Essential Information & explanations, latest texts & monographs on
Peace_movement.
Peace movement
The global peace movement refers to a sense of common purpose among organizations that seek to end wars and minimize inter-human violence, usually through pacifism, non-violent resistance, diplomacy, boycott and moral purchasing. The movement includes several international organizations, but more often describes a loose affiliation of activists and political interests that rally around a shared purpose.
The movement often tends to be a loose, reactive and event-driven collaboration between groups with motivations are as diverse as humanism, nationalism, environmentalism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, ideology, theology, and fear.
Table of contents showTocToggle("show","hide")
1 Overview
2 Other views of peace
2.1 Peace through strength
2.2 Human security
2.3 Peace through freedom
3 Current events
4 Detailed history by region
4.1 Japan
4.2 France
4.3 Germany
4.4 Russia
4.5 Israel
4.6 Canada
4.7 United Kingdom
4.8 The United States of America
5 Related topics
6 External links
Overview
Global protests against the US invasion of Iraq in early 2003 are an example of a more specific, short term and loosely-affiliated single-issue "movement" with little ideological coherence. Nonetheless, some of those who are involved in several such short term movements and build up trust relationships with others within them, do tend to eventually join more global or long-term movements.
By contrast, some elements of the global peace movement seek to guarantee health security by ending war and assuring what they see as basic human rights including the right of all people to have access to air, water, food, shelter and medical care. A large cadre of activists seek social justicein the form of equal protection under the law and equal opportunity under the law for groups that have previously been disenfranchised.
The movement is primarily characterized by a belief that humans should not war on each other or engage in violent ethnic conflict over language, race or resources or ethical conflict over religion or ideology. Long-term opponents of war preparations are primarily characterized by a belief that military power is not the equivalent of justice and that humans should not war on each other or engage in violent ethnic conflict over language, race or resources or ethical conflict over religion or ideology.
The movement tends to oppose the proliferation of dangerous technologies and weapons of mass destruction, in particular nuclear weapons and biological warfare. Some, like SIPRI, have voice special concern that artificial intelligence, molecular engineering, genetics and proteomics have even more vast destructive potential. Thus there is intersection between peace movement elements and Neo-Luddites or primitivism, but also with the more mainstream technology critics such as the Green parties, Greenpeace and the ecology movement they are part of.
It is one of several movements that led to the formation of Green Party political associations in many democratic countries near the end of the 20th century. The peace movement has a very strong influences in some countries' green parties, such as in Germany, perhaps reflecting that country's negative experiences with militarism in the 20th century.
Though the horror of war drives some to join anti-war groups, much of the momentum of social movements in industrialized nations of the 20th Century has been inspired by the desire for a placid, emotionally secure life that grew among those who enjoyed the benefits of a consumer economy. Much of the wealth that funded anti-war activities and related social justice causes came from heirs of industrial fortunes.
Other views of peace
As noted above, there are views of peace that require being ready for war. Other views advocate personal, economic and political liberty as a path to peace. Some see war as a neccessary interuption in a human endeavor for peace.
The term peace movement is itself a rhetorical construction, in part because of the loose nature of the collaborations involved, but also because no modern theory of ethics holds that war is in any way desirable, but is rather a "necessary evil" that prevents worse abuses, e.g. ongoing organized crime, endless torture or genocide of an entire people. What is usually called the peace movement are those who oppose such doctrines as peace through strength.
Peace through strength
Proponents of the design, acquisition and deployment of arms tend to believe, in the words of George Washington's 1790 State of the Union Address, that :"To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace."
Peace through strength is based on the idea that in the presence of violent enemies, the best and final deterrent against invasion is the existence of a feared military. They argue that fear is very frequently the only way to deter certain enemies, with whom no amount of negotiation or appeasement will prevent an invasion.
Jane Jacobs observed that shows of strength are often thought to be required to maintain control. There is the argument that state power and the monopoly on violence are simply essential.
