Question of Values - Johan Galtung's Peace Research 1555875076

Citation preview

Critical Perspectives on World Politics

◊ R. B. ]. Walker, Series Editor

A Question of Values

Johan Galtung' s Peace Research ----◊ --Peter Lawler

RIENNER l'lJBI 1)11 I RS BOUIOfR ION DON

Published in the United States of America in 1995 by Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. 1800 30th Street, Boulder, Colorado 8030 I and in the United Kingdom by Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. 3 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London WC2E 8LU © 1995 by Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Lawler, Peter, 1952A question of values: Johan Galtung's peace re�earch / Peter Lawler. (Critical perspectives on world politics) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-55587-507-6 (alk. paper) I. Peace-Research. 2. Galtung, Johan. I. Title. II. Series. JX1904.5.L39 1994_ 327. I '72'072-dc20 94-8624 ClP British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. Printed and bound in the United States of America The paper used in this publication meets the requirements (§ of the American National Standard for Pennanence of Paper for Printed Library Materiab Z39.48- l 984.

Contents

Preface

vii

Introduction The Sociological Origins of Galtung's Peace Research

15

2

Peace Research as Science

47

3

Structural Violence

67

4

The Critique of Global Structure

91

5

Constructivism

113

6

From Human Needs to Global Values

135

7

The True Worlds

163

8

Peace as 'irvana

191

9

Conclusion

223

Select Bihlioiraphy Imler. About the Book and Author

241 257 267

V

Preface

It i-, linl:, in the i:1'.'-t thirty :, ears or so that some scholars have chosen to arr!:, the Libel .. peace re-,earch·· to their work. Since then various peace re-,e.m:h in-,titution-, ha\ e -,prung up. a range of dedicated academic jour­ nal-- ha\ e emerged. and -,ome uni\'er-.ities have chosen to adopt peace re­ -,earl·h or peace -,tud1e-, a-., part of their curricula. Few of these develop­ ment-- ha\ e occurred \\ ithout '>Ome attendant controversy, and peace re-,earl·h continue'> to attract '>kepticism from various quarters even though 1t i" not a Llbel that could be applied to an une4uivocal set of core as­ -,umptiun-,. _.-\!though the heat ha-, of identity and existence once available to us. Furthermore, the rooh of pmt­ modern anxiety reach deep, feeding i nto a fundamental questioning of how we apprehend or experience the world and "our place, or placele'>sne""· i n it." Thinking about peace and world order cannot remain immune. David Harvey's suggestion that postmoderni sm is startling becau"e of " its total acceptance of ephemerality, fragmentation, discontinu ity and the chaoti c" might be exaggerated and i nsufficiently sensitive to variations within a genre, but it captures the mood nonetheless. 1 -+ This is marked by a refusal of the reference points supplied by modernist thought and prac­ tice, seeking "not to judge modernity by its own criteria but rather to con­ template and deconstruct it. " 1 5 The reading of "texts" (now a term of far wider purview than in traditional U'>age ) no longer req u ires reference to an authoritative "determi ning judgment" or the use of establi'>hed, '>anctioned categories in confirmation of existing hierarchies of knowledge or truth claims: rather it is an i ntervention ist act of interrogating, q uestion i ng, and play ing with meaning as a means of uncm'cri ng or creating ne,, i nterpre­ tations that arc themselves a" open to the same forms of scrutiny. I n the act of deconstruction what is not said-that which is excluded, denied, for­ gotten, or re pre '>sed-i'> e x posed, not a" an a'> y et unrevealed esse nce but a'> another possi hlc read i ng out of the i n f i n ite n u mber of readi ngs ava i l­ able. The sovere ign voice of the author i s displaced: mean i ng and i nter­ pretation lose their author-ity and security and acquire a fluidity and

INTRODUCTION

7

conte , t u a l i t y that can not he anc hored to fi rm foundations outs ide of the text itself. l f one d art's t o attrihute an essence to postmodnn ism at a l l , then i t l ies. parad o , ically. in i t s ant icsscn t i a l i s m . a refu sal o f the comfort of foun­ dation-.. and the a l l -encompa s s i n g . a l l -e x p l a i n i ng grand narrati ve-the to­ tal i 1 i ng center. As a um sequence. much of tht' authori ty of post-Enl ig:ht­ .. t' nment .. modern -.clwlarship i " d i s s i pated. But the assau l t on the modern i-.. not rt's.tricted l l) the i n telkl'lual plane: postmodernism offers a myriad of i conoda-. tic read i ng:" o f the concrete practices of modern ity and h i s torical i n t e rprt' t a t i o n -. o f tht' m . In t he sociological wri t i ng s of Foucau l t . for c x ­ am p k . \\ e are g i \ e n an intt'rpn:tation t h a t looks t o the e x c l u s ionary d i ­ m e n -.. i on of modern i ty as a process o f enforced uni versa l i zation i n which the determ i nation of t ru t h and right conduct ari ses not from the accumula­ t ion pf una ssai l ahle knO\\ ledge through the appl ication o f reason . but from the pen a -.. i \ e ex erc i se of p(rn er. I f power and know l edge are so i n ter­ ( \\ i n e d . then there appear" no po " s i b i l ity of an arc h imedean standpoi n t fwm \\ h i d1 t h e claims to rat ionality of u n i versa l i zi ng discourses of eman­ c i pa t i o n . he the: in the form of theories of i nternational re lations or Gal­ t u n g i an peace researc h . can be assessed. There appears to be l it t l e possi ­ b i l i t : for t h e grounding of u n i versal critical principles o r an ethics. Rather, \\ e are confronted w ith a series of l eg i t imat i ng '"myths," each contai n i n g a n indefensible (in the strict sense) normative kernel. Not surprisingly, there h ave been critical reactions to all of this. In part i 1.: u lar . the de spa i r . e \ en ni h i l i sm . and ant ihumanism that are o ften read i n to the , t ronger art i c u l a t i om of a postmodern sen-.;ibi l i t y ( freq uently at­ tributed to the legacy of '.\' i e tzsche ) presage the abandonment of anything apprn , i mat i ng an emanci patory pol it i c s . U ncertai nty and profound skept i ­ c i ,m appear to un derm ine a n y "eri ous effort to transcend t h e chaot ic pas­ tiche of d a i l y l i fe: at best we are left w i th '"play" and i nd i v i d uated amuse­ ment in the face of a world characterized by impenetrable logics of O \ erpopulation . -..tar\'at ion. ecological destruction. and omnicide. Yet , it is b:,, no mea n -.. the ca"e that al I of those who work w i t h i n a postmodern frame ha\ e .., i m p! :,, em braced de'->pair and fri vol ity. I t can be argued that de­ con..,truc t i on i .., an ethical act. even if the move hetween it and a pol i t i c s appear" t o h e tenuou ..,. R.menau J i ..,t i ng: u i shes between '"skept i c a l " a n d '"af­ . firmat i \ e . po..,tmode rn i .., h and ..,ee" the l atter a-; rema i n i ng: co mmi tted to v i -.. i onar) pol i t i cal projech premi ..,ed u pon the creation of '"a philo sophica l . on tolog ical i n tel lectual pract ice t h a t i '-> non-dog m a t i c . l e ntat i v e a n d 1 1 0 1 1 .. i deolog i c a l . 1 1' The Jo ..,-.. o t cert i t ude a1., to the pms i h i l ity o f uneq u i vocal progre .., .., and advancement doe " not requ i re the complete abandonment of di ver..,e -..trate g i e .., of re ._, i ..,tance. the m a k i n g of ethical choice". or the ut i l ­ i t y o f i .., .., ue- ..,pec i fi c pol i t i cal coal i t i o n .., and 1.,tra l l' g i e .., . Po-;tmodern ity. on t h i .., v i e w. g e nerate.., the ..,earch t o r nonfoun dat ional. contingent L't h i c " and a new. perhap'> more authe n t i c . pol i t i c -.. . Tint '-> . W h i te ..,ugge'->l" t h at

8

A QUESTION OF VALUES

postmoderni sm-as i l l u st rated by Foucau l t ' s geneal og i e s of the i n tersec­ tio n of power and knowledge, for example-may we l l " tu rn our humanist s e l f-congrat u l ations into s e l f-do u b t , " but i t al so i n duces a he i g h tened "sense of respon s i bi l ity to otherness . " 1 7 The theme of acknowledging the voice of the excluded other-of decentering vari ous manifestations of sov­ ereign orthodoxy, common to much postmodern w riting-presents i t s e l f as a contingent but workable po l i t ical and moral princ i p l e . At the very least. i t p l aces c u lture and i dentity at the heart o f soc ial and pol itical inqu i ry, no l onger taken as e i ther g iven or mere l y ephemeral. I f an answer to the ques­ t ion "how should we live" i s to be found at all , then it m u st first be con­ ceded that the question itself i s malleable and plausible respomes to it w i l l only come from the constant i n terplay o f voices and strategies, recourse to an unequivocal source of authoritati v e , transcendent knowledge being no l onger available. I n refe rence to i nternat ional rel a t i o n s theory. Wal ke r arg u e -, that to celebrate i de n t i t y d i fference "" i s to stress the pos s i bi l i t y o f new forms of pol it ical com m u n i t y and po l i t ical pract ice that are open to the variety of peopl e ' s experiences and hi stories, not c losed off by the claims of state or the c l aims of hegemonic uni versali s m . " I x Postmoderni s t reading-, of world pol it ic s d isrupt the t rad i t ional demarcat i on o f re al i s m and ideafom and other cognate dual isms. If its i ncursion is taken seri o u s l y, and I t h i n k that it m u s t be, then the authorit y o f estab l i shed conceptual taxonom i e s as benchmarks for assessing peace research starts t o weake n . The canon of international relations that confi ned modern ity w i t h i n states rather than be­ tween them is exposed as a modern i st caricature. Postmodern cri t i ques do not advocate the complete d i s m i ssal of orthodox scholarsh i p : rather they argue that i t should be m i ned for i t s insights i n to the g lobal dimensiom of the problemat i c of modern ity and not as an ""ah i storical apology for the vi­ olence of the present . " What i s res i sted i s the characteristic presumption of i nternat ional rel at ions orthodoxy that the fu ndamental d i v i s ion that matters is that between i n s ide and o u t s i de the state. The y seek. A s h l e y aYers , to d i s p l ace '"the state-as-absolute-bo u nd ary. " Such d i sp l acement i s not i n ­ tended to help d i scover where the boundary rea l l y i s . or h a s move d to. b u t to ask a d i fferent quest ion : " How b y w a y of w h a t prac t i c e s . by appeal to what c u l t ural resources and in the face of what re s i stances i s t h i s boundary imposed and ritual i sed?" l 'I I t become s i n rn m bent upon not o n l y real i s t skept ic s but a l s o vari o u s re form i s t s to refl ect u pon t h e i r const i t u t i ve assumptions. Someone coming to Galt ung's most recent work first m ight well con­ c l u de that it is i n s p i red very m uch by the recent post s t ruct u ra l i st t u r n . I t speaks o f cosmo logies, c u l t ure s . and c i v i l i 1ations and esche w s state cen­ trism-oftcn angri ly. I t i s highly crit ical of occi dent al i ntel l ectual practices and positivism in part icu l ar. yet it also u t i l i ze s much of the l anguage of so­ cial science. A marked featur e is a rejection of the wholesale adoption of

