimization of the use of power-violence stlldies arc about two
problems: the use of violence and rhe legitimation of that use. The psychological
mechanism would be internalization.) The study of cultural violence highlights
the way in which the act of direct violence and the fact of stfllctllfal violence are
legitimized and rhus rendered acceptable in sociery. One way cultural violence
works is by changing the moral color of an act from red/wrong to green/righr or
at least to yellow/acceptable; an example being 'mlHder on behalf of the counrry
as right, on behalf of oneself wrong'. Another way is by making reality opaque,
so that we do not see the violenr act or fact, or at least not as violent. Obviously
this is more easily done with some forms of violence than with others: an example
being aool1l/,[ pro'l)atl/s. I !ence, peace stlldies is in need of a violence typology, in
much rhe same way as a parhology is among rhe prerequisites for healrh stlldies.
2. A TYPOLOGY OF DIRECT AND
STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE
I see violence as avoidable insults [() basic human needs, and more generally to
life, towering the real level of needs sarisfacrion below what is potentially possiblc.
Threats of violence are also violence. Combining the distinction between direct
and stfllctllfal violence with four classes of basic needs we get the typology of
Table I. The four classes of basic needs-an outcome of exrensive dialogs in
many parts of rhe world 4 -are: sl/lVi'I.'al !leeds (negation: death, morrality); Z2'ell­
oei!lg !leeds (negation: misery, morbidity); idel/tity, meal/i!lif, !leeds (negarion: aliena­
rion); and freedolll needs (negation: repression).
The result is eight types of violence with some subtypes, easily identi!led for
direct violence but more complex for srructmal violence (see Table I). A !lrst
comment could be that Table I is anthropo-cenrric, A fifrh column could be added
at rhe beginning for the rest of Nature, the sine qua non for human existence.
'Ecological balance' is probably the most frequently found term used for envi­
ronment system maintenance. If this is not sarisfied, the result is ecological deg­
radation, breakdown, imbalance. EeobaLlI1ce corresponds to smvival + well-being
+ freedom + identiry for human basic maintenance. If nor sarisfied, the resulr is
human degradation, The sum of all five, for all, will define 'peace'.
BIIt 'ecological halance' is a very broad category encompassing abiota (non­
life) and bi()[a (life) alike. Violence defined as insulrs to life would focus on hiora,
only indirectly on abiota. Ivloreover, there are difficult and important quesrions,
such as 'balance for whom?' For human beings to reproduce themselves? At what
"/J
CULTURAL VIOLENCE
level of economic acrivity and what numbcrs? Or, for rhe 'environmcnI' (what an
anrhropocentric term!) to reprodllce itself? All parts, equally, at wh'lt level, what
numbers? Or for both?
Second, the mega-I'ersions of the pale words usnl above for violer1Ce shonld
also he contemplated. For 'killing' read extermil/atiol/, holo((JI/.It, !!.i'I}()(i{!r. For'mis­
ery' read sileut "olo((lIlSt. For 'alienation' read spiritl/al death. For 'reprcssion' rcad
gl/Iligl KZ. For 'ecological degradation' read ecoride. For all of this wgerher read
'omnieide'. The words might sound like someone's effort to bc apocalyptic­
were it not for the fact that the world has experienced all of this dllfing thc last
50 years alone, closely associated with the n'lmes of Ilitler, Stalin and Reagan'
and Japanese militarism," In short violence studies, an indispensable part of peace
Sllldies, may he a horror cahinet; bnt like pathology they reHect a rcality to be
known and understood.
Then some comments on the content of the table as it stands. The first car­
egory of violencc, killing, is clear enough, as is maiming., Addcd togcther they
consritute 'casualries', used in assessing the magnitude of a war. Bur 'war' is only
one particular form of orchesrrated violcncc, usually WiIh at kast one actor, ,1
government. Ho\l' narrow it is to see peace as the opposite nf war, and limit peace
studies to war avoidance studies, and more particularly avoidance of big wars or
super-wars (defincd as wars between hig powers or superpowers), and el'cn more
particularly III rhe limitation, abolition or control of super-weapolls, IrnpOftclnr
interconnections among types of vioknce are left out, particularly the way in
which one type of violence may be reduced or controlled at thc expense of in­
crease or maintenance of anorher. Like 'side-effects' in healrh stllllics, they are
very important and easily overlooked. Pcace research should avoid that mistake.'
Included under maiming is also Ihe insult to human needs brought about by
siege/blockade (classical term) and sanclions (modern term). To some, this is 'non­
violence', since direcr and immcdiate killing is avoided. To the victims, howel'er,
it may mean slow but intcntional killing through malnutrition and lack of medical
atrention, hitring rhe weakest firsr, the children, the elderly, the poor, the womcn,
By making the causal chain longer the actor avoids having [() face the violence
directly. lie cven 'gives the vicrims a chance', usually ro suhmir, meaning loss of
freedom anel identity instead of loss of life and limbs, rrading the last t\\'0 for the
first twO types nf direct violence. But the mechanism is the threar to the lil'elihood
hronght about hy siege/boycott/sanctions. The Gandhian type of economic boy­
cotr comhined refusal to buy British textiles with the collecting of funds fur rhe
merchants, in order not to confuse the issue by thrcatening their livelihood.
The category of 'alienation' can be defined in terms of socializ'Hion, meaning
the internalization of culture. There is a double aspcct: to be desoci'llized away
froln one's own culture and to be resocialized into anorher culture--likc the pro­
hibition and imposition of languages. The one does nor presuppose the other.
nut they often come rogeth'er in the caregory of sccond class citizenship, where
the subjected group (not necessarily a 'minority') is forced ro cxpress dominanr
culture and not its o\\'n, ,It least not in pnblic space. The prohkm is, of course,
rhar any socialization of a child-in the family, ar school, by society at large-is
also forced, a kind of brainwashing, giving the child no choice. Conscquentlv, we
might arrive at thc conclusion (not that far-fetchcd) that non\'ioknt so('i,ili(ation
is to give the child a choice, c,g. by offerin[!, him/her more than one cultured idiolll.
The category of 'repression' has a similar double definirion: the 'freedolll from'
and the 'freedom to' of the International Bill of Human Hights,H with historical
and cultuml limitarions." Two categories have been added explicitly lleCCluse of
 .:Ie! Johan Gal/lin}!,
thcir significlilce as concomitants of other types of liolenee; detention, meaning
locking pCllple in (prisous, eoneentrarion camps), anri expulsion, me:lIIing locking
pcople out (banishing rhem abroaJ llr to distant pans of the country).
