[ the main topic page ] [ the main page ]

Alexander V. Maslikhin - PhD, professor of
Dept. of Philosophy of Mari State University, Russia

Ideas of pacifism, peace and nonviolence in condition of globalization

Alexander V. Maslikhin

Term “globalization” has a wide distribution in the modern world. But a part of critics of globalization prefer to use other word – “mondialism” (French word “le monde” – “world”). This linguistic preference contains some reasons and one of them is the term “globalization” is used for a long time for designation of natural process of widening of human intercourse.
From the earliest times people, social groups, nations cooperated in the sphere of trade relations and on the state-by-state basis. As well as there was cultural exchange at that time. The level of availability contacts, quantity of connections increased in view of development of communication means. This process should understand as globalization. That is to say, the globalization is a process of widening of limits of natural contacts people and nations with the help of growth availability of means of communication.
The process, we can see today, doesn’t have practically anything common with the original globalization. It is artificial, and it’s one of the reasons why opponents preferred to use instead term “globalization” its French calque – “mondialism”.
It’s important to mark following distinction between the globalization and the mondialism. By no means the globalization doesn’t concern basis of social organization. A state always keeps control of international contacts’ development regardless of their degree. If a state exercises control of steams of people, monetary resources, we have to do with the international globalization. The modern globalization is represented as a supranational globalization, appealed to grade differences between nations and cultural and form on their basis universal civilization. In the period of the international globalization domination the Chinese conducted trade with the Germans, every stage really understood that trade was carried out just between the Germans and the Chinese, but in the case of supremacy supranational globalization (mondialism) it is driven a trade not between representatives of different nations, but between consumers, atomic units of unitized crowd.
That is to say, today the international globalization (integration) – a natural process beginning for many centuries, is substituted for the supranational globalization (mondialism), which synthesizes artificially people, nations and states, transforming them into a conglomerate.
The globalization (integration) throws back as a process and accompanies the humankind during the whole period of its evolution. From the earliest times to the present day evolution of all spheres of public life can be observed under global processes and connected closely with them. Even spirituality and rationality of a human have repercussions of globalization. For example, the evolution of philosophy as a since, as a base of following scientific researches and finding of truth, as a methodological framework of the scientific knowledge, as a basic knowledge about the world, doesn’t carry separately from the outside world. The evolution of the philosophic knowledge carries in the framework of objective lows of world order’s building and forecasts them every so often. And its sharp evidence is an existence of diversified conceptions, theories and ideas even in the framework of modern philosophic knowledge.
It is necessary to consider the evolution of social-philosophical ideas of pacifism, peace and nonviolence in the light of globalization process, which has transformed into mondialism in modern situation.
Modern pacifism of mondialistic direction was formed on the base of social-philosophical ideas, which gained ground in the XX-th century. There were several directions of development pacifism in that period. The first of them was formed thanks largely to activity of M. Gandhi, whose method of nonviolent resistance in struggle for independence of India changed stance on nonviolent struggle. Gandhi could present nonviolence as a dangerous weapon of victory.
The central point of Gandhi’s theory became the doctrine of ahimsa (nonviolence). Without revealing details it should say, that ahimsa connects with one of ancient unorthodox theories – Jainism, and, of cause, lies practically at the centre of main religious system of India – Hinduism. In Hinduism the doctrine of ahimsa determines the behavior of a single human, but in Gandhi’s system it becomes a method of mass political actions.
Gandhi could transfer the principles of ahimsa, this moral and ethical codex of human’s behavior, from ordinary level to higher level of political actions. In addition, the main attention was given to not mutual relations of people but to self-immolation for the sake of righteousness. Such handling of ahimsa was founded by Gandhi on the ground of ideas L.N. Tolstoy, “Bhagavadgita”, Jainism and was added with Hindu world outlook about necessity of suffering. Gandhi contradistinguished readiness to experience moral and physical violence to violence against other people.