Human security
In the human security perspective, nations prepare militarily only for the sake of interventions to make or keep peace, supervise elections or nation-building, disarm dictators, prevent genocide, or end ongoing terrorism.
Lester B. Pearson, founder of the UN Peacekeeping force, first advanced the human security agenda in Canada. Pearson was also an early and decisive advocate of the formation of the State of Israel in the early days of the UN.
This view was widely influential and even decisive prior to the Iraq crisis . The peace movement had only muted criticisms of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia or the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. While the war in Iraq drew massive protests, supporters of the invasion continued to state that the war was advancing a Human Security adgenda by removing Hussein, who was widely believed to have engaged in genocide and other related crimes.
It remains to be seen if it is in fact possible to employ a human security-based strategy, while retaining the support of nation-states and multilateral bodies. Under threats such as new weapons of mass destruction, and nuclear proliferation, policymakers may feel forced to take action more rapidly than diplomacy and peacemaking can offer. The United States president announced a strategy that called for proactive attacks agamst potentially hostile nations.
Peace through freedom
R. J. Rummel presents what he considers to be definitive evidence that in recent centuries government-sponsored murder has killed more people than warfare and that increasing liberty decreases conflict. For that reason, some peace advocates say to increase liberty and democracy would be serve the cause of peace.
This tends to be the view of most Republican and Democratic Party power figures in the U.S. In other words, the pursuit of freedom is likely to be seen among political leaders as justification for war.
Current events
Some believe that as of the Iraq crisis, peace movements could be seen as part of a global effort to cohere "public opinion as a superpower" to compete with U.S. unilateralism.
Peace movements are also generally thought to have benefitted from the rise of Internet communication and coordination, the so-called smart mob technology.
It has also been suggested that such efforts as Indymedia and the Wikipedia play a role in coordinating this public opinion, e.g. compiling lists of alleged effects of invading Iraq, providing neutral views of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, of Islamist activity, varying views of ethics and of politics, and providing a quick check on biased views of history.
Detailed history by region
These histories will begin with the countries that suffered during World War II, and which effectively began the postwar period in a submitted position, and wrote peace into their constitutions. They will then deal with the English-speaking world and the arguments more familiar to the English speaking reader, which intersect with current events most strongly, and are the current focus of the peace movement worldwide.
Peace movements in non-democracies are difficult to separate from propaganda efforts of specific regimes. Thus they are not covered in this article.
Japan
France
Germany
Such Green parties and related political associations were formed in many democratic countries near the end of the 20th century. The peace movement has a very strong influence in some countries' green parties, such as in Germany. These can sometimes exercise decisive influence over policy, e.g. as during 2002 when the German Greens influenced German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, via their control of the German Foreign Ministry under Joschka Fischer (a Green and the single most popular politician in German at the time) to limit his involvement in the War on Terrorism and eventually to united with French President Jacques Chirac whose veto at the UN Security Council was decisive in limiting support for the U.S. plan to invade Iraq.
Russia
(please more on Yabloko Party)
Israel
(please more on Meretz, Peace Now, Gush Shalom, Dor Shalom, Yesh Gvul, Women in Black)
Canada
(please more on Stop the War Coalition, the NDP)
United Kingdom
Post-WWII peace movement efforts in the United Kingdom were initially focused on the dissolution of the British Empire and the rejection of imperialism by the United States and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The anti-nuclear movement sought to "opt out" of the Cold War (see below under U.S.) and rejected such ideas as "Britain's Little Independent Nuclear Deterrent" in part on the grounds that it (BLIND) was in contradiction even with MAD (see below). It was usually associated with the UK Labour Party and in later years, with the British Greens as Labour moved "more to the centre" under Prime Minister Tony Blair.