INTRODUC'TION

9

a n y of t h e metanarra t i v t' s o r WL's tnn modern i ty. but at the same t i me th ere can be detected a l l u s i on s t o thL' reasonableness o r thL' N or d i c m iddle way. It e m brace s rat h L' r t h an a t t t' m pt s t o d i s s o l ve contrad i c t i o ns w i t h i n i t se l f t h ro u g h rdL'rcnL·e t o B u d d h i s t m c t a p h ) s i c s o r a l l t h i n g s . To read s u c h edec t i L· i sm ( or pastidw ) as s p i r i t u a l l y a k i n t o postmodc rn i s m wou l d n o t be i m p l a u s i b l e . b u t i t \\ O u l d lw a t h i n i n t e rpre t a t i o n . A l t h o u g h the vari o u s phase ... of h i s OL' U \ r e arc \ c ry m u l'11 of t h e i r t i me a n d t h e m o s t recent i s no e\.cq1 t i o n t lw rL' arc a l so i m portant l i nkages a n d c o m monal i t ie s t h a t n e e d t o he h·p t i n m i n d . G a l t ung h i m se l f operates w i t h a h i stori cal account of t h e Jc, L' l op m e n t o f h i s model of peace researc h . frequ e n t l y om i tt i ng. moreL1 , e r. t h L' pl1 .., se .., s i , e case. E \'\.:n i n his most recent work, dec i s i v e as­ pet· t s of h i .., earl i e .., t model of peace research-wh i c h certai n l y cou l d not be de ... n i bed a .., L) Lih i dc of a mode rn i st frame of refe rence-re appear to con­ fo u n d t he reader. B u t if G a l t u n g ' s peace research is not obvi o u s l y post­ mode rn . po ... tmoJe rn i st s ne\' e r t h e l e s s might do we l l to l ook at it for rea­ sons both of critique and sympathy. G a l t u n g · , L·o n .., i stent re fu sa l of i nternat i o n a l re l at ions orthodoxy con­ L· ern i n g actor .... p roc e s s e s . and o u tcomes in world po l i t i c s fre q u e n t l y res­ on a l t' .., \\ i t h po..,t modern read i n g s . even if h e does not e m p l o y the same t e rm .., of d i .., L· o u r ... e or make refne nce to sem i na l t e x t s . I ndeed, in many re­ ..,pech h e h�i... been w e l l ahead of the contemporary game . O v e r t ime. h i s \\ ork h a .., come t o e x press con s i de rable d i sq u i e t w i th establ i s hed reform i s t L· o u n t e r p o i n h to real i -, t p e .., s i m i sm . part i c u l ar l y w i t h regard t o t h e i r u n i ­ , e r ... a l i z i ng c o n ..,t i t u t i \' e a -, -, u m p t i o m and t h e i r u n spoken c ul t u ra ll y spec i fi c pre_i u d i L· e .., _ One o f t h e , i rt u e -, of t h e postmodern i n te rregn u m i s t h at i t re­ Lj U i re .., t ho-,e \\ h o ... eek to tran s l ate prefe rred v a l u e s i nto prac t i ce to subject t h e i r a -, ...u m p t i o n , t o r i go ro u , and con t i n u o u s scru t i ny. They m u st ask o f them-., e l \ e-, \\ hether t h e prefe rred w o r l d order. t he g u i d i n g b l ueprin t , or the proc l a i m e d m e t h o do l o g i c al . i n te l l e c t u a l . or prac t i c a l "key" to t h e e x ten­ ... i o n ot moJern i t ::, and rea,on beyond the water ' s edge does not arbi t rari l y -,u pp l a n t one -,et o t -,o\ e re i gn a,wmptions for another t h i s trek t o t h e end of h 1 -,tor::, rat her than that. Th i -, i-, a theme that s u ffu,es Galtung \ more re­ cent \\ Or h . and on occa-,iom he emplo 1 -, it to c ri t i c i ze h i s own earlier efforts . I t a cmn nwn pra x e o l o g i c a l t h e m e i n postmodern w ri t i ng s c a n b e d i s ­ cerned. i t 1 , I t h i n l.. c u rnpo-,ed of t !Je,e feature s : a c ri t i 4 ue of t he epi s temo­ logical a, -,u m p t i o n -, and categor ical a,..,umptions ( conce rn i ng actors , s pace , and t i me J o l ort hodox i n t e rn a t i onal re la t i o n s ._,cholar.., h i p -an a ffi rmation, L·e l e bra t i on c \ en , of di//ercn, c a , a com t i t u t i v e pri n c i pl e of i nt ern a t i o nal pol i t i c -, \\ i t lw u t fa l l i ng had, into -,late-ce n t r i c red u c t i o n i , m ; a c ri t i q ue of the s t u l t i l: i n t2 con -,cq uenc e , o f a g l o hal i 1 i n g and lwmot2e n i zing capi tal i s m ( o r t h e u n i v cr ,al i , t pre ten .., i o 11 , o ffe red by a _._, i n g u l a r a l t e rn a t i v e ) ; a11d a foc u ._, on the c u l t u ral d i m e n , i o n ._, of world po l i t i c s . I r a pol i t ical p roject can be g l e aned from a l l of t h i -, , a l a m i n i m u m i t c o n -; i , t s i 11 a m u l t i facl' l cd re ­ s i stance to a m i x o f t radi t i o nal i n t e l l e c t u a l moves a11d concrete prac t i ce s

10

A QUESTION OF VALUES f

that are seen to have res u l ted in the of ering of a stark choice: i ncorpora­ t ion w i t h in or margi nal i zat ion outside of a sovere i g n model of global so­ c i al order. In the m ore affi rm ative variants can be fou nd an overtly con­ st ruc t i v e dimen s i on i n v o l v i n g t h e rcart i c u l at i o n of commu n i t y in novel forms at the local and global levels that have h i therto been di splaced to the margins by the sovereignty of the discourse of the sovereign state. 20 Again, these are concerns that have ani mated Gal t u n g 's writings. B u t i f connections w i t h postmodern writin gs could b e drawn a t a l L they would be with t hose of an affi rmat ive lean ing o n l y. Eq u a l l y, my read ing of h i s work does not chasti se h i m for t h i '.-> . For my p urposes t h e value o f contem­ porary critiq ues of mode rn i t y lies i n the re sources they provide to interro­ gate Galtung ·s peace re'.->earc h , sometimes to critic ize i t . but abo '.->imply to i l l u strate i t s evol ution and contem porariness. ( I find it rath e r paradox i cal that postmodern l i nes of c r i t i q ue are ra pidly coal e s c i ng into a . . perspec­ t ive'" on world pol i t i c s with all of the e x c l u s ionary i m pl ications its advo­ cates so d i s li k e ). Galtung bel ieves i n fo undat ional social val u e s . and i t i s preci se l y t h e success or fai l u re o f h i s art iculation o r defense o f them t hat prov ides the foc u s and the moti vation for m y parti c u l ar j ourney t h rough his copious writings. Indeed. it was the idea of a .. sc ience of peace" i n the service of real izing uni versal values that energ ized his earl ier writings. I n contrast to t h e t w o broad pieces o f interpretive scenery provided b y the discipl ine of i n ternat ional re lat ions and postmodern i s m . the idea of a sci­ ence of peace provides a third, m ore narrowly focu sed backdrop. PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

The antecedents of Galt ungian peace re search can be fo und i n , arious appe als for t h e estab l i s hment of a . . science"' of peac e . a notion pre m i sed upon a be l ief i n the redemp t i v e power of s c i e n t i fi c know l edge . In the U n ited States and United K i ngdom . respectivt'ly. Quincy Wright and Lev, is Rich ardson led the way w i t h their appl ication of quantitative techniques to the study of large- scale confl i c t . 2 1 Social psycholog i s t s . i n part i c u l ar Her­ bert Ke lman and Theo Le nt 1 . also began to ex plore the psychologicaL atti­ t udinal dimensions of violent conflict. A Quaker and m athematician , .. Richardson argued t hat "science ought t o b e subord i nate t o morals . Some­ what contrad ictorily. he also attempted to remove any norm ative b i a s from h i s work on the grounds that science it self demanded moral neutrality in the name of objectivi ty. 22 Wri ght was a noted e x pert on i nternat ional law who in his monumental worl-. A Stud,· o( n·u ,-, publ i shed i n 1 9..J.2 . pre sented the results of a fifteen-year interdisci pli nary research project. com menced at the U niversity of Chicago in 1 92(). He su r\'eyed the h istory and causes of wars from pri m i t i ve wa rfare through to the atomic age . the latter being considered in a re v i sed edition publishL'd in 1 9().5. Anthropological data and scal ing

INTRODUCTION

11

techniques were employL'd in till' hypothesi 1ation o r a dcfinitive relationship between aggression and level of civilization.23 The littl e-kno\\ n ,, ork of LL'IltL most clearly foreshadowed the foun­ dati onal model of a SL' l f-consciousl y l abeled 1wace research. In the pref­ ace tl) his pwphl'l i call y titled li11,·a rds a Scio1 < ·c· of' Peace. pub l ished in 1 9 55 . the eminent British scientist and fi rst Director-General or the United N ation-., Educational. S cientific . and Cu l tural Organi zation ( U N ESCO) . Julian Hu ,k: , rcflcL·ted upon the prom i se of sc ience and provided one of thL' clcarL'st e , positions of the sentiments that were to motivate subsequent -.,cientifiL· peaL·e researl'11. He referred to a growing search for a "new ide­ olog: ·· that ,, oul d apply scientific knowledge to the probl ems confronting the modern ,, orl d. These problems included the prevention of war. the de­ \ eil)pment of tran,national organi zation. and the conservation of global re­ "LHi fl'e-.,. Hu ,le: -.,a,, obj ecti \'e sc i entific knowl edge as reason incarnate and the path to human progre-,s. Sci ence was a unive rsal d iscourse with a core principle of f ree d i scus-.ion at a l l soc i a l l evels. whose promise had on!: come to be re, eal ed in the modern period. Replacing ear l i e r "mytho­ .. logical and theologi ca l in\'ention-. and empirical l y unsubstantiated phil o­ -.,ophical -.,peculation. Hu x l ey be l ieved humanity now possessed a "reason­ abl: accurate. comprehensive and -.ci ent i fi ca l ly-based picture of [ its ! .. de-.,tim . �-" Sc ience had e xtended its domai n from the natural worl d into the P": chological and -.ocial aspects of rea l i ty and in so doing flagged the further nten-.,ion of -.cientific rationalization into the realm of the socia l . Hi-., confidence i n the emancipatory potential of scientific knowl edge and ih abilit) to tran-.,cend the uncertainties of earl i e r specu lati ve and phi lo­ -.,ophical form-, of thought sharpl y reca l led the histori ca l depiction of the e , olution of knowledge that wa-. central to the arguments of the founde rs of po-., iti, i-,m. Although -.,uch view-., might now be dismissed as both quaint and dangcrou-., redolent of popul ar images of wi l d-ha i re d sc i entists claiming to ha, e in '>ight the '> O l uti ons to the ills of a grubby humanity­ the: ,, ere the imaginin g -, of pro foundly moral men to be judged against the backdrop ot cold wJr. rapid e-,calation-. in the technology of war. and the e , ident indulgence -., of international pol itical d iscourse at the time. Lent; hinhelt -.,aw po'> itivi-.,t -,cientific method a-. intrin-. i ca l l y sound hut -.,ubject to ahu'>e. Through a pro c e '> '> ot "democrat i rntion" and expan­ sion. he depicted -.,cientific re'>earch a\ capable of divorcing itse lf fro m dis­ torting pre judice -., and tran-,cenJ ing \Ocial and political harriers. What was e -.,peciall: needed wa.., '>c i entilic re-.,earch that wou l d he lp to re-.tore a bal ­ ance het\\ een the development o f phy..,ical power and the insu llicient de­ velopment of \\ hat he termed human ··character. " For Lent; , humanity had an unreali1ecl pot ential to live harm oniou-,Jy. and the adagL' that "war i-. made in the mind-., of m en" wa-, a guid inµ_ princi p l e or the new '>cience or peace. To thi-, end . he arµ_ued for exten..,ive resL'arch into hu rnan characll'r and attitude-.. to he carried out hy multidi'>cip l inary. multinational re -.earch