According to Gandhi, the conception of nonviolent world appears in minding about cosmic (universal) order, where a human, a society and universe are organic whole. From this perspective the struggle for peace in universe should begin from self-culture of a man. In this case peace is not only an absence of hate or confrontation, but, first of all it is a world of constructive cooperation, based on love, respect and equality.
Another direction of development pacifism in the XX-th century became Christian pacifism, which was established on European Christian philosophy and theology. This direction was founded on ideas of Martin Luther King, a baptistic priest, whose life was dedicated to fight against segregation and economic inequality.
Exposure to works of great nationalists and philosophers of humankind, beginning with H.D. Thoreau, J.J. Rousseau, G.W.F. Hegel and ending with K.H. Marx, V.I. Lenin, Gandhi were upon King’s thinking and helped him to settle down to a course of positive social philosophy, where nonviolent resistance became a weapon against oppression and cruelty.
In the framework of this direction the main principles of nonviolent resistance were presented. These principles were through facings during the struggle American niggers for equality. Presented in doctor King’s book “Stride Toward Freedom” principles of nonviolent resistance continue to play a great role in struggle for freedom and righteousness.
The third direction of evolution pacifism ideas is so-called socialistic pacifism. The feature of this pacifism direction is due to the class struggle as a kind of struggle for peace. The basis of socialistic pacifism was established by such great scientists as Comte de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier, Robert Owen in XIX-th century. In spite of difference in views of property, class relations, state structure all of them upheld the views so-called economic determinism. All of them declared decisive role of mode of production, which influenced on all spheres of society life. In this regard war was estimated by them as a negative feature, “because war prevents to buy and make, interrupting all intermedia, closing all ways of an exchange”[1].
The socialistic pacifism represents an original variant of internationalism, a projecture of extremely class meaning of freedom. Because according to founding fathers of Marxism it undertakes measures not only against different nations and states, but also against different classes, we can say, that interethnic and international conflicts are engineered by representatives of exploitative class (by ruling class). These actions aim to take proletariat attention off revolution and change vector of disaffection from truth to artificial enemies. Differently, the dominating minority forms antagonisms among workers of the various states for the purpose of mutual destruction most active elements and decrease in the general level of discontent to please to own interests getting besides possibility to carry out a robbery time of the whole states[2]. From here also there is a conclusion about “imperialistic” character of wars in present period.
"The nuclear" pacifism connected with occurrence of the nuclear weapon became one more direction of the pacifism which has received registration in the XX-th century. This direction has set the task of the states and the people to stop distribution, and further and to forbid the nuclear weapon. It is necessary to notice that supporters of nuclear pacifism act sharply against not only nuclear, but also any other weapon threatening to destinies of humankind, including chemical, bacteriological and other more killing systems of arms (the laser weapon, climatic, etc.).
Besides allocated above currents it is necessary to mention racial pacifism. This direction was extended in first half of XX-th century in the framework of various racial theories. Among supporters of this direction it is possible to note the French anthroposociologist Vacher de Lapouge. According to his views war is accident as during military operations the best representatives of the people perish.
From the end of the XX-th century in the conditions of a celebration of the “modernized” globalization (mondialism) liberal pacifism or pacifism of liberal sense starts to play a special role in pacifism. Growth of popularity of this direction has been caused by liquidation of socialist camp that has caused numerous difficulties in distribution of socialist ideas, including socialist pacifism. Besides, it is necessary to notice and the fact that liberal pacifism in a greater degree, than any another will be co-ordinated with those global processes which today it is accepted to name artificial globalization (mondialism).
The collapse of the Soviet Union and the establishment of a unipolar system of international relations has led to the proclamation of the basic postulate of the law of the strongest policies (Margaret Thatcher), or “supreme arbiter of law, the guarantor of rights and freedoms, the right to maintain international order” (John Schlesinger). This is from one, so to speak, the official party.