By early 2003, the peace movement in the UK was powerful enough to cause several of Blair's cabinet to resign, and hundreds of Labour Party MPs to vote against their government. Blair's motion to support militarily the U.S. plan to invade Iraq carried only due to support from the UK Conservative Party. Global protests against war on Iraq had been particularly vocal in Britain. Polls suggested that without UN Security Council approval, the UK public was very much opposed to involvement.
The United States of America
Although there was substantial organized resistance to foreign wars in the U.S. since its beginnings, this was often simply an outgrowth of isolationism or religious pacifism, and not in general a coherent movement with single goals until after World War II, when these movements were dismissed by most in U.S. foreign policy circles as "impractical" and militarism ascended.
Resistance was muted during the 1950s when the United States saw itself in direct conflict with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the "Cold War", which involved an immense arms race especially in nuclear weapons. This muting was in part due to McCarthyism and the outright targeting and censoring of opponents to preparation and arming for war. The Mutual Assured Destruction thesis from game theory was the basis of a policy that cost literally billions of dollars and became the sole focus of U.S. foreign policy: anti-communism.
One may reasonably date the open explicit and public resistance to this process to the departing comments of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned that the United States was in some danger of being politically dominated by a military-industrial complex.
The peace movement in the 1960s in the United States sought to bring an end to the Vietnam War. Some factions within this movement advocated a unilateral withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam. One reason given for the withdrawal is that it would contribute to a lessening of tensions in the region and thus less human bloodshed. Another, contrasting reason was that the Vietnamese should work out their problems themselves, i.e., without interference from foreign powers.
Opposition to the Vietnam War tended to unite groups opposed to U.S. anti-communism, perceived imperialism and colonialism and (for those involved in left-wing politics) capitalism itself. Some factions within a rapidly growing anti-war movement advocated a unilateral withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam. One reason given for the withdrawal is that it would contribute to a lessening of tensions in the region and thus less human bloodshed. Another, contrasting reason was that the Vietnamese should work out their problems themselves, i.e., without interference from foreign powers.
Some critics of U.S. withdrawal predicted that it would not contribute to peace but rather vastly increased bloodshed. These critics advocated U.S. forces remain and get victory over the Communists, whom they saw as the aggressors in the conflict.
Advocates of U.S. withdrawal were generally known as "doves", and they called their opponents "hawks". The imagery was intended to present the withdrawal advocates as peace-seeking (good) and the withdrawal opponents as bad and predatory. The idea of a chicken hawk also emerged at this time, to describe those who had avoided dangerous military service before they entered politics, but then advocated aggressive stances once in office.
High-profile opposition to the Vietnam war turned to street protests in an effort to turn US political opinion against the war. The protests gained momentum from civil rights movement that had organized to oppose segregation laws, which had laid a foundation of theory and infrastructure on which the anti-war movement grew. Protests were fueled by a growing network of independently published newpapers, often called "underground," and the timely advent of large venue rock-'n-roll shows such as Woodstock that attracted young people to mass gatherings.
The slaying of four anti-war protesters at Kent State University cemented the resolve of many protesters. The late 1960s in the US became a time of youth rebellion, mass gatherings and riots, many of which ignited in response to the assasination of Dr. Martin Luther King, but which ignited in an atmosphere of open opposition to a war-time government.
Provacative actions by police and by protesters turned anti-war demonstrations in Chicago at the Democaratic presidential convention of 1968 into a riot. Anti-war protests subsided as US policy turned toward withdrawal of troops. Momentum from the protest organizations became a main force for the growth of an environmental movement in the United States. Veterans of the Vietnam War returned home to join the movement, including John Kerry, who thirty years later, as a United States Senator, campaigned to become President of the United States.
Other veterans returned from the war saying that nobody wants to be in a war where people are suffering and dying, but that they found peace in their own minds by knowing they served their country. Some cited the words of George Washington's 1790 State of the Union Address, who said, "To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace."
Related topics
External links
This article is adapted from from Wikipedia All Wikipedia article text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License
|