12

A QUESTION OF VALUES

teams, which i n contrast to the earnest amate urism o f the peace move ­ ments, would be thoro u g h l y professio nal and conducted w i t h i n an ade­ q uate i n s t i t u t i onal set t i n g . He e x pre ssed a parado x i c a l fa ith in s c i e n t i fi c proced ure a s the means for releasing a human potent i a l i ty to harmonize d i ­ verse purposes and achieve universal betterment. 25 Though Len t z and H u x l e y offered a devel oped i m age of a po -, s i ble science of peace, they were not read i l y e m u l ated by the i r contemporarie s . The enthusiasm for "soc i al science" was a l ready pervasive i n a number of discipl ines, including international re lations, but a commitment to empiri­ c i sm as method did not neces sari ly entail a commitment to po si t i v i s m in the fu l lest sense, and i t cert a i n l y did not s uppose a commitm ent to peace. After all, science was at the same time working h ard, very h ard and very successful ly, for the weapons industry and defense pl anner-,. and so-called soc i a l scient ists were often i n the busines-, of shoring up. not challenging. conventional political practices w i thin or outside of the state. Others shared the concerns of Lentz and others but cho-,e to explore le -,-, grand av­ enues in the e xpression of their disquiet. What d i d ensue was the rapid growth of "con fl i c t research." l arge l y i n the U n i ted State-,. a-, an intel lec­ tual orienta t i on that lead to the estab l i shment of the Jo urnal of' Conflict Research in 1 957 and the Center for Re search on Conflict Resolution at the U niversity of M i ch i gan i n 1 959. Both these i n s t i t u tional de\'t� lopme nts reflected some of the normative sentiments of Huxley and Lentz and cer­ t a i n l y were transd i s c i p l i nary i n structure. The fou nder-, o f t h e M i c h i gan center-Boulding, Ange l l , and Rapoport-came fro m di fferent acad e m i c discipl ines, a n d all shared an enthus iasm for the appl icat ion o f n e w -,ocial scienti fic techniques ( cul led from the fie lds of econom ic-,. soc i al P'-)Chol­ ogy, and sociology) to the study of large-scale social conflict. Their re­ search output fe l l into a limited nu mber of categori es: psychological stud­ ies of the origins, management, and reso l ut i on of confl i c t : game-theoretic analyses of the dynam ics of confl ict: stat i st ic a l analyses of arm-, race-, and the correl ates of war. The real innovation l ay in the growing institutionalization of multi­ disc i p l i nary research teams and the cautious connection of rigoro u -, -,cien­ tific re searc h with a normat ive di sposi t i on to seek out \\' ay s to reduce the incidence and e_xtent of war. A noticeable absence was reference to the word JJeace in many of these endeavors . espec i a l l y i n their l abeling:. Thus. confl i ct research achi eved a certain respect abil ity. and i t s boundaries soon blurred with s i m i l ar developments in a number of other discipl ines. in par­ ticu lar international relations. Nevert h e l e s -, . even confl i ct research had an oppos it ional pol i t i cal fl avor hecause i t s output was. from i t s inception. de­ signed to counter that of the wel l -establi shed in -,titutes of strategic studies and the pe s s i m ism and percei ved moral v ac u i t y of m a i n st ream rea l i st in­ ternational re la tion-,_ There i s a cert a i n double i rony to be detected i n the attempts of some scient i fi c a l l y m i n ded rese archers to eschew the u ncer­ tainties of ph ilosophy and pol i t ical theory yet at the same time to embrace ,

INTRODUCTION

13

however hesitantly. a 11L'L'd ! o pro v i d e an ethical l y driven counterpoint to the pol i t i L· a l and ph i l o sophical a s s u m p t i o n s that u nd e rpinned orthodox thinki n g ahout intL'rnational rl'i ations and the pro v i sion of national security in particular. The ori g i n , of a '-L' l f-con-.c i o u s l y d i s t i nc t i v e fie l d of peace re search that m l)re fu l l y re fl ected the po-.itiv ist vi sion of H u x ley and Lentz and was \\ i l l i ng to lkL'l are thL' fact opL'nly l ay acr o s s the Atlantic in Scandinavia. It \\ a,, nw rL' acni rat e l y. a tran sat lantic development i nvolv ing two journeys hy one man : One ,, a, from Norway to the Un ited States in order to work in the then premier ,oc ioll)gical comm unity: the other. a kw years later. was a re turn to the homeland hecause it pro v ided a location more conducive and -,y m pathetic to the real ization of a v i s ion of a new. in stitutional ized schol­ ar! :, cnterpri ,e. In ! 95 lJ . a comhinat ion of events produced the founding of \\ hat \\ ,h to hecome the I n te rn at i onal Peace Research I n s t i t ute of Oslo. 26 The J r i \ i n g force he h i nd i t s estab l i s h ment and that of the first Chair i n PeaL·e a n d Contl ic t Re ,earch at t h e U n i versity o f O s l o w a s a very young Johan Galtung. The ,ett i ng u p of the i nstitute was not an easy task. but it \\ a, , i g n i fi c an t in that the � onvegian government had agreed to provi de ,uh,tant i a l ,upport through the newly estab l i shed Counci l for Research for Contl i ct and Peace and the \1 ini stry for Educat i o n . I n spite of this. the new in,ti tute \\ a, to ac hin e gen u i ne pol i ti cal autonomy. U n l i ke their more cau­ t i ou, American counterpart '- . members of the fledg l i ng Scandinav i an peace re, carch com m u n i t y had dec i ded to adopt the t i t l e "peace research" from the ouhet rather than to -.helter beh i nd the pol i tically less controversial c at­ egor:, of con fl i ct re,earc h . Five years later. the S tockhol m I ntern ational Peace Re ,earch I n ,ti tute aho got under way. again with considerable gov­ ernment -., u pport . : - The Scandinav i an peace re-.earch community fi n a l l y c a m e of age \\ ith t h e founding in 1 964 of the Journal o( Peace Research. \\ hich for i h fir,t ten :, ear-, wa, edited by Galtung and in the first i ssue of which the birth of peace research was announced. NOTES 1. Galtung regards "commentary" as an easy task, since "at no point does one have to touch the problems of peace." "The Next Twenty-Five Years of Peace Re­ search,' p. 252. 2. On the "tradition" in international relations, see the comments by Walker in "The Prince and ' the Pauper. "' His discussion informs much of what follows. 3. Exemplary of this is Martin Wight's distinction between realism, rationalism, and revolutioni'>m. See Wight, International Theory . ..i. Walker, ' The Prince and ' the Pauper, p. 30. :'i. This is forcefully illustrated in Holmes, On War and Morality, ch. 2. o. See Bull, The Anarchical Society; and Wight, International Theory. 7. Nardin cited in Keal, "Can Foreign Policy Be Eth ical?" p. 4. X . See Bull, Justice in International Relations. 9. Falk. "On the Recent Further Decline in International Law," p. 272.

14

A QUESTION OF VALUES

1 0. Linklater, "What Is a Good International Citizen?" The phrase good in­ ternational citizen has been used by the c urrent foreign minister of Australia, Gareth Evans. For further discussion of Evans's usage, see Lawler, "The Good Cit­ izen Austral ia?" 1 1 . See Law ler. "Peace Research and International Relations: From D iver­ gence to Convergence." 1 2. For example, see the comments made by Camilleri, in spite of his evident empathy with peace research, in his "The Evolving Agenda of Peace R esearch." This is also a theme that runs throughout this discussion of Galtung 's work. 1 3. Harvey is citing the editorial of PRECIS 6, 1 987. See his The Condition of Postmodernity, p . 9. 14. Ibid., p. 44. 1 5 . Rosenau, Postmodernism and The Social Sciences, pp. 4-5 . 1 6. Ibid., p. 1 6 1 7 . White, "Poststructuralism and Political Reflection," p. 1 9 l . 1 8. Roy, Walker, and Ashley, "Dialogue: Towards a Critical Social Theory of International Politics," p. 88. It is insightful to contrast Walker's and Ashley's con­ tributions to t h i s di alogue w ith Rosenau '-; distinction between ,keptical and affir­ mative postmodern voices in mind. It i s hard to read Wal ker · s e n g agemenh v. ith modernist i n ternational re l ations theory and not detect a , i g n i ficant praxeological ­ political intent, as expressed in the observation that challenging the discursive practices of international relations orthodoxy i s at the same moment to open up possibilities for "rethinking and reconstructing contemporary political commu­ nity." Ashley's position is far more ambiguous, to me at least. 19. Ashley, "Living on Borderlines," p. 3 1 1 . 20. Exemplary of this is Camilleri and Falk, The End of Sovereignty? 2 1 . See Wright, A Study of War; Richardson, Arms and Insecurity; and Richardson, Statistics of Deadly Quarrels. Richardson began his research during World War I and completed the two monographs in 1 947 and 1 950, respectively. They were published i n 1 960 after concerted efforts by the luminaries of the nascent conflict and peace research community in the United States. For reviews of Richardson ' s and Wright's work, see Eckhardt, "Pioneers of Peace Research­ Lewis Fry R ichardson," and "Pioneers of Peace Research II-Quincy Wright." 22. Eckhardt, " Pioneers of Peace Rese arch: Lewis Fry R ichardson," pp. 27 1-272. 23. In the preface to the 1 965 edition, Karl Deutsch describes Wright's A Study of War as one of the foundational texts of contemporary peace research. 24. Huxley, "Foreword," in Lentz, Towards a Science of Peace, pp. vi-vii. 25. Lentz's five "articles of faith" were faith in progressing toward the har­ monization of human purposes; in the utility of undiscovered facts; in the discov­ erability of facts through the use of human intelligence; in the creative evolution and redirection of scientific research; in the existence of and applicability of the motive of universal human betterment. See Lentz, Towards a Science of Peace, ch. 6. 26. Founded as part of Lhe Institute of Social Research at the U niversi ty of Oslo in 1 959, it became a fully autonomous institute in 1 966. 27. The Stockholm Institute is probably the best known of all peace research i m t itute,. Although e n t i rely fu nded from t1overnment re source s . it is autonomom. and only one o f the eight members of i t s governing board is ev er a Swede. It es­ chews a theoretical output in favor of data collection and analysis for public use. See Blac k aby. " Pean· Research and the S t od. 1101 111 l n \ l i t ute o f Peace Researc h . " For a useful survey o f the Scandin avian institutes a s well a s most others, see M ack. Peace Research in the J 980 's.