The reverse side of liberal pacifism looks a bit different and it is connected with the fact that a significant part of the citizens of leading states increasingly feels themselves cosmopolitans, the so-called “world citizens”, what has already led to widespread descending patriots and reducing the willingness of citizens to fight for their country. For example, at the turn of centuries there were conducted the sociological studies by P. Estero, V. Rukavishnikov and L. Halemanu allowed to divide countries into three groups on the willingness to fight for their country: the first group with a high level of readiness to defend their country (more than 70%) were Norway, Romania, Denmark, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Bulgaria, Czech Republic and the USA. The average level of preparedness to defend their country with weapons in their hands (from 40 to 70%) showed the population of countries such as Iceland, Britain, Russia, Hungary, Slovakia, Portugal, Canada, Northern Ireland, France, Spain. The lowest level (less than 40%) was recorded in Germany, Belgium, Italy and Japan[3].
The drop of popularity and prestige of military service became another point of spreading of liberal pacifism. The tendency to reduce the authority of the military emerged in Europe since the 80-ies of XX century, that at this stage resulted in the disappearance of the military profession from dozens of the most prestigious professions in most European countries. The problem of evasion of young people from military service is not unique to Russia and former USSR countries, but to most countries in Europe. The most striking example of this case is Spain, where for 10 years (1987-1996), the number draft dodgers has grown more than 15 times. In France and Germany more than 50% of the population are opposed to universal conscription, even in the USA the number of volunteers, coming into the military, reduced[4].
The focus of liberal pacifism is on the prevention of all forms of violence except economic. The main task of liberal pacifism is to discredit any aggression, besides the economic. A special feature of liberal pacifism in modern conditions is that the negation of all forms of violence is not the same as the proclamation of peace and nonviolence the greatest value.
In the age of supranational globalization triumph (mondialism) there has been a sharp shift of opinion on the war and the armed forces by the political elite and the population of the leading nations of the world. The maintenance of a unipolar world, the so-called «Pax Americana» is impossible to implement in the absence of an international arbitrator, having the possibility to use armed forces to maintain the stability of the system. This situation is typical for a supranational globalization. On the other hand, the formation of apolitical masses of the population, deprived of their sense of patriotism and national identity is also a consequence of the mondialism.
There was a paradoxical situation. The ideologists of the concept of a unipolar world order, which became a reflection of mondialism, and modern liberal pacifism being in opposition to each other, have in fact, the same roots. The base of that combination serves “the depoliticization of conflict and conceding it as a kind of natural disaster” as it was said by a contemporary Slovenian philosopher, psychoanalyst and writer Slavoj Zizek.
The supporters of liberal pacifism do not only exclude the possibility of using military force, but also support completely this development of events, within the various “humanitarian” shares or shares of “coercion to peace”. The liberal ideologists insisting on conducting “humanitarian” military operations represent the militaries in the public eye almost as fighters for peace. On the contrary, the opponents of the liberal ideology denied humanistic traits, which gives the right to “civilized world” to decide how and where the escalation should be prevented. That generates in modern conditions habitual “humanitarian” bombing raids and military operations to “enforce peace” that have been tested in the last decade of the XX-th century at the peoples of Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thus, original ideas of pacifism, peace and nonviolence keep an urgency in modern conditions. Pacifists of the various countries draw attention of humankind to global problems of the present, first of all to a problem of a defence of peace from rocket-nuclear war. They fairly underline: if the governments and the people in due time do not realize all gravity of increase of rocket-nuclear threats and militarism it can turn out so that the humankind, a planet will disappear, – then there will be no problems, them there is nobody and there will be no need to solve. Information-communicative components of a public life in a condition to provide to peaceful forces of a planet necessary means for realization of the progressive ideas.
_________________________________________

[1] Áîðùåâñêèé Ë.Â. Îòíîøåíèå Ñåí-Ñèìîíà, Ôóðüå è Îóýíà ê ïðîáëåìàì âîéíû è ìèðà // Âåñòíèê Ëåíèíãðàäñêîãî óí-òà. Ýêîíîìèêà, ôèëîñîôèÿ, ïðàâî. 1974. Âûï. 1. ¹ 5. Ñ. 140-143.
[2] Ëåíèí Â.È. Ïîëíîå ñîáðàíèå ñî÷èíåíèé Òîì 30. URL: http://www.mysteriouscountry.ru/wiki/index.php - 11.04.2010.
[3] Ðóêàâèøíèêîâ Â., Õàëìàí Ë., Ýñòåð Ï. Ïîëèòè÷åñêèå êóëüòóðû è ñîöèàëüíûå èçìåíåíèÿ. Ì.: 1998. – 295 ñ.
[4] Ðóêàâèøíèêîâ Â., Õàëìàí Ë., Ýñòåð Ï. Ïîëèòè÷åñêèå êóëüòóðû è ñîöèàëüíûå èçìåíåíèÿ. Ì.: 1998. – 295 ñ.

[ the main topic page ] [ the main page ]