To discuss the categories of strllctur:d liulcnce we need all image of a violent
structure, and a vocabulary, a discourse, in order to identify the aspens and sec
how they reLHe to the needs l':ltegotll's. The :ltchetvp:d liolcnt structure, in my
view, has expluitatiun as a center-piece. This simply mcans rhat some, the mp­
dogs, get much more (here measllted in needs currency) nut of the inreraction in
the structure tban others, the underdogs. lll There is 'unequal exchange', a eu­
phemism. The underdogs may in fact bc so dis:1dnnragcd that they die (stan'C,
waste away from diseases) from it: exploitation A. Or they may be left in a per­
manent, unwanted state of misery, usually including malnutrition :u1d illness: ex­
ploit:ltion B. The way people die differs: in the Third Wmld, from diarrhea :11ll1
imll1unity dcficiencies: in the 'developed' countrics, aWlilbhly and prcmatlltely,
from cardio-I'asl'ldar diseases and malignant [lImors. All of this h:1ppellS Ilithin
complex structlltes and at the end of the long, highly tamifieJ causal chains :II1J
cycles
A violent structure leaves marks not only on the human body hur :dso on the
mind and the spirit. The next fonr terms can be seen as pans of cxploit:ltion or
:IS reinforcing components in the structure. They function by impeding conscious­
ncss formcltion and mobilization, nlo eondition~ for effcLtil'e struggle :lgainst ex­
ploitation. l'mrfmfioll, implanting the topdog inside the underdog so to spcak,
combineo wirh srgll/i'llfafioll, gi,'ing the underdog only a very p8ftial viell of what
gocs on, will do the first job. AnJ l!Ial'.(!,il/a/i':,ofioll, keeping the underdogs on the
outside, combined with .!liIgllltilfilfioll, kceping the underdogs Jway from cach
other, will do thc second job. However, these four shuulJ also be seen as structmal
I'iolence in their own right, and more particularly :IS variation on the general
thcllle of structurally built-in repression. They 11:Ive all been operating in gcnder
COI1tCXts even if women do not always have higher morulity rates hut in fact may
hal'c higher life cxpeetancy than men, prol'ided they sUfl'ive gender-specific :lbor­
tion, infanticide and the first years of childhood. In short, cxploitation and re­
prl'ssion go h:lnd in hand, as violence: but they arc not identical.
Ilu\I' :lhout I'iolence against nature? There is the direct I'iolence of sbshing,
hllli1illg, elC., :IS in a war. The structural form of sueh violencc would hc morc
insidious, nm intended to destmy n:ltute but nevertheless duiug so: the pollution
and depiction associated with modern industry, leading to dying forests, ozone
holcs, glob:l] Il'arming, and so on. \Vh:lt happens is tr:ll1,foJ"l11:1tion or natlll'e
thmugh ii/f/II.,fli,1! a(fi"ify, leaving non-degradahle residucs :11](1 depicting nonre­
11CII:lhk resomces, combined Ilith a l!:'odd-I'Il(()/II/Jilssilig mllllllfn'ia/i':,i1fioll that
m,lkcs thc conscquences non-visible to the perpetr:nors. '1 Two powerful struc­
rUlcs :II Il'ork, indeed, !egitimizeJ by economic growth. The blizzworJ 'sustain­
able l'ulIlllmic grtl\\"th' may [)[Ol'e ro bc yet anmher f0fl11 of cultural violencc.
.1. RELATING THHEE TYPES OF VIOLENCE
With these Clllllll1ents \iolence' is defined in extension by the types gilen in
Tahle I, II.Sillg direct :lI1d strtlctllLlI I'iolence as ovcrarching categories or "sllper­
tl'jll",'. 'Cllltur:d I·jolence' ClIl 11()\1' bc :Hided as the third sllpcr-type and Pllt ill
the third eillnn III' a (I iLilHls) liolence triangle as all image. When the trianglc is
stood Oil it, "direl'l" :lI1d 'strul'tlll:d I iolencc' feet, the image ill\oked is cldtm:11
I'ioiencc as lhe lcgirimilcr of both. Standing the triangle on its 'dire:cr violence'
ClILTUHAL VIOLENCE 43
head yielJs the image of structmal and cultmal sources or dirl'Cl violencc. Of
course the tri:lngle always remains a triangle-but the inugc prodlll'l'd i, ditTer­
ent, and all six positions (thtee pointing downw:lrd, three 111'\\'anl) inl'oke somc­
what different stories all worth telling.
Despite the symmetries there is a h:1Sic diffcrencc in the timc relation of the
three concepts of violence. Direer liolence is :In el'ent; StrUe'lIII:l1 I"iolence is :1
process with ups and downs; eultllral violence is an im'il/lflllf, a 'pclrn:mcnce',1!
remaining essel1ti:llly the samc t'lf long periods, gil'cn the slow II:lnsl(ltI11,ltIOnS
of basil' enlture. Put in the usefnl tcrms of lhe French i\nnalcs sclwol in history:
'evenementielle, conjonctmellc, la longne durcc.' The thrce forlus or liolencc
enter timc differently, sOll1cwh:\t like the difference ill earthquake theory be­
tween the earthquakc ;IS an erent, the movell1cnr uf rhc teclOnic pl:1tes as a
process and the fault line as a more permanent condition.
This leads to aL'io/f'II(f sf!'tlf,l imagl' (complementing the triangle illlage) of the
phenomenology of violence, IIsefnl :1, a paradigl11 gcnerating " II'ide variety of
hypotheses. At the botrom is the steady tlow through timc or culllll.d lioknce, :l
substratum from which the othcr two can derive thcir Illltril:l1ls. In rhe next stra­
tum the rhythms of strllctllfal I'iolellee :He loc:ned. P:lltelll, ot cxploit:ltion arc
building lip, wearing Ollt, or torn dowll, with the ptlllcl'ti\ c aC'culn!J:lllill1ent of
penetration-segmentation preventing consciousnl'ss formation, anti f,:rgl11cntation­
margin:dil,ation preventing organization :lgainst exploit:ltioll and repres'iion. And
at the top, visible to the unguided eye amI to barefoot empirici'im, is the str:ltIrm
of ditect violence with the whole rccord or c1irL:ct lTl",lty l'l'I"!'err:1ted Ill' hUlI1:111
beings against each other anJ against other forll1s or life and I\:ltllre in genn:t1.