1 The Soc iological Origins of G altung's Peace Research

In our vital state of need this science has nothing to say to u s. -Husserl

The y oung Gal t u ng \\ a-, w ry m u ch a product of the A merican sociological comnr n n i t :, i n the l 95lh w it h i n which he completed h i s training and began to teach. The "behav i ora l re v o l t"' w as c u t t i ng a s w ath t hrough the social ,c i ence, . and debate as t o the proper c haract e r of sociology re v o l v e d aro und t h e c l a i m t h a t on l y po s i t i v ism c o u ld prov i de t h e b a s i s for acqu iring the rigor and a u thori t y attributed to the nat u ra l s c i ences . A lthough such a be l i ef \\ a, aho to permeate Galtung ' s foundat i onal arg uments for peace re­ ,earch. it \\ a-., not -., i m p l y a c ase of appe a l i ng for greater m ethodologi c al ri gor. A premo n i t i on of Gal t u ng ' s q uest w a s prov i ded i n J u l ian H u x le y 's com mendat i o n o f Theodor Lent z ' s s e m i n al e x p lorati o n o f a science of peac e . in \\ h i c h he c l a i med that earl i e r m y thologi c a l or theologi cal '"in­ .. \ ent i on, and ph i l o..,oph i cal -,pec u l at i on could now be t ranscended b y a "'>ci en tifically-based pictu re of h u m an destiny. " 1 That a :, o ung . rad i c a l po l i t i c a l act i v i st i n N orway sho u l d em brace a p o -., i t i v i ,t und l'.r-., tand i n g o f '->tori c i -, t , and ant i ph i l mophical core . � YL'.t . if we accept thi'-> red uc t i on o f po'-> i t i v i s m to e m p i ric i s m . a para­ dox prc '->e n h i he l f when we con'->idcr the earl y w r i t i ng s of J ohan G a l t u n g . T h e y cert a i n l y -.,ho w h i m to h e o f a pm i t i v i '-> t temper. h i s i n i t i a l arg u ments for peace re '->carch pre,cnting i t a-, a putat i ve .'->c i e n c e . But they rev e a l that G a l t ung wa'> aho c o m m i tted to the '->carch for peace and -, hoLmd u p w i t h t he h i stor ical c o n d i t i o n s of soc i al l i fe . Soc i ­ o l og:, \ d i , c i p l i n a r> au tonomy w a s deri ved from t h e demarcation o f a spe­ L' i fi L· c l a ..; s of fac h pert a i n i ng to soc i al orga n i za t i o n . i nc l ud i n g s uc h t h i n gs a , the rwrmat i \ e a n d symbol i c aspec t s of colkct i v e soc ial l i fe . 1 7 Yet . there \\ ne l i m i h t o t hl' n e \\ sc ience . .-\ ( t ho u g h i t endeav ored to "observe. de­ ,cribe. a n d c l a s s i fy " soc i al no rms and v a l ue s . i t co u ld not pass j udgment u p lHl t h e m . and the a u t horit y of moral ru les was grounded u l t i mately in the concept of "society " 18 The i dentification of the social foundation of nwra l i t > \\ a, de fended b y appea l t o w hat B e nton calls "generativ e causal­ it: "-that i , . that oh sen able phenomena ( in t h i s case, adherence to moral ru l e , 1 re fleL' t a n u nderl y i ng rea l i t y . Howev er. the prec i se nature of that re­ al i t : rem a i n e d u l t i mately i n e x p l i c able w i t h i n the rules o f sci e n t i fi c rati o ­ nality to which Durkheim claimed to adhere. 1 9 I t \\ as i n the ide n t i ficatio n of percept i ble and measurable phenomena that \\ o u ld e .\ p l i c at e e l u ..; i ve fea t u res o f organ i zed social e x istence , such as moral a u t h or i t y and -,oc i al sol i dari t y . t ha t the poli t i c al content of D urk­ h e i m · , ,oc i o l ogy l ay. It might reveal the bases of soc i al order and. t here­ fore . progre -.. -, \\ i t h s t ab i l i t y. If it w e re pos s i ble to iden t i fy e m p i r i c a l l y a ": -..1cm of moral ru l e -.. and norms w i t h i n a spec i fi c soci al format i o n and go on t o i dent i f: -.. i m i l ar systems w i t h i n soc i e t i e s of the same type . that s y s ­ tem of m o r a l r u l e -.. c o u l d be deemed as normal for t h at part i c ul ar type of vll' i e t : . The d icho tomy be tween fact and v a l u e . means and ends. could be hri dged . -.. i nce they both were e m p i r ical o u tcomes of part icular soc i e t ie s a n d rn u l d n o t b e ab-..trac t l y d i chotomi zed. Draw i n g upon an analog y w i t h t h rc -.. t ud: of t h e normal a n d pathological w i t h i n t h e b i o logical s c iences. D u rk h e i m arg ued t h at t h e ide n t i fi c a t i o n of n o rm a l i t y w i t h i n any soc i e t y co u l d h e fac i l i tated t h ro u g h t h e empirical i de n t i fi cation o f a pre v a lent "so­ c i a l !ac t . " I n cond i t i on -.. of '>Oc i al change. th erefore , it would be pos s i b le to rej e c t the concept io n o t normal i t y deemed appl icable to the ty pe o f soc ial format i on be i n g -.. u per-,eded o n the grou nd-, t h at i t was n o longer appl ica­ b l e t o the n a -,cent -..oc i a l order. M oral r u l e s may appear as general . but i f t h e condi t i o n -.. for t h e i r general it) n o longer e x i -,ted. they could n o longer be considered normal. D u rkh e i m · -, acco unt appear'> i n n ately con serva t i V L' i n dep i c t i n g t he e x ­ i -.. tence o f coerc i v e -,anc t i o m a n d rule-, a-, a n obser vational tru t h . h u t i t can al -, o be read a .., a n a t t e m p t t o c-,cap e the acc u -,at i o n o l c o n snv at i ve a h i -.. ­ t o ri c i -, m t h ro u g h i h recogn i t i on o f t h e h i -,tor ical co n t i ngency o f moral ity. He o ffe red a n e v o l u t i on ,u 1 ac c o u n t o f -, < >C i a l mo ral ity th at h i g h l i g h ted the

20

A QUESTION OF VALUES

immanent as well as the soc ially actual: "The future i s already written for him who knows how to read it. " 20 But even if Durkheim had undermined individualistic and psy cholog ical accounts of moral behavior by firmly placing the understanding of morality within a holistic model of society. he remained saddled with the problem of dealing with competing claims to moral superiority within any given society. Thus. Benton argues, "by tak­ ing the vocabulary (coercion. freedom. constraint. etc.) of political ideol­ ogy ( where these terms have a function in distinguishing. defending. or criticising different forms of political order ) and giving it an epistemolog­ ical task . " Durkheim exposed the unscient ific and conservative character of his project. As with Comte. prescientific, ideological notions were "con­ stitutive of the political project which Durkheim' s work theorizes. " 2 1 Only Saint-Simon could properly claim to b e a polit ical radical, but all three of positivism's founders constructed their vision of the '>Oc i ological enterprise with practical, reformist intentionearch rn e t h o d s .

22

A QUESTION OF VALUES

Thus, sociology entered what Lipset and Smelsor term the modem era, the principal features of which were characterized by the work of Paul Lazars­ feld and Talcott Parsons. Parsons 's work bridged classical E uropean sociology and its more pragmatic American counterpart with a fu nctionalist. sy stems perspective, the origins of which can be traced to Durkheim 's study of "organic soli­ darity. " In The Structure cf Social Action. Parsons dev eloped an analyti­ cal perspective critical of crude behaviorism and empiricism. which am­ plified Weber 's antinatu ralist method of Verste hen, by focu sing on the subjective and interpretative aspects of social action. Parsons argued for a uniquely sociological and voluntaristic account of social action that en­ compassed all of the elements of social action-in particular the effect on action of subjective value orientations-perceived to be absent, s up­ pressed, or inadequately treated in the writings of the E uropean social the­ orists _3o An immersion in European social thought was reflected in his stress on the importance of theory in the creation of scientific knowledge. In contrast to the small-scale empiricism of the Chicago school, he con­ structed complex, formal theoretical representations of the total social structure. For Parsons, the "'facts" of social life were '" statements about ex­ perience in terms of a specific conceptual scheme which provides a mean­ ingful ordering of that experience. " 3 1 Sociological theory was to be de­ ductive, conceptually elaborate, precise, and capable of demonstrating the logical connections between its conceptu al elements and the empirical realm that was its object domain. Such theory determined the form and content of the questions that sociology can ask. It was not a mechanical re­ production of reality but constituted a meaningful interpretation of social order. Rejecting the utility of "pure sense data" or "raw experience." Par­ sons privileged theory over the empirical realm . but the independence of theoretical sy stems from the empirical world did not obviate the need for them ultimately to "fit the facts": theory was not fictional in content. The objective was a general theory of social action constructed around univer­ sal categories that, though not amenable to observation. were nonetheless constitutive of reality. By Parsons ·s own account, Weber influenced his underst anding of the sociological enterprise and his belief in the need for the professionaliza­ tion of American sociology . Sociology had a limited purview : It was not a philosophy of history and therefore not a means by which the future could be discerned as the unfolding of a long-term historical pattern. In contrast to the ass umptions of classic al positivists . que stions about the origins and future of human society were placed outside of its domain. The p u rpose of s,ociology was to explain social action. its stru c t u re and meaning, by way of theorie s that could give order to the apparent chaos of experi­ ence. \ 2 American sociology had to learn from the Eu ropeans and develop a more "macroscopic" perspective in contrast to the traditional focus on

SOCIOLOGICAL ORlrnNS OF GALTUNG'S PEACE RESEARCH

23

spec i fi c soc i a l i ssues. Parsons was q u i t e ckar about the normat ive i m p l ica­ tions of his v i e wpoint . rejec t i n g: the Comtean overtones of earlier Ameri can ,;oc i ology and the i n th1encL' of " l i beral Protestan t i s m . " I n 1 9:'i9 he w rote: Max Weber was probably the first major theorist to assert the fundamen­ tal importance of careful ly distmgui�hing between problems of scientific generali�ation and those of evaluation and policy and to work out a clear methodological basi s for the distinction. It is only within the last genera­ tion that acceptance of this distinction has come to be generally diffused within the [American] social science professions and it is still quite in­ complete. The strong positivistic component in the philosophical matrix underlying the social sciences has been one of the major impediments to this acceptance. 33

C k a r l y . t h e dctaL· h me n t o f modern soc i o l o gy from i t s E n l ight enment ­ i n "p i red n l1 rm a t i , e ori g i n s w a s be i n g so ug h t . On this po i n t Parso n s and H abcrmas a r e i n agreem e n t : Soc i o l og y qua science cannot engage in n or­ mative argument. Par" o n " depil'ted A m e rican soc i o l og y as hav ing reac hed a "first l e v e l o f m a t u r i t :, a" a " c i e nt i fi c d i sc i p l i ne . " T h e proc e s s o f " d isentanglement" from · · t h e ear l i e r " i m p le i de n t i fi ca t i o n with speci fi c prac t i c a l goal s in t he -.,oci ety " had enabled -,oc i o l ogy to become ··an i ndependent , rel at i v e l y p u re d i -.,c i p l i ne \\ i t h a re-,earc h and theore t i c a l t radi tion of i t s o w n . " H owever. the proce -., -., \\ a " a, : e t i n complete: the danger of " i deological contami n a­ t i o n " and 1 11 , u ffi c i e n t comm i tm e n t to pure research and t ra i n i ng remained. Par-.,on-., detected t h e beg i n n i ng -, of a " soc iolog i c a l era" in which "the term -.,oc i o l ogy i , c o m i n g i ncrea-, i n g l y to be a central symbo l i n the pop u l ar i de­ o l o g i c a l prcoc c u p a t i o m of o u r t i m e . " B u t the r i s i n g stat u s o f soc i o l og y was n o t without i t s probl e m s : A n ideology i s precisely a meeting ground between a society 's value­ commitments and its empirical scientific cul ture . . . [where] powerful pressures come into conflict with standards of scientific objectivity. . . . [Soc iology] must serve as a primary guardian of the scientific tradition, counteracting the many tendencies to introduce biases and distortions . . . . The only honest professional answer to many questions is "we don 't know," even though many would-be sociologists loudly proclaim their pseudo-solutions of many problems. 34 :-\ ! t h o u g h accept i n g t h at " t h e ap p l i ed fu n c t i o n " o f \oc i o l og: y wa,; l e g i t i ­ mate . Par .... o n , t h o u g h t t h a t i t \l10 u l d h e m e d i ated t h ro u g h the pro lc ss i o n a l , c h o o l .... . \\ h i c h wou l d t ra i n prac t i t i oner..., and " fo rm publ i c a t i o n s a l s o ex press a further du­ a l 1 t :, 1 11 the rn 1 \ o l \\ ri t i n g-., on po l i t i c a l i s.'> Li t: '> tor the N orweg i a n pop u l ar pre , -., a n d ot acade m i c paper-., on ,oc i o logical method or empirical re search p u h l ! ', h e d 1 11 l e a rned j o u rn a h. The c l a -., -., i c a l po s i t i v i � t v i s i on of the sc i en ­ t i " t \\ a-., , u p p l e m e n te d \\ i t h a , h ad i n g o f the ro l e s o f t h e acade m i c and pamph l e te e r ! a " " a s, the ca,e w ith Comte. S a i n t - S i 1 1 1 0 1 1 . and their Amer i ­ ca n -.,ucL· e s, , ( >r'> J . read i l ! app are nt i n t h e d i v e r,L' -., u hjel'l rnattn a n d v a ried discursive tone of Galtung 's writings. 5 2

