Structural Violence

[Rambuchan]

If you two love birds have quite finished...

I read the link, and yes, that is a solid example of this "structural violence."

That was literally yesterday's news. I have yet to see anyone open a thread about it. I find that to be a great shame. But my visits have been fleeting over the last few days, so I might have missed one.

I too think this linked event is a precise case in point.

But the monopoly on force possessed by our world's governments is necessary, I think. Structural violence leads not only to such economic idiocy as what you linked to but also to a myriad of positive results, the most basic one being the simple survival of the species through law and order (others being public literacy, health care, etc.). I see no reason to limit structural violence to such things as poverty and classism.

Unfortunately, the holistic approach seems to be unfit when refering to "the human species" in this context, at least in my mind. Law and order in this country is specifically designed to preserve a certain section of the human species, not all of it. There are two obvious questions flowing from this > Whose law and whose order? There's another obvious question that then follows from this > Who benefits from that law and order, with the health care and education that it affords? It think the answers to these questions are much the same in your country as in the one I'm posting from. And yes, the questions can go on beyond the social ills you mention.

Not only will you leave it up to Zamecnik (notice how there's no 'h'), but I suppose this is hardly the thread to discuss such things anyway.

On the contrary, I think it sounds quite relevant. Plus I'm not that aware of this. And anyway, who wouldn't love to hear the details about Mr Sachs vandalising Russia?

 

[MamboJoel]

Hum, it was even worse before republics and democraties : an entire system devoted to defend the interest not of a ruling class but of a family and it's ruler, the king/despote etc...
Things are getting better, but it takes time, it has to take time, if you want to get ride of holism (which is the aim at the end of the day, I agree) just right now we won't talk about the meaning structural violence but simply do violence, everywhere.

 

[WillJ]

If you two love birds have quite finished...

Yes, this is getting too mushy. I hope that soon luceafarul calls me a neoliberal goon, so I can call him a filthy communist, and we'll all be back to normal!

That was literally yesterday's news. I have yet to see anyone open a thread about it. I find that to be a great shame. But my visits have been fleeting over the last few days, so I might have missed one.

Yeah, I saw it on Wikipedia news. (The world's finest news source. )

I too think this linked event is a precise case in point.
Unfortunately, the holistic approach seems to be unfit when refering to "the human species" in this context, at least in my mind. Law and order in this country is specifically designed to preserve a certain section of the human species, not all of it. There are two obvious questions flowing from this > Whose law and whose order? There's another obvious question that then follows from this > Who benefits from that law and order, with the health care and education that it affords? It think the answers to these questions are much the same in your country as in the one I'm posting from. And yes, the questions can go on beyond the social ills you mention.

You have a point, but what I was saying is that even if everyone were to benefit equally and we all sucked happily on our lolly-pops, structural violence would still need to be in place.

On the contrary, I think it sounds quite relevant. Plus I'm not that aware of this. And anyway, who wouldn't love to hear the details about Mr Sachs vandalising Russia?

If Zamecnik wishes to, I'm all up for some criticism of Sachs. I find it especially interesting since it's usually right-wingers who hate him, from what I've gathered.

 

[Rambuchan]

Hum, it was even worse before republics and democraties : an entire system devoted to defend the interest not of a ruling class but of a family and it's ruler, the king/despote etc...
Things are getting better, but it takes time, it has to take time, if you want to get ride of holism (which is the aim at the end of the day, I agree) just right now we won't talk about the meaning structural violence but simply do violence, everywhere.

It seems you wish to trace and compare your values to the past. I don't.

 

[Rambuchan]

Yes, this is getting too mushy. I hope that soon luceafarul calls me a neoliberal goon, so I can call him a filthy communist, and we'll all be back to normal!

Please, don't ever underestimate the potency of using the word "pinko" as well.

Yeah, I saw it on Wikipedia news. (The world's finest news source. )

I'll readily agree that it's a lot better than it used to be.

You have a point, but what I was saying is that even if everyone were to benefit equally and we all sucked happily on our lolly-pops, structural violence would still need to be in place.

To be honest, I think Luc has done a lot more thinking and research on this than I have. So have the people in the Transcend link in my sig. As was duly noted, the organisation is in fact founded by the man who coined the thread title. It is such a treasure trove of a site and I've got a whole load of readin'n'work to do on it myself.

If Zamecnik wishes to, I'm all up for some criticism of Sachs. I find it especially interesting since it's usually right-wingers who hate him, from what I've gathered.

Please, don't ever unvalue the sting in using the word "Nazi" either.

 

[MamboJoel]

It seems you wish to trace and compare your values to the past. I don't.

From the present. Human nature is a rigide body that is not yet ready to get rid of nations. I agree with the aim, progress has been made and more will come. You can theorize tomorow and describe your hopes or predictions though you can't change Human nature and it's readyness for a better system with a click.

 

[Rambuchan]

From the present. Human nature is a rigide body that is not yet ready to get rid of nations. I agree with the aim, progress has been made and more will come. You can theorize tomorow and describe your hopes or predictions though you can't change Human nature and it's readyness for a better system with a click.

In the context of the thread, I find this to be the very epitomy of pessimism. Sorry to say it. When will they ever be ready in your mind? In the words of the Coolness police, the first sentence is also dishonest, given your previous post.

You are also aware, I am sure, of the history of political and social systems in Europe through the middle of the 19th century. There's an historical example to note, demonstrating that "human nature" is very ready for 'a new and better system', when given half the chance. And even when not given the chance, we saw Lutheranism and Humanism blossom in Europe much, much earlier - under another form of structural violence.

 

[MamboJoel]

In the context of the thread, I find this to be the very epitomy of pessimism. Sorry to say it. When will they ever be ready in your mind?

We'll all ne aware of it when it happends. I think it takes time (how long for the firts emancipation successes you talked about in the XIXth ?) and it goes at it's own pace, a bit accelerated maybe by the means of communication we now have.

In the words of the Coolness police, the first sentence is also dishonest, given your previous post.

Though I share the point of the "Coolness police" I don't see how this sentence was dishonest. Maybe the issue here is about pragmatism vs idealism once again. A bit digressive, but : why do we need to chose a side ?

 

[Rambuchan]

We'll all ne aware of it when it happends. I think it takes time (how long for the firts emancipation successes you talked about in the XIXth ?) and it goes at it's own pace, a bit accelerated maybe by the means of communication we now have.

Notice the close relationship between the Printing Press and those movements. I think we've got ourselves a very similar new communications technology for such new ideas today.

Though I share the point of the "Coolness police" I don't see how this sentence was dishonest. Maybe the issue here is about pragmatism vs idealism once again. A bit digressive, but : why do we need to chose a side ?

We don't and that's not the issue I'm interested in, even if it is what you say.

WillJ: This is a note to self and you, to go dig out some articles from the Transcend site. I think your question about whether "structural violence" needs to exist necessarily is well answered in some of those. I have certainly read a few that makes me confident such a thing need not be a necessity. I just haven't had time to find them again for you. So many good ones there.