Generally, <I causal !iow 1'1'0111 cultur:d via struum:t1 to direct violence can be
identified. The cultllre preaches, teachcs, adnlOnishe" cggs on, and ciullo; liS into
sceing exploitation and/or tepression as normal and n:ltllr:d, IIr into not seeing
them (particularly not cxploitation) at all. Then conle the eruptions, the elTorts
to use Jirect I·jolenee to get out of the structllf:l! irOl1 cage, II and coontcr-I'io!cncc
to keep the eagc intact. Ordinal\', regular erimiual :ll'til"ity is p:Jrlh' an dfort by
the IIndcrdog to 'get out', to redistribute wealth, get elen, gct revengc ('Ilhle­
colLIf crime'), or by somebody to remain or bn'ome a topdog, suckill,g the stnll'­
tllfe for what it is II"0nh ('white-L:ollar crime'). 1Ioth direl't ami StrIIClill:l! violellce
creatc needs-dcficits. When this happens sudJcnly we can [;llk of f/illlllid. When
it happens to ;l group, a colleerivity, we havc rhe collectivc tr:llnna theIr l'an sed­
iment into the collectil'e slIhconsciolls and hecome raw material for In:ljor liis[(Jr­
ical processes and events. The IInderlying as<;llmptio[\ i, simple; 'violc-m'e hreuh
violence'. Violence is needs-deprivalion; needs-deprivation is seriol"; one rcactioll
is direct violence. Bllt that is not rhe only reaction. There conld :Ibo Ill' a feeling
of hopelessness, a deprivation/frustr:nion syndrome that sholl's lip on the inside
as self-directed Jgl-!:ression :llId on the olltside as apatllv and II Itlldrall~t1. (;il'en a
choice betweell a boiling, violent and a freezing, apatheric ,ocici y :IS rC:lnion to
massil'c needs-deprivation, [(Jpdol-!:S tenJ to prefer the Lltler. 'l'IiLy prcfer 'gov­
crnability' to 'ttllnble, anarchy'. They love: 'stahility'. Ila!eed, a nl:ljo, f/)[m of
cllitural violence indnlged in lJy ruliuf!; clires is to IJlal11C the l'il'lill1 o!' strUl'tural
violence who th[()ws the first stone, not in a gLls,llOllse bur to get "In of the iron
cage, stamping him as 'agl-!:res,or'. The cHegory of struLtnral I iolc-lH'c ,I",nld lilake
sneh Lllltlltal violence transparent.
However, the violence strata illlagc docs not tlcline (he only c:JlI"d chain in
the violenLe rriangle. There arc linkages and c:ols:d flolls in all six direuions, :md
cyeles connecting all thrce may stan :It any point. This i, a good ITaSOIl why the
triangle nul' sometimes be a hetler image th:m thc t1Hee-licr ,tLllllm model.
N Johall Cal/1/Il!!.
Afric;lI1s ar.... c'lptllrcd. forced across the ,\tLllltic ro work as sLII'es: milli(lns ;He
kilkd in the process-in .\fricl, on bmru, in the Ameri[·as. This massive direct
\'iolence mtr eclltllrics seeps di)\\"ll 'lnd scdin1cnts as melssive strnellltal violence,
\v\th \\hites as the master tel[Jdogs and blacks as the slave unuerdogs, producing
and rcprodti("ing massi\'e clJitllr·.Ji violence with racist iue;ls Clerywhere. After
SOllie tiUl<.:. dir....lt \iolen.. . e is 1()rglJttcn, sLl\'cry is forgonen, and only twO labelo
show up, pede enollgh I'm college textbooks: 'discrimination' for massive strlletllral
\'io!cncl' and 'prcjlldicc' for massi\'e eulnlt:d \'iolenee, "Sanitation of language: it­
self cllitural \Iolenee,
The \ieiolls \'i"!cnce cycle cm ,dso start in the strliCtlifal violence corner. Social
difkrellti'lflon slLlIIly takcs on vertical ehuaeteristies with increasingly unequal
,,",chelnge, and thcse soci;11 facts wonld then be in search of soci,li acts f"r their
Illailllc:nanl'e, <Jnd clIl((lr<J1 \'iolencc for their jllstific<Jtion-tn gencralize 'll1:lteri­
alist' (ml'aning strIlLtllr,d) \I:lfxist theory. Or, the I'icious C\'ck collid st;lrt in COIll­
bil1l:d direl't :md Sltlll'tllrell \'iolence, \vith One grollp treating anuther group su
badly tb'lt thcy feel a nc"d fot jilstilll,:ltion and cagerly accept any cultural r:l­
tionak handed tel thenl, I\[ore than one thollsand years al'0 Nordic Vikin~s at­
tacked, che'Hed and killed Hussians. I\llght that not' be a gLlod enough re'lson for
rormuLHing the idea that Russians are dangerous. wild, primitin:-meaning that
onc day thcy may comc hack and do the S,II1lC to lIS as \\ e did to them?H Even
[(J thc point that \I'hen Germany atLlcked Nor\\av in April IlJ-IO, the ofnci,ll con­
chlsion heclme that the Rl\sslans arc dangerous because they may one ,by do
the same, .-\nei here \ve see the .sllfprise :Htack tr,ulm,r.
Could there be still a deeper stratum, human nature, \\'ith genetically trans­
mirted dispositions or at le'lsr predispositions for aggression (uirect violence) and
domillation (structural violenceF The hllll1an putcntial for uireet and stmerur:11
"iolenl'c is ccrtainly there-as is the potclltial for uireet and suuctllfdl pe:lee. in
my \'ie\\" hU\\T\-er, the most important argumellt against a biological dererminism
that postu!:nes a dril"e in human natme for aggression and dominance, COinparable
to dril"cs I'm food and scx, is rhe high level or l"ariabililY in ag,gressil"cness '1I1d
domill'lllce. W" find people seeking food and sex unucr (almost) all external
cireum.\LlIleeS, But aggressiun and dominallce exhihir tremendous v'lfiation, de­
pending on the context, including rhe structural and culwr'll conditions, Of
,. ,
COllrse, rhc dri\'e may still he there, only not strong enough [() assert itself under
all eirel\lnst'lnces. in th'lt case, th" concern of the peace rl'seareher would he to
knoll those Cirl"llillstalices, and to explore how to remo\'e or mouify rhelll. Hcre
m\' hypnthesis \\'oldd he tklt the two terms 'stmcture' :llld 'ellltlire' ClIl aeCOIl1­
lllod'H" rhis c;.;ploratiun very comfortably.
Let liS reap ,In imporLlllt llanest frolll rhis taxonomic exercise: \\e can use it
to clarify the concept of lIIi/ililri~i7lil)ll 'IS a process, '1l1d militarislll as rhe idcology
ill'COlllpilll\'jng th:lr prucess. Ob"iously, one <Jsp....el is a general inclill'ltion roward
dilTCt I"iolenee in the form of real or thre;lteneu military actinn, whether pro\'oked
or nm, \\'herher ro serrlc eo\)tiier or initiare it. This inclination brings in its wake
the production and deployment of th" appropriate hardware ,1l1d sufr\\are, How­
e\'er, it \\'ould he S1lpcrfici:d to studY militariz'ltion only in tcrms of past military
al'li\'ity rl'l'ords, :m<l present produl'lion and deployment p:mcrns:" rhis would
lead to facile conclusions in terms of personnel. bndgct and arms control only.