Sociology as Science The introduction to one of the undergrad u ate courses taught by G a l t u n g at Co l u m b i a U l l L'LJ U I VO Th i s recog n i t ion of t h e conti ngency o f soc ial scie ntific knowl edge w a s not resol v ed i n Galt ung ·s early d i sc uss ion of scientific procedure . but, with h i nd s i g h t . it can be seen as a fi rst indi­ cation of discomfort wi th the idea of a soc i al sci ence that was to become more evident in his later work w hen science was appl ied to the task of peace research . The s ubordinate role of theory w as confirmed by G a ltung 's descrip­ tion of i t s purpo OF UALTUNU'S PEACE RESEARCH

33

barriers to adequate social sciL ' nCL'. In the L · :t sL ' or the -.;urvey ll'chnique. for e ,ample . the efkct o f thL ' ob,nvn on thL ' data and its L ' valuation is evi­ dent. C. ,altung's rcsponsL' was blunt: No intnsubjectively acceptable solu­ tion to this p roblem e ,ists. s:I\ L' that of ··thin king the effect away." B ut, doubt i s also L":ht on the p robkm itsl'lf: ·· M uch has beL ' I1 said about the normatiYL' charal"ln of tlw ,ocial sciences and the i1 ·a 1/1·ciheit of the nat­ ural or phy siL·al ,ciL ' IKL's . . . but it seems that no generally accepted con­ clusion has bee n arri\ cd at concerning the pertinent question whether the difkrL ' n CL' is LH1C of k.ind or one of dcgree. "t,h A s members of a society, sci­ L' nthh arL' lik.el) to haYL' \ alUL' sy slt'm-.; that more or le ss reflect dominant or L)ffi1..· ial SL)L'ial \ alue, . a situation rein forced in part by the need to fi­ nanL'L' rc,L ' ard1 and publish fi ndings. Though some technical means of al­ k\ iating the prohlem arc suggcsll'd. Galtung's unease is apparent: " What right L1 L)C , the 'LKial scientist kt\ e to inve stigate his fellow human beings" and . . tL) \\ hat e\tent can he comfort himself with their willingness to co­ L)peratc. a-, long as the objects do not clearly see the implications of their ir1\ e-,tigation ocial sciences ··ha\ e de\ eloped far more rapidly in the comparatively problem- free coun­ trie-, in :\ orthern Europe. than for in stance in Italy. where parts of the cou ntr: art: deemed to he underdeveloped. " 1i s The issue is particularly acute it k. rn r n ledge move-, acro1., -, -,ocial boundaries. Later critical forays in thL' '>ociolog:-, of k. n o v., ledge are fon: -,hadowed in an early discus sion of the -,ocial irnplicatiom of :\orway·" path- hreakin)! development as sistance to India \\ herein Galtung ac k. n owkd )! e" that the '-.CKial policy developed out of We-,tern -,ociology may not he -,uited to a different cultural context. Al­ though the cro 1., '> -cultural -,uitahility of We-,t ern -,!K' ial -, y -, tem-, o l ,\ h i c h I the '> ) -, tern under s,cru t i n y I i -, a 1 1 1 e rn hn . . . thi-., m u st -.,omeho\.\. g i \'e an ideal ricture o l what I the "Y "tem I -,lwu ld. could or ought to be . " G;.ilt ung \\- anted to a\ o i d the acc us, at ion that funct ional anal ysis, was, a form of v a l ue ,i udgrnL·nt and rejected the a -, -, u n qHion that the dc " i red s, tan dard i -, -, i m p l y e i ther that ol prc"cr v i n g the stalu" quo o r c h a n l,'. i n g it. Rather. an ideal typc-S � �cu1 he con -,tr uclc d for crnn pari -,011 w i t h the

38

A QUESTION O F VALUES

actual system S. Func t iona l i ty is assessed in terms of the reduction i n d i s­ tance between S * and S . B u t how i s S * arr i ved at? The fo l l owing proce­ dure is suggested: The safe answer seems to be that this is up to the sociologist; and a very fruitful approach seems to be to pick out the values, goals, aims and ends of S [a social system] he deems to be pertinent and embody them in S * [an ideal type] . In some cases the best thing seems t o b e t o ask the mem­ bers of S . . . [or] . . . members of some systems including S . . . . By defining S* we define what we consider to be good for S. 85

The function a l attributes of a soc i a l structure are determ ined by reference to a set of values embedded in the col l ec t i v e consciou sness of that system or within a wider consciousness pertai n i ng to the c l ass of soc i a l systems. of which that s ystem i s a member. Val ues against w h i c h a soci a l s ystem can be asse ssed are de fended o n l y i n sofar as they m i g ht be shown to be held by a s ui table reference group. The proposed procedure was i nterventionist. Galtung went on to suggetanda rd , prior to the e x ami nation of the funct ional i t y of a , pec i fi c ',(JC i a l ': "1em: v a l ue-., ( or funct i on s ) c o u l d n o t b e derived from t h e ": -.,tcm i h e l t. In fo c u -., i n g upon d i s'>onance between soc i a l norms and fo rm, ol -.,Oc i olog ical d i s ­ course within w h i c h i t w a s constructed. Positivism c o u l d offer only a chimeric alternat i v e to phi lo'>ophy and mora l l y i n formed reason as t h e cognitive bases for a rational and good social life. Finally. two q u a l i fications to the ti dy picture I have tried to sketch must be noted. F i rst. Galtung's adoption of a pos i t i v i st model of peace re'..earch cannot be fu l l y e x p l a i ned by refere nce to deve lopments in anal y t ical d i s­ course: there was a sociol ogy to h i s soc iol ogy. Gi ven the controver'>y that has h i storically surrou nded the i ntel lectual explorat ion of peace . the adop­ tion of a scientific approach-wi t h all of the attendant connotat ion'> of rigor and absence of moralism-made pragmatic. po l i tical sense. especially dur­ ing the latter part of the first Cold War. As the process of estab l i shing: t h e PRIO-founded by Galtung:-was to re veal . t h e m a n t l e o f science prowd usefu l in the quest for public legitimation. not to mention fun d i n g . 'Y Second, the appeal of science and mathematics to Galtung lay also in t h e i r i nherent nove l t y and creat i v ity. The qu antitat i v e soc i o log i s t Paul Lazarsfe l d i mpressed Galtung: w i t h his i ngenu i t y and u nabated enth u s i a sm and taught h i m t hat mathemat i c s and stati s t i c s were not only creat ive but a l so fun . S im i l arly, Galtung adm i red Parsons because h i s theor e t i c a l e x ­ plorat ions displayed "an audacity u n heard of in a j ungle o f smal l -scale em­ pirical p l a t i t udes. "YO The i n t a n g i b l e q u a l i t i e s o f creat i v i t y and audac i t y m i g h t sit uncomfortably w i th t h e notion o f a rigorous soc i a l science. b u t t h e y provided more s i g n a l s t h a t Galtung ·s di scourse on peace research cou l d not be ful l y comprehended sole l y by reference to its se l f-pro c l aimed epi stemological and methodological prin c i p l e s . I n spite of his e n t h u siasm for American soc i o l ogy. in 1 960 Galtung dec l i ned the o ffe r of t e n u re at Columbia. H e v i vidly reca l l s his fare w e l l speech i n which he t hanked h i s col kagues a t Columbia for their inspiration. h u t frankly i n formed t h e m of his fel t need to engage i n "higher and better t h i n g s . ",) ! He had been told bv Ta lcott Parsons that his i nterest i n such t h i ngs as race re l at i ons and peac� was "really not very chic."92 Galtung went home to Norway. NOTES

I . Huxle y, "Foreword," in Lentz, Towards a Science of Peace, pp. vi-vii. 2. Giddens, Positivism and Sociology, p . 2 ; Giddens, "Positivism and Its Crit­ ics," in Bottomore and Nisbet, A History of Sociological Analysis, p . 237.

SOCIOLOGICAL ORIGINS OF GALTUN G'S PEACE RESEARCH

43

3. B ernstein, The Restructuring of Social and Political Theory, p. 5 . 4. Tudor, Bevond Empiricism, p . 4 . 5 . Habermas, Knowledge a11d Human Interests, p p . 3-5 , 6-9, 7 1 -90. Bil­ d1111 t:s{'r1 J::ns rl' l l'r, Ill "thL' l llrrnat1\ln or , h a p i n g and thl' l h urnan i � t ic l t>d ucation. .. nil t i , ,1 1 i nn and aL·ui l t urat i lHl of a , c l f-n111., c iou, ,uhJ L'L'l . a prnL'L'\� that i� not elm­ sen i n advance by the self but in which the self actively participates. 6. Ibid., p. 7 1 . It 1s debatable whether the problem actually constitutes a paradox or simply a case of discursive incompatibility. 7. Giddens, "Positivism and Its Critics," p. 238. 8 Habermas, K11owledge and Human Interests, p. 74. 9. Ibid., pp. 76-77 . 10. Habermas attributes this vision of the utility of science to Bacon, ibid., p. 77; whereas Giddens traces it back to Condorcet. Giddens, "Positivism and Its C n t 1 L· , . .. p. 2 .N . 1 I . Comte, "Discours sur I ' Esprit Positif," cited in Habermas, Knowledge and Human Interests. pp. 76-77 , emphasis added. 1 2 . Habermas, Knowledge and Human Interests, p. 80. See also Giddens, "Positivism and Its Critics," p. 242. 1 3. To this end, he founded the Positivist Society: "The principle, Love; The basis. Order; The end, Progress." Comte, System of Positive Polity, pp. xxiv-xxv. 1 4. I am drawing here from Taylor, Henri Saint-Simon; and Taylor, The Po­ litical Ideas of the Utopian Socialists. 1 5 . Benton, The Philosophzcal Foundations, p. 8 1 . See also Lukes, Emile Durkheim. pp. 2-4. 1 6. Durkheim cited in B enton, The Philosophical Foundations, p. 206, note 3 . See al s o Lukes Emile Durkheim, p. 3 96. 1 7. "It [soc iology] must above all have an object of its own . . . a reality which is not the domain of the other sciences." Durkheim cited in Lukes, Emile LJ1n {h( 1111 . p 9. St>e aho G i dden,. D11rU1ci111 . p . 6 3 : and G iddens. Capitalism and Modern Social Theory, p. 86. 1 8 . Lukes Emile Durkheim, pp. 9- 1 2 and 1 1 0- 1 1 9 . I 9. Benton, The Philosophzcal Foundations, p p . 84-89. Benton argues that the re al "1urcc> ()f D u ri-- h e i rn ·, conce ption of " : t h e d e fi n i t i on of the concept of peace and the app l i cat i on of st ruc­ t u ra l - fu n c t i on a l i -, t -.,oc i ol o g y t o t h e an a l y s i :-. o f the i n t e rn a t ional '> y s t e m . B o t h \\ i l l he rn i C \\ ed i n t h i '-> chapter. However. i f t h e latter const i t u ted t h e h u l k o f G a i l u n _{ '-> e a r l i e r peace re '->earc h . i t wa'-> t h e fo rmer t h a t most c l e ar! ;, re flected thL· deli c i e n c i e '-> of e m p i ri c i '>m and po '-> i t i v i '>m . and it is t o the definitional aspect that I first tum . AGAINST TRADITIONAL PEACE THINKING

