Towards a Social Psychology of Peace
| Published date | 01 September 1988 |
| Date | 01 September 1988 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002234338802500304 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Towards
a
Social
Psychology
of
Peace*
EVA
SENGHAAS-KNOBLOCH
&
BIRGIT
VOLMERG
Department
of
Psychology,
University
of
Bremen
Why
has
the
idea
of
a
common
humanity,
as
formulated
in
the
Russell-Einstein
appeal
of
1955
and
in
the
pronouncements
of
the
contemporary
peace
movements,
had
so
little
practical
impact?
This
article
outlines
some
structures
and
processes
in
the
social
life
of
states
and
deals
with
the
question
of
how
collective
learning
is
affected
by
them.
Emphasis
is
put
not
on
imperatives
and
rules
determining
actions
in
systemic
processes,
but
rather
on
the
way
in
which
individuals,
with
subjective
needs
and
wishes,
cope
with
these
imperatives
and
rules
when
acting
as
representatives
of the
state.
Pathological
traits
within
political
roles
in
the
realm
of
state
sovereignty
are
exemplified
in
Robert
Kennedy’s
book
on
the
Cuban
missile
crisis.
The
institutionalized
separation
of
the
subjective-human
and
objective-systemic
demands
has
also
been
analysed
in
the
everyday
life
of
citizens
The
dominating
patterns
of
action
in
the
roles
of
everyday
life
have
been
found,
in
an
empirical
investigation,
to
correspond
to
those
in
political
roles.
These
findings
support
the
thesis
that
suppressed
subjectivity
feeds
a
collective
unconscious
process
of
seeking
compensation
in
the
realm
of
national
armament
and
security
policy.
ISSN
0022-3433
Journal
of
Peace
Research,
vol.
25,
no.
3,
1988
1.
Introduction
In
1955
Bertrand
Russell,
Albert
Einstein,
and
other
Nobel
Prize
winners
directed
an
urgent
appeal
to
their
academic
colleagues
and
to heads
of
state
in
East
and
West
to
remind
mankind
of
its
common
humanity:
We
are
speaking
on
this
occasion,
not
as
members
of
this
or
that
nation,
contment,
or
creed,
but
as
human
beings,
members
of
the
species
Man,
whose
continued
existence
is
m
doubt.
The
world
is
full
of
conflicts;
and,
overshadowmg
all
minor
conflicts,
the
titanic
struggle
between
Communism
and
anti-
Commumsm
(Rotblat
77).
Consciousness
of
common
humanity
was
to
bridge
the
gap
between
the
political
systems.
This
appeal,
supported
by
other
initiatives
by
Bertrand
Russell,
inspired
the
Pugwash
movement,
but
its
originators
did
not
achieve
the
fundamental
change
they
sought
in
security
policies.
Indeed,
scientists
who
wanted
to
exchange
views
of
the
con-
sequences
of
a
new
world
war
found
them-
selves
unable
to
transcend
the
opposing
political
aims
which
divided
them.
The
new
peace
movement
is
deeply
con-
cerned
about
the
survival
of
mankind.
Instead
of
appealing
to
heads
of
government,
it
addresses
all
citizens
and
in
so
doing
*
A
shorter
German
version
of
this
article
appeared
m
Tatz
(1986),
pp.
217-237.
expresses
a
personal
disagreement
with
the
position
of
governments.
It
reveals
a
dissent
between
the
ruling
class
and
the
ruled,
but,
at
the
same
time,
it
reveals
the
impotence
of
the
ruled.
The
state
still
determines
inter-
national
relations;
who
would
rely
on
private
declarations
of
peace
in
an
international
crisis?
Much
as
we
would
like
to
promote
a
global
civil
society,
we
are
still
far
from
this
goal.
We
are
bound
to
state
collectives
which
form
an
international
system
with
its
own
laws
and
rules.
Global
society
is
still
characterized
by
inequality
in
living
standards
and
by
anta-
gonisms
between
states
which
hamper
the
process
of
economical
and
cultural
inte-
integration.
Although
we
see
an
increasing
number
of
international
organizations,
both
governmental
and
non-governmental,
there
is
no
superior
institution
with
the
power
to
stop
the
arms
race
and
prevent
wars.
Our
own
identity,
whether
we
like
it
or
not,
is
fundamentally
formed
by
being
part
of
a
national
collective.
We
cannot
simply
drop
out
of
the
history
of
this
collective,
whether
by
conscious
acts
of
peace
or
by
ignoring
history.
We
are
perceived
as
mem-
bers
of
a
national
collective
with
a
particular
history
that
presumably
indicates
a
possible
pattern
of
behaviour
in
the
future.
The
Presi-
dent
of
the
US
and
the
Chancellor
of
the
Federal
Republic
of
Germany,
we
may
To continue reading
Request your trial