Cond II ceding prcSI'l)pDSeS getting :It the ro()[s, in this case <Ir the sUUl'fural and
cultural root" as sn.l',E,cstcd hy the three-strata p,m1Lligm. Concretely, this means
identil\in,~ srrllcfllfal :tnd cultllral aspcCTs thar \\'ould tend to reproduce the read­
in"ss for ll1i1itary 'Inion, produniol1 'mel deplll\l11ent. This II ould inclmle moh­
hjll.~ of V(Jlln~ !lO\S at SdlOOI, plill1ogenitllre.'" llnempluymenr ,1I1d ",ploit:ltion in
CliLTllRAI, VIOLEN(:E 4S
genet;1!. Further, the lise of military production ;lIld (leplOI"IlJCllf [(I still1u!'lte
economic grO\\"th and economic distrilJlltion: he:wily nationali';l, r'll'ist ,md sexist
ideologies," and so on, The cOlllhin:1tion of huilding milirary t":lllri'lg and exer­
cise components inro high school anu IIniversity cmricula and Stllll'tIIlT," and
disseminaring militiHism as culture, shOlilel merir p,1rriCliiar attelltion, Yer ,trueture
and CUltilfe 'He usually not included in ',lfms contrDI' studies, horh heing highly
sensitive areas, Those: taboos hale to be: brokcn.
4. EXAMPLES OF Cl JLTURAL VIOLENCE
\\"e: turn nOw to rhe lisriug of si;.; enlrural domains men rio ned ill {he inlrodue­
tion-religion 'lIld idcology, language and art, empirical and forlnal science­
gi\'ing one or t\\o examples of cultural violence frollJ each dOinain. The logic of
the scheme is simple: identify the cultural clcment and show ho\\ il Cilll, empIr­
ically or potentially, be used ro legitimize uireer or strul'lltral \·iolelll'C.
4.1 RELIGION
in all religions rhere is sOllle\\'!lcre the sacred, tim Hfi/(~I: let us ['all it 'god'.
,\ h,l,ic distinnion can be made between a tr'lnsecnc!enral Cod oursiLIc liS and an
immanent gud ioside m, mayhe also inside :i11 lile,I" The Jlld,usllJ of the Torah,
founded almost 4000 years ago, el1\'is;rged Cod ;IS a m;ile dcilY residing ourside
planet Earth. A car'lstllJl'hic ide,,: n Cle:lf case of tr:1I1seendentalism "s a metaphor
from \\'hich m:IIlY eonseqllences follow, raken ol'er by rhc orher ,"emiric or occi­
dent<11 religions, Chrisri;lIlity and Isl'lm With god outside liS, as Cod, even 'ahove'
('Olll" Father, who ~Irt in [le'I\'en') it is not inn'irabk IJllr indeed lik"l)' rhar some
people will he seen 'IS closer to th,lt God th,m orhers ClTn 'lS 'higher'. J\!oreover,
in the gener'11 lil'l'idcnt;ll tradition of not only dllalism b,lr J\!cllJi,:haeism, wirh
Sh;Hp dichotomies het\veen good :lnd e\i1, there \\"(lIild ;11,,1 h'lIT l() he somerhing
like i1l1 cvil Sara II corresponding [() the good God. for re:1sons of symm"lry. Again
transcendentirl and immanclH represcnr;Hions ilre p(lssiblc, with (;od and Satan
possessing or at least choosing thcir own: or \I"ilh (;ou or S:Il'ln-nOr to ll1elltion
God lilid Satan-being inside liS, ,\11 e,"uIJlnarion, arc f(llind ill all ol'l'idental
religions. But rhe focus here is on rhe kHd vcrsioll, helief in :1 transcendcnral
God and ~1 transeendclltal Sar:1I1.
\Vhom does God cllOo-se? \Vould it not be re'lsonal>lc [() :ISSllllle thai he chooses
thuse lllost in [lis unage, le:lIiog it [(I Sat'ln to rilk" the othcrs, as indic1tcd in
T,1hle II? This \\'fJlild gi\'c II.S ;1 douhle dieholomy wirh (;od. thc C1lOscn Ones
(by God). The IlndlOsen Ones (hy Cod, chosen hy S:Hall) 'llld Sarau: the chosen
ile:lllin,!', for sah':lrion and c!oscncs, [(J (;od in HCI\·"n, rhe IlndHISCU I(lr d,ltuna­
rion and closeness to Satan in Hcll. Ilowt:ver, I k'\\'L11 and I fell cln also he re­
produced on earth, :lS a forer:lste or indicarion (If the aflellife, I\llst:I\!ItI.\lIJl' can
be secn as prcl"lfarions for Hell!! Ic"v"n-alld s(Kial L'l"ss ;IS rhe finger of (;od,
An immanent eoncepr of god :IS rcsidiog inside ll.S \\',"<Id In"ke 'Iny such di­
chotomy an ;Jet ;lg.1inst god. With a transcendelll,l! God, lJ(Jwen'r, Ihis allllCcomes
11I""ningfu!. Th" first three choice, listed ill Tallie II arc found as e'Hly as Gcn­
esis. The LIst one is more rypic;]1 of ril" New 'I'est;llllcnr wirll ilS ,'oCllS oIJ righr
belief, not jllst on right dceds. The other 111'0 ,ne fOllnd :IS ,c1f1er"d references
to sla\'cs, :wd to rCl1llning IUHll rhc ',(Ird what is of thc I,ord alld lIl\fn Caes;lf
wh'lt is Caes:n's. The Ilppcr CIaSSl'S rc-ferred to as I>eing ('Iosu to C;od have ae­
46 }o!tall Ga/fllllg
tllally traditionally been tbree: Clergy, for the obyiollS reason that they possessed
special insight in how to communicate with God; Aristocracy, parricuLnly the itT
gmtio (lEi; and Capitalists, if tlley arc succcssfui. The lower chsses and rhe poor
were also chosen, eyen as the first to enter IJaradise (the Sermon on the i\lounn,
but only in the after-life. The six together constitllte a hard Judaisl1l-Cllristianity­
Islam which can be softened by giving up some positions and tlIrncd lfltO softer
Islam, softer Christianity and softer judaism by adopting a more il1lnwnenr con­
cept of God (sufism, Frallcis of Assisi, Spinoza).
The consequences in the right-hand column of Table II cOlild also follow from
prcmises other than a theology of chosenness; the table only postul.nes contrib­
uting, sufficient causes.
For a colltcmporary example consider the policies of Israel with regard to thc
Palestinians. The Chosell People eyen haye a Promised L'lnd, the Er{'/~ Yismd.