The n o v e l t y of peace re ..,earch w a .., e-,ta h l i '->hed v i a a broad . i m prL·c i sc . a n d r a t h e r d i '->per..,ed c r i t i q u e o l "trad i t i o nal peace t h i n k i ng . " M a n y o r t h e

47

48

A QUESTION OF VALUES

criticisms were made a few y ears after the founding of peace research and were reconstructive in tone, as illustrated by the phrase "traditional peace thinking" itself. This referred not only to classical philosophical re flec­ tions on the quest for global peace-such as Kant \ " Perpetual Peace" and its twentieth-century successors-but also to the modern Anglo-American discipline of international relations almost in its entirety. Not much con­ sideration was given to how the authors of traditional peace thinking viewed their own work. Galtung took the view that by definition the dis­ cipline of international relations was primarily, if inadequately. concerned with realizing peace. The quest for peace was the motivation expressed by the founders of the modern discipline of international relations , and virtually all main­ stream writing on international relations since has claimed peace and war. in some sense or other, as its core concern. However, it is debatable whether the realization of global peace in the sense understood by its lib­ eral-internationalist founding figures, or the young Galtung for that matter. has remained the guiding purpose of international relations scholarship. es­ pecially given the hegemonic presence of realism since the 1 940s. At the heart of realism, in all of its variations, has lain the claim that as long as an anarchic sy stem of sovereign states exists-and few realists herald its imminent disappearance-war remains an ever present possibility. Given this, a preoccupation with realizing peace as a permanent feature of inter­ national relations appears not only naive but foolhardy . For example. Hans Morgenthau. a principal architect of postwar realist ascendancy. acknowl­ edged that in the abstract peace was an end state that international rela­ tions scholarship sought to realize, but he insisted upon the recognition of power as the prime motivation behind state behavior. 1 Others, not neces­ sarily of a fully realist persuasion, have emphasized the problem of inter­ national order as paramount, with peace as sometimes the necessary vic­ tim. To place such thought within a historical continuum of "peace thinking," tidily connecting Kantian and neo- Kantian �chemes for global peace with modern social scientific peace research, elides the crucial dis­ tinction between the transformative intent motivating so-called idealism and the profound skepticism that informs realism and its cognates. But Galtung's critique suffered from inadequate references to concrete exam­ ples of the discourses being rejected and a reliance upon impressionistic observations about various disciplines, not only international relations , within the humanities and social sciences. 2 The reader i s left with the im­ pression that he was either unaware of the nuances of debates about inter­ national relations and what some of his contemporaries were actually say­ ing or was simply not interested. A critical point was being made in broad strokes to establish the novelty of peace research. Lack of precision notwithstanding, the thrust of Galtung's complaint was unequivocally positivist. It also struck its target in many respects.

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

49

Tra d i t i o n a l t h i n k i n g about 1wacl' ,, as d e s cr i bed as u s u a l l y be i n g "vague , co n fu sed a n d c o n t ra d i ctory. " ; I t w a s deemed to he " rare l y orit! i n a l " and o ft e n e m p loyed t o glori fy Cl' rt a i n means per se rat her t han to ide n t i fy those nw a n s t h a t ,, o u l d kad t o 1wacdu l e n d s . The n e h u l o u s rn:ss of peace a s a l· o n c e p t e n a b k d i i... a t ta c h m e n t t o any ,et of soc i a l v a l ue s , pol i c i e s , or strall' g i e s t o :-. u p ptirt c l a i m s as t o t h e i r v a l i d i t y : kw w o u l d c laim to he op­ po-.;ed I t) pe�ll' l' . (,enna l l y '-Pl' a l-.. i n g . h i stor i c a l u :-.age o f t he t er m was a s an u 11--c ient i fi l· . , al u L' - l aden L·ategory. e m p l oyed for " r i t u a l i s t i c and e x pressive .. p u rpo-.;L' , a n d n o t w i t h t h e i n t e n t o f c l a r i fy i n g o r rea l i zi n g a c l ea r l y de­ fi ned L' n d -.;tate. G a l t u n g drew a compari son t hat w o u l d l ater come to haunt h i m : Peace had become coter m i n o u s w i t h n irv an a-a concept t h at b y , i r t u e M i i... d i ffthenL' '- S . i n t a ng i b i l i t y. and q u a s i - re l i g i o u s q ua l i t ie s c o u l d n o t b e a n a l y l l'd or re:-.earched . -+ N e v ert h e l e s s . i t h a d been p u t to d i ffere n t u tcmmed from the u n sc ie n t i fi c n at u re o t trad i t ional , , r i l i n g . I n .., p i t e of a sh ared e m p i r i c i s t o u t l oo k. . G a l ­ t u n g h e l d to a mure fo rmal conception o f s c i e nce than mo"t rea l i s t s . who u n dcr-.,tood h:,, e rn p i ri c i .., rn the i d i ograp h i c ( rather than nomothe t i c ) refer­ ence to hi story as a reposi tory of facts. Tradi t 1 o n ,t l t h i n k i n g ahout peace wa.., redeemable. in part . a" a sou rce of h y pothe"e" amenahlc to .., c i e n t i fic a s, s, L·..,..,me n t . For G a l t u n g . the soc i o ­ l ogical e n t e rpri ..,e w a .., concerned not o n l y w i t h acc o u n t i n g for t h e e m p i r i ­ c a l I :,, e x i s, t i n g and de ri v i n g pre d i c t i o n .., from it hut a l ..,o w i t h proha h i l i -.; t i ­ c a l l y e x p l or i n g " t h e to tal ranµe o f pm.., i h l c variat io n . " It n o t o n l y ,;lw u l d be concerned w i t h p re d i c t in g w h a t w i l l ha ppen c l' le r i -.;. pari h u .., hut a l -.;o .., h o u l d i nq u i re a .., to the cond i t i or h !or di flL·n:nt s,tate.., o f the re levant -.;oc ial

50

A QUESTION OF VALUES

system to obta i n . The e x tant system was o n l y one o f many poss i b i l i t ie s , and pred iction w a s seen to " I open ] the range of possi bi l i ties ./ h i m -, d f as a m L' m hn o r g ro u p s whnc a norm or rcc­ i p roc i t > i -.; , a l i d a n d coo pnat i o n a d o m i nant mudc o f i n t nac t i o n . . . . In the real world i n l L' g rat ion i, a rac t . Man s u rrounds h i msd f with a sphere o f a m i t y a n d m u t u a l a i d . B u t o u t s i de o f t h i s sphere e n m i t y a n d m u t u a l d e ­ :--t ruc t i o n m a > r uk . " 1 • At LIL'L' \' a l uc . t h i s statemL'nt appeared on ly t o i den­ t i t'y a d i -,t i 1K t i o n hct\\ L' e n a -,uc i a b k dome -, t i c rea l m and an asoc ial i nter­ nati lmal order. an oh-,en at i on compat i hk w i t h trad i t i onal rea l i s t references t u an i n ho -.; p i ta b k i n tnnat i o n a l state of nature. T h i s was c learly not the i n­ tent i o n . g i , en a prec e d i n g comment to till' e ffec t that there was l i tt l e e v i ­ LiL'ncc of a n ) t h ing l i ke the Hobhc -, i an im age e v e r hav ing e x i sted. The more p l a u s i b l e i n te n tio n ,, as that of h i g h l i g h t i n g a u n i versal h uman capac i ty to i Lk nt i fy ,, i t h l)ther-,, a capaci ty. m oreover. that w as amenable to e x te nsion . ThL' term , rL1rc ,, 1 t h i t -, L'01111otat ions of r i g i d i t y and fi x i ty was not used, b u t rathe r t h e nwre fle \ i b l e categor i e s of gn>ll/J or sph ere of' amity w e re adop k d . The ta:--k c o n fron t i n g a p u t at i \'e peace researcher. therefore. was how to extend community and achieve a consonance between innate human sociability and g lobal social structure. The ,ccond e m p i rical obsen at io n v.: as that however be l li cose rel at ions bct ,, een h u man com m u n i ties are . "'man rare l y uses all of h i s means of de­ , truct i o n agai n -, t all enem i e -. all of the t im e . " There were " l i m i tations and rules . . . e l ements of a game i n the fight." 1 8 By v irtue of an element of comnw n i n t ere,t . h um a n i ty tended to constra i n the u se of force. Aga i n . a c l c ar i m p l i c:1 t i u n ,, a -, that t h e capac i t y t o constra i n the resort to v io lence L· o u l d be n panded . a n o t i o n that prov i ded another p ra ct ic a l q u e s ti o n for peace re,earch to addre , -, . Gal t u n g went on t o propose that i f we i magined the e x trapo l at i on of the,e two demonstrable hu man p roc l i v i t i e s . then a v i ­ , i on o t the e l i m i na t i on o t v i o l e nce and the d i sso l u ti on o f the d i s t i nc t ions be t\\ ecn t h c Jom e -, t i c and i n terna t i o nal -.oc i a l rea l m -. would emerge . The e\ t ra po l a t i on of th e fi r,t w o u l d re a l i ze a cond i t i o n of pos i t i v e peac e . ,, h e rea, e x trapo l a t i o n of t h e -,econd w o u l d l e ad on l y to t h a t o f nega t i v e pt?ace. I n c o m h r n a t i on . h o \\ e , er, t h e y w o u l d produce a con di t i o n of gen­ eral and com p l ete peac e . The d i -,t i n c t i v ene-,.., o f peace re-.earch l a y in i t s c o m m i tment to re ,earc h i n g t h e con d i t i on , fo r both pm i t i ve and negat ive peace. In l i g h t o t Ci a l t u n g · , c l a i m that " g l o bal v a l u e -, · · e x i -.ted -.ui gener i s . it c an no,, he ,een ho\\ peace re ,earch wa-., pre-,ented in the i mage of a func­ t i o n a l i ,t -,oci ology. Th e t\\ o i dcnti li ahle ',(K i a l tenden c i e -. c o m b i ne to cre ­ a t e an i m age o t a g l o bal '- ) ,tern that. contra l l ohhe -. . d i -. pla yed patterned . ru l e - g o v e rn ed he ha\ i o r and a d y n a m i c potent i a l . Vi ol ence ari-.;e-. from t hL' re l a t i on, het \\ een -., u h" > " l l' m i c " g ro u p , . " hut h u m an i t y d i -., p Lt)' '- a capac i ty to cooperate and in t egrate. Ct q i n t h i -, l i g h t . the val ue of peace . l i ke tha t of health, was not seen to be in need of defense: "If this is a v alue," c l a i med G a l t u n g . " i t i-, among the mo-,t corhL' n , u a l onn . ·· 1 ' 1 The value or

54

A QUESTION OF VALUES

peace connoted a functioning and integrated global social system and thus took on an objective, hardly disputable quality. By extension, the role of the peace researcher was to be that of a technician-phy sician dedicated to the preservation and improvement of the health of the global body politic. In contrast to traditional realist skepticism as to the possibility of extend­ ing community beyond the water 's edge, peace research com menced by asking under what conditions might an extension best obtain. H aving introduced the concept of positive peace into the lexicon of peace research, Galtung devoted little effort to fleshing out or substantiat­ ing its content in the early phase of his writings. This was in spite of his bemoaning of the analytical poverty of traditional conceptualizations of peace. At various points positive peace was equated with such values as cooperation, freedom from fear or want, economic development. absence of exploitation, equality, justice, freedom of action, pluralism, and dy ­ namism . In short. it was synonymous with a specific understanding of the global good life, yet the only defense offered consisted of some brief allu­ sions to "primary " human needs or '" fundamental rights. " In the end, the tenability of the various values derived solely from the a priori plausibility of the umbrella concept of positive peace: they reflected the existence of '"positive relations" between groups. Although Galtung did acknowledge that his list of values m ay not have represented those that nations or indi­ viduals empirically pursue, a rather considerable concession. they were nevertheless exemplary of "(relatively ) consensual values in the world community of nations, other than the mere absence of violence."� 1 1 Clearly Galtung believed such values to be prima facie rational from a global sys­ temic viewpoint, but ultimately they would have to be shown to be held. If they were simply posited as abstracted implications of the existence of a global social sy stem, it would be diff i cult for peace research to make a case for anything more than system equilibrium or m aintenance without being accused of imputing values to an abstract systemic entity. As his own criticisms of structural functionalism showed. this was p recisely what Galtung needed to avoid. THE "ORIENTED" SCIENCE OF PEACE RESEARCH

