The Nonkilling Society - Illusion or Goal?

Last Updated (Monday, 14 September 2009 15:25) Written by Anis Hamadeh Sunday, 09 August 2009 13:45

On the surface, people agree on the necessity of reducing killing in the world, if possible down to a zero body-count. At the same time, new wars have started that are not sufficiently questioned in the mainstream public. This can be criticized as double standards of the society, but it can also be recognized as a loss of values that can be overcome. Do German soldiers really have to kill and be killed in Afghanistan? The majority of the population says no, but does not have the power or strength to induce change. Too deeply rooted is the belief that killing and the threat to kill constitute effective forms of politics. And do we know a peaceful world, at all, be it at home, in school, at work, in the society? Sometimes it seems as if we simply lack functioning examples of nonkilling societies which prove their possible existance. Or is it that we view reality through the glasses of our lethal tradition and thus overlook trends of nonkilling?

 

Trend toward Nonkilling

The development of the international community is basically nothing else than a tendency and trend toward nonkilling. It started with a new awareness of the world, with good maps and the internationalization of the time zones. The Universal Declaration of the Human Rights, the development of an international law, the League of Nations, the implementation of the Geneva Conventions, and the establishment of the United Nations and an international court are milestones, clearly indicating the will of the nations to overcome violence and especially killing. The basic idea of the international community is that, if we know each other and agree by contract, peace will be probable.  

This is one reality. Another is the one of manipulation and egotistic interpretation of the above-mentioned institutions of peace. Corruption. In these days there especially are cases of state terrorism and breaches of international law by the militarily powerful via "preemptive" violence. The law of the jungle thus does not seem to be overcome yet. Terrorism is one of the results.

New Conditions

The factor public is of central importance for the establishment of peace. Examples are investigative media, but also the prophets of the religions of the script, whistleblowers, political poets and mass demonstrations. The age of the internet changed our concept of the public. Next to the frontal public of schools, media and politicians, new forms have developed. Today, everybody can build his or her public and it is easy to network and to freely communicate information.

This phenomenon has firstly occurred about fifteen years ago and has its peak only now with the increasing internet competence of the population. It is the beginning of a new era, one in which the communication facilities are enormously improved, making it more and more difficult for people to suppress information. This has a positive effect on the trend of nonkilling, even though it cannot prevent mainstream misinformation, traditionally accompanying war and killing.  

A Matter of Values

Thus the realization of nonkilling societies does not lack the premises. We neither lack the people, nor the ideas, in order to find peaceful and just solutions for internal and external conflicts. We lack the values, we lack knowledge.  

A nonkilling society will ostracize such politicians, journalists and entrepreneurs who see killing as an option. It will not respect them and not take them seriously. At the moment, though, the contrary is the case, for example in Germany: whoever relativizes, justifies and supports the bloody deeds of befriended statest, has many more chances for their careers than someone who is generally against killing and its conditions. The career of acting chancelor Merkel shows this with great clarity.  

Every country has its peculiarities. Germany is the third biggest arms exporter in the world and ranks approximately seven in the worldwide armament departure. "Deutsche Waffen, deutsches Geld töten mit in aller Welt" (German weapons, German money support killing worldwide), this slogan did not appear without a reason. Besides, we are part of the Nato which, since the downfall of the USSR, has engaged in breaches of the law. Thus even the horror of the Nazi period did not lead to an ostracization of killing.

A paradigm shift is necessary to move those societal powers to the surface that treat the value of nonkilling adequately. This shift will not happen without pressure. Such pressure can happen through an event, for example if a big lie is disclosed. The pressure can also build up when another war is coming down. The Gaza case, however, shows that even 1400 dead - most of them civilians, many children - do not necessarily entail a condemnation of the perpetrators.

When we look at the list of the above-mentioned institutions of peace and nonkilling it is easy to believe that this trend will prevail in the long run, even if a paradigm shift is necessary to reestablish the meaning of the respective documents. This means that at one point schools will foster the values of nonkilling, just as media and politicians will.