They behayc as one would expect, transLlting chosellncss, a I'ieiolls typc of elll­
tural violence, into all eight types of direct '1nd struClIJral I'iolcnee listed in Table
I. Therc is killing; maiming, material depril·,ltion bv denying West Rank inhab­
itants what is neeued for liyelihood; there is cksoci31izarion lIithin the theocratic
state of Israel with second cla~~ citizenship' to non-Jews; there is detcmion, in­
diviuual expulsion and perennial threat of rnassil'e ex pulsion. There is exploita­
tion, ar le'ISt as exploiration R.
The four structural concomitants of cxploiration 31'e 311 lI'ell developed: efforrs
to make the Palestinians sec themselves as born Iinderdogs, at lllost heading for
second class citizenship by 'gettilll-'; IIsLd to it'; gi"ing them sm,1I1 segments of
economic activity; keeping them ourside jell'ish sociery [loth lIithin ,md outside
the Green Line, and dealing with PalestiniJns in a r1icirk ('f il!ljJl'Iil mode (as in
the C'lmp D~vid process), never as one people. There is neither nussi"e exter­
mination nor massive exploitation A of the sort found in many Third World coun­
tries under the debt burden, which above ,111 hits children. The violence is more
evenly disuibuteu over the I"hole repertory of eight types. To some, who set
their sights low, defined by Hirlerire or Stalinist extermination and Reagatlite
exploitation A, this me'l/lS th:lt no mass I'iolcnee is going on, thus proving hoI\'
hllm~ne the Isr'lelis ,ne. Slleh perspecri"es are :llso examples of cultmal violence,
indicative of how moral st'lIldards have becllnH: in this centmy.2()
4.2 IDEOLOG"{
With the decline, and perhaps dearh, not only of rhe transccndenral bllt also the
iml11anellf God through seeularil.ation, me: cOlllu expect ,necessors to religion in
the form of polirical ideologies, and to Cod in the form of the modern srate. to
exhibit SU!l\e of thc ~ame ehar'lcter traits. Religion and (~od may he dead-bllt
not the much more hasic ide;l of sharp and I'Jllle-!o'lllc::d dichotomies. The lines
m'IY no lont;er be dr,lIrn betwccn (;"d, the Choscn, the trncllOscn and Saran.
i\lodcrnirv \lould reject (Joel and S'ltan but might demand a disrinction bet\l'een
Chosen and Unchosen; let us call them Self and Other. Archetype: nationalism,
with State 'IS God's sllccessor.
:\ steep gr~ldiellt is then constructed, intLIting, even exalring, rile vallie of Self;
de/brin!'., CI"ell debasing;, the Lllue of Other. At that puint, structllral violence can
starr opcratln,!!. Ir will tend TO bCLOme a self-fulfilling prophecy: people become
debased by being e\pltJitcd, 'l11d rhey :He exploited because they arc seen as
debased, dchumanized. When Orhcr is nor only ,lchlll1l:lJ1ized bllf has been suc­
ces,fully ctJll,-crrcd imo elJl 'it', depri\Ld of hl';ll:lJllwod, rhe sr,lge is set fur any
CULTURAL VIOl.ENCE 47
Table II. The Chosen ,IIlU the \Inehosen
GUO CIIOOSLS Ai\O LEAI' ES TO SATAN WITII TilE CliN,I:\lI'ENCE or
HllmJn Species Animals, Plants, Nature Spcciesism, I~coeidc
f\len Women Sexism, Wirch-burning
Nationalism,
His People The Others Imperialism
Whites Colored H~cjslJl, l :"looi'llislI1
"(.:!as-..iS01, "
Upper Classes LOIyer CLlsses Exp/"iwrion
type of direct violence," which is then IJLImed on tile I'ierill!. This is then relll­
t(need by the category of the 'llJngerous it', the 'vermin', or 'bacteria' (as Ilitler
uescrihed the Jews); rhe 'class enemy' (;IS Sralin deserihed the 'kulaks'); the 'mad
dog' (as Reag;ln described Q'ldhati); the 'cranky criminals' LIS Washington experts
describe 'terrorisrs '). Exterminarion beeumes a psychologically pmsihlc duty. The
SS guards become heroes to be celebrated for their devotion to duty.
Using the six dimensions of Tahle II, lie can easily sec how the chosen ones
can remain chosen witllOUt any transeendellf,ll god. Thus, onlv human beings :lre
seen as clpable of self-reflection; men arc stronger/more lo/.',ictl than women;
certain nations are modern/carriers of civiliZ'ltion and the hisrorieal process more
than others; whites arc more intelligem/logical than non-whites; in u\(ldern 'equal
opportuniry' society the hesr arc ar the rop and hencc emitled ro power 'llld
privilege. And certain tellets of belief in modernizatioll, development, progress
are seen as apodietic; not [0 I,elieve in them refleers badlv on rhe Iwo-belie'-cr.
not on the belief.
All of these ideas have been ;Inc! still arc strong in Wesrcrn eliiture, altlIrJllgh
the faith in male, Western, whire innate superiority has now been hadly shaken
hy the struggles t\H liberation by women, non-Western peoples (sllell as rhe jap­
anese economic sllecess over the West), alld colored people imide Wesrern so­
cieries. The Ullited States, the most Chrisri'ln n'ltion on e,mh, has senetl as a
major hattlegrOlll1d, inside 'll1d outside, for these struggles. Reducillg US culrmal
yiolence becomes particularly important precisely hecallse thar l'Ollntry sets the
tone for others.
These three assumptions-all h'lsed on ascribed distinctions, gellder, race and
mltion already giYen at birth-arc hard to maintain in 'lll achiel ement-oriellfed
society. But if modern soeiely is a meritocracy, then to deny pOller and privilege
to those on the rop is to dcny merit itself. To deny a miniullllll of 'modern
orienration' is to open the tield to any belief, including denying power and priv­
ilege for the meritorious and a strict horder herween human Iile and <lIlIer forills
of life. In short, residu,Ji choscnness will stay lin for a while ,IS speciesis!l\, 'elass­
i,m' 'lI1d 'meritism', regardless of the status of (,od and Satan.