Galtung slid past some of the cont radictions between his model of so­ cial scientific inquiry and his claims as to the merits of peace research by employing an idiosy ncra tic map of the social sciences. Indeed. throughout his work Galtung displays an audacious. sometimes simply cavali;r ap­ proach to c ategory problems: t r in doubt. invent it. � 1 Peace research was defined as "a focussed or oriented discipline with its point of gravity among the sciences of man." whereas international relations. sociology. economics. and history were "' pure" disciplines to which peace research

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

55

w as re lated. as med i c i n e is to the b i o l o g i c a l s c i e n c c s . 2 2 In a pure science t h e prob l e m t o be i n \' e s t i gated is tk fi ned by t h e resL'arc h p rocess i t sl' I L w he re a s thL' p ro b l e m a n oriented science c o n fron t s i s defi ned accord i n g to .. an . . a u tote l i c o r g u i d i n g Y a l U L' di spo s i t i o n . such as heal t h . w e l fa re . lcgal­ i t > , or peaL· e . From th L' s u preme value c a n be derived a n u m be r o f hct­ e rot e l i c , a l U L' :-- , u p o n whose fu l ri l l m L' ll t the rea l i 1:a t i o n o f the s u preme \ a l u e u l t i mate l y depl· n d :-- . :\n oriL'll lL' d science ask.s u nder what s i t u a t i o n s ( co n d i t i o n :-- . or , a l U L' :-- nf i ndependent Y aria b l c s ) d o c s a spec i fi c v a l ue ( of the depL'nLk nt , ariab l e ) obta i n '_! T h i s was not to be c o n fu sed w i t h the more fam i l i a r L·a t egory o f a pp l i e d science t h a t . argued G a l t u ng . w a s " researc h t h a t h a :-- fo u n d ,ome ap p l i ca t i o n i n fu rther i n g v a l u e s . w he t h e r i t w a s i n ­ .. lt: nded to o r n o t . T h e u n i q ueness o f o r i e n ted sc ience l ay i n t h e e x i stence t) f a n i n i t i a l m ot i , ating , a l u e d i spos i t i o n : b u t it req u i res t hat " t here m u s t b e consensus i n the society, o r a t least in major parts o f i t , a s to the fun­ dame n t a l , a l ue aro u n d ,, h i c h the orien ted d i sc i p l i n e i s organi sed. " 2 -' There ,, e re ambi g u i t i e :-- i n G a l t u ng · s model of oriented science. There ,, �h . h e arg ued . a corre l at i o n between the status of oriented d i s c i p l i nes and the l e , el of co11-,e 11:-- u :-- m er the re lev ant a utote l i c v a l u e , yet t here was a l so J r ,, O - \\ a y re l at i o n -., h i p between the l e v e l o f consen s u s and the a l l ocat i on of fu n d , to -.,pec i fi c for m :-- o f o r i e n ted rese arc h : t h e more c o n se n s u s , t h e more re -., e ;. i rc h . a n d t h e more researc h . t h e m ore co ns e n s u s . T h i s r a i s e s q u e -., t i o n -., a b o u t t h e u lt i mate , ubord i n a t i o n of the c o n se n s u a l v a l ue to the i n t c re -., i-- of t h e fun d i ng part i e .., , to which Galtung p rovided no answers, al­ though h e \\ J , c le;.irl> a\\ are of some of the grubb i e r aspe c t s of set t i n g u p re -.,earch pru g r;.im, a n d the v u l n e rabi l i t y of the a u tote l i c v a l u e of peace to a kind of manipulation that was supposedly to be avoided. Further ambiguity aros e from the c l aim that peace research was not on l y i n the b u -., i ne-.,-., of re:-,earc h i ng the real i zation of goa l s emerg i n g out of t h e g u i d i n g , a l u e of peace b u t was abo i n vol ved i n i de n t i fy i ng the goa l s t h e m -., e h e -., . A n o te o f i m pat i e n c e . n o t t o m e n t i o n i nc o n s i stency, w as re­ , e a l ed in Gal t u n g ·.., o b " erv a t i o n th at "debates on w h at i � real l y meant by peace -.,eem to po"tpone . . . p ro fc -, -, i on a l re '>carch e ffor ts . " A l t h o u g h t h e i den t i li c at l ( )n o t \' al u e \ w a" compat i b l e \\ i t h the y o u n g G a l t u n g ' s p o s i ­ t i \ hill . al t i m e -., he c h aracteri zed i t a " an e x t ra:-,c i c n t i fi c act i v i t y reflect i ng .. d i ffe r i n g . . i de o l og i c a l t a \ l e '- . The u n derstand i n g: of h ypothe :-, i s form ation o u t l i ned i n h i .., -.,oc i o l og i cal wri t i n g " i" reca l led here : Theoretical h y pothe­ "e" ( an d value" wo u ld have to he produced i n -;uch a form ) are s u hjcct i vc l y g e n e rated e i t her i n d u c t i v c l y from oh"ervat i o n -; o r v i a i n t u i t i on a n d em pa­ thy. T h u " peace re-,earch c o u l d . in fac t . commence wi thout a g u i d i ng defi ­ n i t i on o l peace . o t h e r than the hro ad d i " t i n ct ion d ra w n hctwccn pos i t i v e a n d n e g at i v e peac e . /\,; e v e rt h e l e " " · e v e n c o nj e c t u red v a l ue " wou l d u l t i ­ mate l y have t o h e pre"entcd i n a form amenable l o " c i c n t i fic i n vest igat i o n . W h e t h e r t h e y were produch of a n e m p i ri cal ly '-llh'-lan t iatahk \(Kial con "en­ '-U'- or of ext r,hc i e n t 1 li c lll U \ l ll,�'. '- . the rn o"l that ( ,al t u n g c o u l d tk nHlll \ lratc

56

A QUESTION OF VALUES

was that values were held. Even thi-. he did not do: no e v i dence of a con sen­ sus a s to the content or the au lotc l ic value of peace was prov ided. The only conclusion can be that Galtung thought it to be se lf-ev identl y reasonable. 2� The di s t i n c t i o n d ra w n between pure. appl ied, and orien t e d science may have been contri ved. idea l i ze d . trivial e v e n . but i t served to p u s h peace re searc h fu rther away from t h e re flex i ve conside ration o f t h e val u e o f peace t oward the techn ical i s-. u e s o r im p l ementat ion. 2 " I n t h i s re spect. Gal t u ng ·s model of peace research re flected the ph i l osophical pragmat i sm that so strongly i n fl u enced t h e e v o l u t i on o f American '>oci o l ogy i n t h e twentieth cent u ry. Pragmatism was s u pport ive of · · the empirici'>t att i t u de . " The pragmati s t . arg ued Jame s . " t u rn s h i s back re ..,ol u tely and once and for a l l upon a l o t of i n veterate habi t s dear to profe '> s ional p h i l o -.opher-. . " Against t he preocc upation of "'rat i onal i s t -. " w i th u l t im ate ori g i m . a priori reasons. and absolutes. the pragm atist "look [ ed ] toward s l a st t h i n g s . fru i t '> . con seq uences. fac t s . " 26 S u c h an o u t l ook pervaded G a l t u ng · s i n i t i a l arg u ­ ment for peace researc h . With t he a u tote l ic v a l u e o f peace dec l ared . s u b­ seq uent disc u ssion c oncerned i t s e l f l arge l y e i t h e r w i t h developing a -.oc i ­ ol ogical description o f t h e i n ternat i onal '>ystem o r w i t h t h e '>truct u re and deve lopment o f t he profession of peace researc h . The e x p l orat i o n of the ·'cond i t ions of peace" was given h igher pri ori ty than the re fi nement of t h e i dea o r peace i t se l f. the l atter task b e i n g describe d at o n e poi n t a -. degen­ erate i n the mathematical sense. 27 The Peace Researcher as Phys ician The emphasis on establ i shing the bona fides of professional peace re searc h was espec i a l l y e v i de n t in t h e analogy dra,\ n bet,\ een pe3ce re ­ searc h and medical sc ienc e . I have a l ready noted that in i m ag i n i ng peace researc h Galt u n g was i n fl ue nced by his fat her's pro fession a s a p h y :--. i c i an . I ndeed . Gal t u n g came t o see a n u mber o f para l l e l s bet \\ e e n t h e de\' e l o p ­ ment or peace research a n d medic i ne . F i r s t . med i c ine ,, a :--. y o u ng-a recent a l l i ance between the old art and naft of s urgc>ry and modern '"qu ant i t a t i \' e nat ural science." Peace research was e v e n younger, b u t it was alre ady i n t h e pro tL'd th at peace re search wa:--. in compet it ion with thL' d i ,c i p l i n c o r in t nnational re lations. at l east i n i t :--. l c ­ gal i st a n d h i storical forms, for t h e control of di plomatic practice. Furthermore , there h as been a historical tendency in medicine to "de­ phi l o,oph 1 1 c " and :--.h i l t l ro m "a rmchair spL'C u l at 1on" to t he d i :--. c ov cry of -- 3

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

57

web of invariann's that form the basi s for today \ control of somatic man. " So too with peace research. whne "we see thL' same devl'lopment in our fit>ld. away from till' traL· t. the empirically unguided swee ping speculations and on to the p ieL'L'llleal approach. " These devl'lopments were not cost-free bt' L'ause the :,. i ll \ oh ed the l oss of the lon gn. wider viewpoint. Not that Gal tung \\ antL'd to l)\ nstate the risk s .. A typical and important aspect of thi s i-.; tht' ,, illingne,, to call soml'thing " peace research" or "research in .. human -.;un i,al and ju..,t go aht'ad colkcting research e xperience without having a ,ati,faL'tor:,. lkfinition and a conceptual framework and a decluc­ ti , e theory. These formal aspects of science are indispensable in the long run. but the:,. ma:,. bt' a straitjacket if deve loped and applied prematurely. " It ,, as the p w kss ionalization of medicine that was of particular intcr­ t'St to Galtung. for it provided a developmental model for peace research. " Tht' ,tructural ,im i l arity with peace science i s so great that it would be ,trang:t' if thi -, i .., not also to be the future status of that science." Galtung enthu,ed. a l though ht' conceded that his vision was utopian . In universi­ tie,. mt'dicint' had the status of a faculty rather than of an institute, de­ partment. or program. It recruited from a variety of disciplines and com­ bint'd i n , i ghh drawn from various resources in the treatment of somatic ht'al th. \tedicint' \\ a-, an umbrel la di scip line interchanging with a number .. of " parti c i pating -,ci ence .._ , for whi ch it defines problems to be solved, l earn-; from the ir '>t'rt'nd i p i ty and to which it contributes its own original and app l i ed rt',earch. Pt>rhaps in the not too distant future, fifteen to t,, t'nt:,. :,. ear-, he -.,ugge-,tt'd. peace research faculties would be flourishing "as a matter of course, as a matter of human survival ." To be profe -, , i onal wa-., "to -,tand in a contractual relationship to the .. rt' -, t of ,oci et:,. . for although profe., sionalism confers a degree of auton­ omy and -.,elf-regulation. it carrie., an obligation to render to society "ser­ ,ice-, that I are ] deemed to be indi a techn i cian or '>ocial L'.n gineer. FurthnmorL', profc -, , i onali.,m dovetai led with the -,cientifi c obligati on to eradicate -.;ub­ j ectivi -,m from the re,earch proce'>'>. It wa-, not that peace re'> earcher-; WL're to be the e xecutor, or poli tical po licie'-. (kveloping the lllL'an.., to real i 1e