Thc ideology of nationalism, moted in rhe t1gure of Chosen People 'Ind JIIS­
tified rhrough religion or idcology, sllOlild he seen in conjunction with the ide­
ology of the st,lk st'ltism. Article l) ill the postwar J'l[)clIlesc Peace (;ollsritulion,
./8 Juhall (;alt/II/g
that short-!i\l:d effort to make some cultural pean;, stipulated tILl( "The right of
belligerence of the (Japan) state will not he reeoguized." Evidently japan had
forfeited rhat right-wheteas others, presumably the vicrors, exited from the war
\I ith the right intact, maybe elen enhanced,
Where did that right of belligetence corne from? There arc feudal origins, a
direct carry-ol'er from the prerogative or the '/1'X gmtia r!"i to hal'e an liltill/o mti(J
lip/I'. The state can then be seen as an org:lIlization needed by thc Prince to cxact
enough u'Ces (and, after 17lJ3, conscripts) to pay for incrcasingly expcnsive armies
and navics. The state Ivas created to m:1inrain the l1lilit;ll'y rather than vice I ersa,
as Krippendorff maintains. a But the state cm ,lisa be seen as one of the successors
to God, inheriting the right to destroy life (execution), if not the right to create
it. i\lany also sec the state as h,wing the right to control the creation of life,
exerring authority superior to that of the pregn:IIH WOI1l'ln,
Combine n'Hion,ilism with steep Self-Other gradicnt" and sutism Ilith the
right, even the duty [() exercise ultimate power, and we get the uglv ideology of
the nation-state, anothet catastrophic idea, I\.illing in war is now done in the name
of the 'nation', comprising all citizens with some shared ethnicitv, The new idea
of del1lorraey can be accommod'Hed Il'ith transition fllfl1lulas such as ['OX pop"li,
['O.\' dri, Execution is :llso done in the nal1le of 'the people of the st:ltc X'; but
like IV~U h~lS ro be ordered by the St'HC. i\luch of the pro-life sentiment against
abortion is prob:1bly rooted in a feeling that abortion on the decision of thc mother
erodes tbe power monopoly of the state over life. If anti-abortion sentiment were
really rooted in a sense of saeredncss of the fetllS (11011/0 II'S SIIO'l1 !tOll/illi!ill,')' then
rhe pro-lifc people would ,Jlso tend to be pacifists: they II'Olild he against the
death penalty, and bc outraged at rhe high mortality levcls of bbcks in the liSA
'lnd mhers 'Hound the world. Of cnurse, the primity for choiL'e rather than life is
another tvpc of cultural I'iolenee, based on a dcnial of fet~JI life 'lS hlln1Jn, making
the fetus an 'it'.!]
Combine the ideolog\' of the n'ltion-sLlte Il'ith a theologically hased Chosen
Peoplc clllnplo and the stage is set for disastcr. Israel (1'ahll'eh), Ir'lIl (Allah),
Japan (Anuter~lsu-ok'lll1i), South :\fric1 (a Dutch 'refmmed' God), rhe United
Slates (the julieo-Christian Y:1!l\\'eh-(;od) :Ire relatil'ely clear cascs: clpable of
anl'thing in a ctisis, Nni Germanv (thc Nazi Odin/Wotan-God) lIas in the same
cltegory, The Sovict Union under Gorll'lchel'-who sees himself as tbe Sllcccssor
w Lenin after 61 yC:HS of sUlgn~Hion-is pmhably still laboring under its calling
as ,1 Chosen People, chosen Ill' I listory (capital h) as the first nation-state to entcr
Socialism, And France has the samc superiority complex-on]y that any idea of
being ch"sen hy somebody I\'CHild indicHe that there is something allO\'e France,
an inwler:lhle idea, France chose herself, 1111 !,Cllplr r'111, 111I1 is Jidr IlIi-II/(III(', exem­
plificd hy the archetypal act lI'hen N~lpolcon W;IS to be crowned by the Pope in
! <)()·t I Ie took rhe crOlrn from his hands and crowned himself.
4.3 LANGUAGE
Cerr'lill bll,guagcs-thosc Il'ith a I ,,!tin hase such a., lulian. Spalli'ih, French (and
modcrn English). hut not thme II ilh a Germ:lIlie hase slIeh as GL'rman and Nor­
wcgian-makc II'0men inl'isihlc by '''ing the same ,,'ord for the m,tle gender as
for rhe elltilC human specil:s, The import~lI1t mOlTnlCllt for non-sexist IHiting is
<I i',ood eX:lInl'le or cieliher:ne clJitur:11 tr:lllsfnrm:nion all<lY from eultLlr~lj I'iolence.'"
The task n1llst han' looked impo."iblc I\hen ,ome cOllfagcolls I\omen got started,
<lnd \Tr it is ,drL'''''' lJe;lIing frllir.
CULTUIL\1. VIOLENCE ./1)
Then thete are more suhtle aspects of language where' he \'i"IcIlLT is less
clear, more implicit. J\ comparison of hasic fcatllres of) ndo-I':urope:llI LlIl,!.',uagcs
Il'ith Chinese and japanese brings out celtain sp'lce and time rigidifies impmed
by the Indo-European Ltnguages; a correspondillg rigidity in the logical structure
with strong emphasis on the possibility of arriving at lalid inkrences (hence the
Western pride in being so '!ogictl'); a tendency to distinguish lingllistically he­
tween essence '111L1 apparition, leaving room I'm thc immorrality "I' the essence,
and by implication for the Icgitimaey of destroying wh~,t is oilly the apparition,cS
1-loll'ever, this is deep eultllre, rhe deeper byers of that Ililltom stratum in the
violence triangle. The relatiolls to direct and structural violel1L'e Ileeon1e much
more tenuous,
4.4 ART
Let me make just one point, important for the prescm elllCigeun: flf a 1':urtJpean
Union as the successor to the European Community of ]')()7.'" Ilow docs I;:urope
understand itself? The star\, tied to the "Europa" of(;reek mytlwlog\ is not I'ery
helpful. The understanding of Europc as the negation of the Illill-EmoJlean en­
vironment carries us much further. And that cI1\ironmc11t at 'he rimc of the tran­
sition from the i\liddle Ages to the ~,Iodern Period II"IS the gigalltiL' Ottoman
Empire to the east and the south, reaching the walls of Vienna I I(,}),\), conquering
Syria and Egypt (1517), I'assalizing Tripolitania, Tunisi~l and :\Igcria afterwards.
leaving only the Snlunate of Fez alld l\ loro(co \I'ith the small Spanish Ilahshurg
enclaves, two of them still there. The onl\, non-Oriemal (meaning :\ral), i\luslim)
environment \I'as Hussia, poor, I'ast in ,space and time, Sleeping, hut gianrY
I~urope Lhus had to understand hcrself :IS the uegatiun of thc cnemy to the
south and the southeast. Thus developed the nH:taphor of 'orlcntal despotism',
still vcry prominent in the European mind, to comc ro grips Ilith ,he 'environ­
mem'. Typical of the 'oriental de.,pot' was callousness and arllitrarine.,s. Like the
Emopean Prince he killed: hut he mled hy his own whim, not hI" \;'w, SexlIally
he enjoyed an access (thc harem) his Emopcan mlkagues could 011 I\' appru'Cimate
by sneaking out at night to \'iolate peasant girls, So did i\ luslims nOI mnstrained
hy Chtistian monogamy. In !<'rance a school of painrillg emcrged in the llJth
eentmy representing oriental despOlism in a setting of sex and/m I'iolenee, Ilenri
Regnault's 1';vOI/io!l Witlioilt /'1'0<1,1,1 and I~ugelle lklacroix's nit' /!til/Ii O(SlIldllll'
Ilpal are good e.\an1pks, Hegel, L'opied hy i\larx, also sal\' oriclltal despolism ~rnd
oriental (or Asian) mode of prodllction as negative, hOlnogelleOlls, stagnallr.
It helnngs to this syndrome that the non-Arab part of thc sL'lnicirelc around
Europe, RIl.,sia, also had to he seell in terms of orienLd dcspoti.,nl. That 'des­
potism' could ilt the tsars as J description is perhaps Ie.,s oll;cl,tion:d'/e-hllt
'oriental?' The figure h;lS probahlV illtluellecd the 1~'llopcan illlagc of I{ussi<l and
the Soviet Union for centuries, alld still docs, as intcnded shlrs i Jil eithl:r.
4.5 EIVIPIH.ICAL SCIENCE
One eX<lmple of cultural I'iolenee 1l'(Jlild hc neoclassil"t! eCOIHlIlII,' d"ctrine, un­
derst'lnding itself 'lS rhe science of economic activiry. Strungl\' inlluL'nccd hy the
Adam Smith tr~ldition, neoclas,il'al economics nlm studies cmpiril';dly [he svstl:m
prescribed hy its own c!octrim''i, and finds its own "elf-flillillin,!.'; prophecies often
conlinned in empirical re,ditl', Olle part "I' neochssical d"gm:1 or 'cflmentional
SI) JO!tflll Ga//IIII£',
wisdom' is tradc theory based on 'c-Oll1p,ILHin: ad"'JLHages', originally poslillatcd
by David Ricimlo, dc, eloped furrher by \-lec-bcher :lIld Ohlin 'Iud by Jan Tin­
bergcn. This is the doctrinc that prescrihes that each couLHry should enter the
world market with those products for "'hich that eonntry has a comparative ad­
vantage in terms of production berors.
In priletice this means that countries well endowed with raw m;Jterials ,1nd
unskilled labor arc to extract ra'I'materials, Ilhilc those ,,'ell cndml'ed with capital
,lnd technology, skilled labor and scientists, are to process thcm ..\nd thns it was
that Porrngal gave up its textile indu'lry and bccame a mediocrc winc produccr,
'Ihereas EngLlLld gor the stimulus, the challenge needed to cInel"p her industrial
capacity still further. The coosequenees of this doctrine in the form of mday's
I'ertieal di"ision of labor in the world arc visible for most people to scc. Structural
violence everywhere:" among countries and within countries.
Thus, the doctrine of eOLllp:uatil'e advantages sen'cs as a ju,tifiotion for :1
rough division of the world in rerms of the degree of processing which countries
impart to their expon products. Sinec this is roughly propOrtiolL](e to the amouut
of challenge they receive in the productiou process, the principle of comparative
advantages sentences countries to staY where the production-E1cror profile has
landed them, for geographical and historie'll reasons. Of course, there is no law.
legal or empiric11, to the effect that countries cannot do somcthing to improve
their production profile-a basic point made by the .lapancie economist Kaname
ALlm'ltSu.'·j But to do so is not easy when there arc immediate gains to be made
by not changing the status quo, for those who own the raw materials/commodities.
And thllS it is that the 'law' of comparati"e advantagcs legitimizes a structurally
intoler'lble status quo. In short. this 'law' is a piece of cultural violence buried in
the very core of econolllics.
4.6 FORMAL SCIENCE
But surely this eanullt be said of mathenDties? This is not so ob"ious. If mathe­
matics is vie"'ed as '1 formal game with one basic rule. that a theorem r and its
neg'lti(lll-T CJnnot hoth he valid, then there may be violem l·onsequences. Even
when m~lthematical logic explores poly""leut logic. the tool used is bi"alcnt logic
with its strict line benleen valid ,md iUI',did; !l'i1illlll 11011 dmlll'. And it is easily
scen that it has to be that way, inference being the mortar of the mathematical
edil1ce, with IlIodlls !,o!lm.f and II/odll.\' fo!!ms being the key procedures. No infer­
encc C,ln be made with 'ImbigufHls truth values for the antecedents or the infer­
w
C'IH:C.
This meaus that m:ltheminies disciplines us into a particular modc of thought
hi~hl) comp,ltiblc with black-wbite thinkiug ;Jnd polarizarillLl in personal, social
'Illd "llIld sp:lces. The either-or character nf Lll:lthcmatical thought makes it an
C"\citing g,ulle: but as 'I model for a highly di'llectic human, social and "mid reality
It is far from adequate. And 17r7tljllrtfio is the lJ<lSic requil'en1eIH !'H culture, sym­
holil' Sp'llT, if it is to guide us in "isioning a less violent Jlotcntial reality.
4.7 COSMOLOGY
\\e rCllLrn to the prohlem of rile tr'lIlsition hom cultur:ll ,iolence to violent cul­
ture .. \s mClnioncd In ,eetion 1 ab",c. snch global judgements could be 'arri"cd
JI hy ilkllfih ill.!.; ,Ill c,rcosilT :IIHI iii, use nllmhcr of cultliral ,IS!l<CctS. in religious
CULTURAL VIOLENCE SI
and ideological thought, in language and an, in empirical and fornl;l\ ,cicnce; all
of theln serving to jnstily violcnce. r lowcver, thctc i" al,o anllLhcr 'Ippro'll'h: [()
explore the substriltulll of thc cultlJre for its 'dcep culturd,J', of II Ilich Lhcre may
be se'·er,lI.-\] \Vc would he looking at the roots of the loots, so [() sl)C,tk: the
cultural genetic code that generates cultural elcments and reproduccs itselr
th lOugh them. That this bccoll1es very specnlative is not so problematic; it is in
the nature of science to postulate lkeper layers, spelling I'ur implil'ations, testing
the hard core of the theory ,Hound the ragged edges.
The cosmology concept is designed to harhor that suhsrr'llum of deepet ;JS­
sUl1lptions about reality,12 defining whar is nOlmal and n<lmra!. Assumprions at
this te,·cl of depth in thc collcctivc subconscious :lre not CJsily Lillearthed, not ((J
mention uprooted. And yet, it is at this level that oL'cidcntal cIl!tllfe shows so
many violent fearures that the w'hole eultme starts Ilioking violc-nL There is cho­
senncss, there are strong centcr-periphcry gradicllts. Thclc is the mgency, the
II/Jllm!rpse !lo,d syndroll1e precluding the slow, patiellt hllilding aud cllactment of
structmal and direct peace. There is atomistic, dichotoln'llls thought with deduc­
tive chains counteri1cting the unity-of-means-ilnd-ends. There is 'IlTogallcc toward
/latllre eounter,letiug lhc uuity-of-life. There is a srronl-', tendcne\' lO indivillilillize
ilild rank human beings, brcaking up the unily-ot~man. l\lld thL're IS a transcen­
dental, absolute God wilh a'lesome successors. The ,l'IlOle eulrLIrC Ill),SeSses a
tremendous potential J{lf violence that l:an be expresscd at the IrlOre manifest
cultural level and then hc used to justify the unjustifiable. That there is also
peace in thc Occident, sometimes evcn enl:milting from thc Occident, is some­
thing of a miracle, possibly due to the softer strands.
The problem is rhat this type of thinking easily leads to i1 sensc of hopeless­
ness. Changing the cultural genetic code look" at least as difficult as changing the
biological genetic code. J\(oreover, even if il were possible, 'cultural engineering'
might be a form of violence as problematic as gellctic engiueering is proving.
Should it be left to 'chance'--nlCaning to those wilh p,m'er 'Iud privilege?" This
is a very difficult and important lield tllr future pealT research.
5. GANDHI AND CULTURAL VIOLENCE
- --
\Vhat did Gandhi himself 113"e to say abllUt these trid;v problems, open as he
was to exploring alterniltives to both direct and srrul"tural ,iolencc" Ilis :lIls"cr
was to reproduce, from his ecul11e11ism, two axioms thar in a SCllse sLIJI1marizc
Ganclhism: IIlIi(I'-o/-li{e and IIl1ifl'-O{II/({IIIS (INd Old. Thc first f,>llol"s from the see­
oml if it is assumcd that no life, and partil'ldarly 11lI hUJl1'ln life, C'lLl be used a, il
Illeans to an end. If the end is lilc!ihood, then the 111(':1ns has L<J he life-enhancing.
But how do we understand "unity"? A reil)Uuable intcrprerarion, Llsing the ideas
developed in the preceding sections, would Ile in terms of closene'is, :Igainst
separation. In Ollf mcntaluniverse all forms of life, parLicuLtriv hllmanlife, should
enjoy closeness and not be kept dpan by steep Self-Othcr gradicnts rh,1t dri"e
wedges iu social spacc. Any justification derived from the hard core of il cultILrl',
e.g. a calling as a Chosen I)eople, would be rejected whell it l"ontlicted with this
even higher, even 'harder' axiom.
\Ve can understand 1IIIitl'-O{lI/f(llI.l-illld-md, as hringiLlg oilier mcni,iI clements,
such as acts, and t'lcts hrought about hy 'lets, close tog,ethcr. Thcy should not be
kept separatc by long C311sal chains that drive wcdg,es in social limc. To initiare
long )ocial sequences leading to take-off or re"olllt;ou, iUI"t"Stin,e; in industry or
thc industrial proletariat, is Ill)[ g<Jod enough. The means IllllSt he gc)(,d in them­
52 Johall Gal/lIllg CULTlJnAL VIOLENCE 53
selves, not in tcrms of distant goals, way down the road-as witnessed by the In so doing, maybe peace research could even makc some contribution to
millions sacrificed on the altars of industrialism in the name of 'growth/capitalism' rounding a major scientific enterprise still conspicuously absent from thc pantheon
and 'revolution/socialism'. Justification derived from empirical confirmation, 'it of academic pursuits, the science or human culture, 'cultllrology'. TueLly thc field
works', is rejected when it conf1icts with this even higher, even 'harder' axiom. is divided between 'humanities' for 'higher' civilizations and cultural anthropology
Any Self-Orher gradient can be used to justify violence against those lower for 'Iuwer' ones; with philosophy, history of ideas and theology tilling in some
down on the scale of worthiness; any causal chain can be used to justify the use
pieces. Concepts like 'cultural violence' span all of that, just as 'structural vio­
of violent means to obtain non-violent ends. Gandhi would he as skeptical of lence' spans the whole spectrum of social sciences. Peace rcsearch has too much
l\./arxist ideas of revolution and hard work, of sacrificing a generatiun or twu for to learn, so much to take, to receivc. Perhaps we shall also in due time have some
presumed bliss the day after tomorrow, as he would of liberal/couservative idcas contributions to make: in the spirit of diversity, symbiosis ami equity.
of hard work and entrepreneurship, of sacrificing a social class or two fur the bliss
of the upper classes evcn today.
The conclusion drawn by Gandhi from these two axioms was respect for the
sacredness of all life (hence vegetarianism) and acceptance of the precept 'takc
care of the means and the ends will take care of themselves'. Thus the nnity-of­
life doctrine is very different from a doctrine of 'ecological balance', since it means
enhancing all life, not just human lifc; and all hnman life, not jnst the categories
chosen by some (to Gandhi, distortcd or misunderstood) religion or ideology. And
the unity-of-means-and-cnds would lead to a doctrine of synchrony, calling for
work on all issues simultaneously" rather than the diachrony of one big stop that
is assumed to trigger the forre lIlo/rio'. Archetype: the Buddhist wheel where el­
ements of thought, speech and action tend to be at the same level of priority, not
a Christian pyramid with more focus on some than othcrs (e.g. faith vs. deeds).J5

6. CONCLUSION
Violence can start at auy corner in the direct-structIHal-cultural violence triangle
and is easily transmitted to the other corners. 'With the violent structure institu­
tionalized and thc violcnt culture internalized, direct violence also tends to be­
come institutionalized, repetitive, ritualistic, like a vendctta. This triangular
syndrome of violence should then be contrasted in the mind witll a triangular
syndrome of peace in which cnltural peace cngenders structural peace, with sym­
biotic, equitable rclations among diverse partners, and direct pcace with acts of
cooperation, friendliness and love. I t could be a virtuous rather than vicious tri­
angle, also self-reinforcing. This virtuous triangle would be obtained by working I
on all three corners at the same time, not assuming that basic change in one will
automatically lead to changes in the other two.
But does this inclusion of culture not broaden the agenda for peace studies
i
considerably? Of course it does. Why should peace studies be narrower than, for
instance, health studies (mcdical science)? Is peace casier than health, less com­
plex? And how abollt biology, the study of life; physics, the study of matter;
chemistry, the stlldy of thc composition of matter; mathematics, the study of
abstract form--all of these are fairly broad. Why should peace studies be more
modest? Why draw borderlines at all in a field so terribly important in its conse­
quences, and also so attractive to the inCJuisitive mind? If culture is relevant to
violence and pcace, and surely it is, thcn only the dogmatic mind will exclude it
from explorations as penetrating and tenacions as the countless studics dcvoted
to the many aspects of direct and structural violence. The only thing that is new
is that thc field opens for ncw areas of competence, such as the humanities,
history of ideas, philosophy, thcology. In other words, an invitation to new dis­
ciplines to join thc quest for peace, and to establishcd researchcrs in the field to
retool-a little.