58

A QUESTION OF VALUES

already given ends. Peace research was not merely an "applied" science, for this would "exclude the important function of science as the provider of new perspectives. of new horizons and new goah. " Here classical pos­ itivist sentiments came to the fore in the requirement that p.:ace research was also to provide visions of what a peaceful world should look like. An important task was the generation of utopias, derived from well-founded empirical perspectives, in contrast to the tradition of "desperate and ad hoc efforts to tackle problems as they arise. " Ultimately. within the field of peace research the roles of pure or oriented researcher and practitioner would become integrated, as was perceived to h ave already occurred within the professions of engineering, agriculture. and medicine. ' 1 1 Peace science, it seems, could save us. Galtung showed little awarene ss of the ideological overtone" of pro­ fessionalism or it s implications for the enclosure of peace as a research do­ main. The validity of comparing the development of medical science and peace research depended fundamentally upon -.u"t aining the contentiou-. analogy between the values of health and peace. While not entertaining the illusion that the concepts of "international" and "'somatic" health ··had any ­ thing like the same cognitive or normative s tanding:· since con-.ensu" over the nature of the latter clearly exceeded that over the former. Galtung ar­ gued that "this kind of consensus is not created by decree. only by hard re­ .. search to know the nature of the international system better. Thi" formu­ lation appears to attribute to scientific research an overtly political function, since the identification of peace as an autotelic \'alue precede-. the consensus-generating research. The recognition of peace as a uni, ersal social value was constrained only by insufficient re-.earch into its preci',e content. and the analogy with health reflected the ,,iew that peace could come to be regarded eventually as an equally reasonable value. The as­ sumption clearly was that we could develop a knowledge of the dysfunc­ tional international system akin to our knowledge of the unhealthy human body, a classical structural-functionalist slide. Aside from the fact that what is meant by somatic health is itself contested ( b> tho-.e adhering to alternative non-Western conceptiom of health. for e\.ample ). the idea that scientific research could replace political and moral philo-.ophy as the source of international consensus on the preci-.e meaning of peace relied ultimately on the presumption of an i-.omorphic rdationship bet ween the international social system and biomechanical entitities. The dictates of scientific method required peace research to translate values into testable hy potheses. and the analogy with medicine was again empl oyed to make the point. Medical research has generated a highly dif­ ferentiated understanding of illness and its treatment : peace re-.earch needed to develop a com parable understanding of "nonpeace. " Peace pro­ po-.al s ( analogou-. to "treatments" in medicine ). many of which already ex­ isted. could be _judged according to their capacity to eli1ninate dimensions

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

59

of nonpeacc. ' 1 l n uti litarian fashion . the validity or a peace proposal was to he a,scssed in tnms or positiVL' consL' q uenccs rather than inherent \\ orth. But thi, , uggL'stL'd procedure on l y defrayed the arg ument : N on­ pe�lL'L' i, a L'atq:! or:-, a, polL'ntial l y disputable as peace. especial ly if de fined as the IlL'gation o f positi, L' peaL·e. Fol lowing Hippocrates, the overt nor­ mati, e dimen sion or peace research l ay primarily in the ethical de limita­ tions of its practice l n a n :-, c1 -.;e, (i altu ng\ peace research llecisive l y failed its own test. In order for the \ �tlues emhodied in the idea of positive peace to escape the indiL' lment of ,uhjeL' li\ism-thc principal inadequacy of traditional peace think.ing-the:-, ,, ould 11.n e to be scientifica l ly eval uated. They were not. I n the earl:-, phase of Galtun,{ s peace research he restriL·ted himself largely to the generation of n.tensive taxonomies of the dimensions of nonpeace and t:-, pc-. o f peace thin k.ing and the mathematic:1 1 exploration of the rela­ tiLm,hip, bet\\ een the r ,, o -.ch. ' � In one of the few discussions of the au­ .. tutelic , a l ue of ··peace. Galtung either grounded the values it contained ,, i th 1 11 a p ur ely de,criptive account of human needs and rights or simply asserted them: "Freedom from want" was premised u pon a set of "pri­ .. .. mar:-, h uman need,. \\ herea, "j ustice arose out of "basic, fundamental .. righr ... " : "eq ualit::, hroadly corresponded with "ju stice" and arose out of the e4ual value of either individuah or "nations"; and "pl uralism" reflected the , ie,, that " nation-, and the world should contain a large social and cul­ tura l d i , er,ity of form, coexi,ting side by side. " Galtung saw no logical in­ compatihilit::, in hi-, li-.t of global social values. only a "structural incom­ .. pat1hilit:-, ari,ing out of the fact that there existed "no empirically viable ,, orld that ,, ill maximi,e all ! the values ] at the same time. "3 3 The potential ten , ion hetween , alue-, generated from within a professional research com­ m u nit:-, and authentically public val ues was simply not considered. Galtung obli4ucly ackno,, !edged -,uch problems in suggesting at one point that the li'>t of values w a " better understood as a catalogue of ana­ l::, tica l p rohlem" than a" a reflection of that which humanity was histori­ ca l I ::, '> lfl\ ing to obtain. Thi'> conce'> ,ion reinforces the j udgment that Gal­

tung 's peace research was not intended to justify its normative a , -., u m ption" out to focu-, instead on the rea li1-ation of a given set of values. The p rohkm " ith pmiti v e peace aro'>e from its location within a scientific cpi-.,temolo!,'.) that crippled the di-.,rn , ..,ion of ih inescapable normativity. At the time, a t::, pical rnpome hy ( i altung to the problem was to anticipate the developme nt o f ' " a n al) tical too l '> " -;o that the val ue-; that u nderpinned peace re-.,earT h co uld one da 1 he expn: '>"ed in mathematica l term,. q Prob­ lem'> ,, ith the ;1n a l o_!.!: hct \\ L'L' n the au toteIic value-., of health and peacL' were di'>mi-.,-.,cd ;1-., a reflection of pe ace re,carch '" tender age. ( i a ltung fre­ q uent ! ::, pointed out that the intention wa'> not to gel the final word 0 1 1 basic value'> or to imp ute to the con CL'pt ol peace a definitive content. Nev­ erthelc-.'>, hecau '>e peace rc'>earch wa, c1'->t in a largely technical ro k. the

60

A QUESTION OF VALUES

j u st i fication of i t s normative orientation was effec t i v e l y presupposed and ·c rit i c i sm cast into the dustbin of ph i l osophy. conven ient l y situated outside the laboratory of peace. PEACE RESEARCH AS G LOBAL SOCIOLOGY

Further insight into the l i mit ations of scientized peace research can be g l eaned from a brief look at Galtu n g \ soc io logical wri t i n g s on i nterna­ ti onal re lations. w h i c h con s t i t uted the bulk of his early peace re searc h . Supposedl y analogous to the study of physio logy i n t h e n at u ral sciences. his work on the i n ternat ional system consi sted pri mari ly in the appl i cat ion of soc iological concepts. such as structure . rank. and stat u s . to the analy s i s of t h e i n ternational system . I ndeed. m u c h of Galt u n g ' s early peace re­ searc h is perhaps better comprehended as a contri bution to the social sci­ ent i fic study of i nternat i o n a l re l a t i o n s rather t h an to a d i " 1 i n c t i v e n e w fi eld. There w a s a marked absence of normat i v e or prescri p t i v e c o n te n t . and i t w a s not surprising t h a t i n 1 965 i nternational re l at i ons scholar John B urton cast doubt on some of the claims to ori g inal ity made by peace re­ searchers such as Galtung) 5 In Gal t u ngian terms. ear l y peace research ap­ peared actual l y to restrict itself to contributing to the "pure " science of i n ­ ternational relations o r the exploration o f barriers t o negative peace. The case for t he appl icabi l i t y of soc i o l ogy to the study of i nternat ional rel ations re sted l argel y upon the assumption of an i somorp h i c rel at i o n s h i p between soc i al systems. F o r G a l t u n g . soci ology could c o n t r i b u t e to the analysis of international relat ions in two respects : First. i t could con tribute to the study of the "concrete" i nteraction of state representat i v e s : second. i n its structural-func tional gu ise it could abstractly model the i n teraction of states "as such ." The i nterest i n re lations between state representat i ves re­ sulted in a number of useful papers on the sociology of d i p lomacy at the natio nal and i n ternational levels and t h e connec t i on bet\\'een soc i al pos i ­ t i on and foreign pol icy orientat i o n . 30 More abstract soc i o logical anal y s i s could b e found w i t h i n a nu mber o f papers on t h e anal y s i s o f strat ification in t he i nternational system . H e re the pri n c i p l e of i somorph i s m appeared part icularly usefu l because the numerica l l y sma l l i n t e rnational s y stem i n ­ v i ted compari son w i t h the ana l y s i s of sm a l l - scak soc ial sy -.tem s. S i n c e . strictly speaking. the co ncept of i somorphi sm re fers to a I : 1 mappi n g re ­ lationship between d i fferen t sets. G a l t u n g adnowledged that i t s applica­ tion was fraught with pro b l e m s . and hL' appeared t o treat i t l arge l y as a useful source of creative insights . 3 7 For Galtung, international rel ations was properly a "structural sci­ ence,'' yet it was charac terized by a foc u s on individual states at the ex­ pen-;e or an anal y s i s of the international s y stem sui generi s . What should distinguish international re lations from "po l i t ical science" was an anal y s i s

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

61

.. of the "inlL'ral'lion strul'lure . in the same vvay that the study or social sys­ tems distinguished soL·iology from individual psychology. The comparison lxt,,een politiL·al sL·iencL' and individual psychology was rathn odd be­ L'allst.' it ignort.' d tht·. t.' \tensi,e application of systems theory to the study of national political s) stt'. m'-. But thl' point st.' t.' ms to have been that the inter­ national s: stem should be comprl'hl' mkd on its own tnms rather than by induL·tion from national systems. The principle of isomorphism promotes thL' idea that ,talt.' s engage in rok-playing within an international system of intL'raL' lion. Thus it ,,as argued that the behavior of states was oriented by the sLKial ,tru l' l ur e in which the) "' er e embedded. and their interactions ,,ere to bt.' funL·tionally understood as rank -dependent. Like individual s, .. ,tate , po-..-..t·. ,sed "status sets that conditioned their behavior and outlook. and it ,, �h h: pothe -,iit.· d that aggressive state behavior arose out of a dise­ quilibrium ,,ithin the status sets of states. which resulted in an "unstabl e

self-image." Galtun{ , sociological analysis of stratification in the international '-: '- lem ,,a-, no, el and prescient. even if it indel ib l y bore Parsons 's hal l ­ m:irk. :-\, a contribution to peace research i t was less impressive. The con­ L· e p t o f pli-..iti,e peace figured little in Galtung 's gl obal sociology. but its uncertain L'Ontent and -,tatus l eft their mark nonetheless. If sociology or in­ ternational relations as ··pure" sciences were to provide the analysis, then the " oriented" -..cience of peace research was supposedly charged with de­ , e l oping pre ,cripti, e re -,ponses to the problems highlighted by the effects o f r:ink di-..e4uilibrium. But the more obviously analytical exercises rarel y e , tcnded b e ) ond abstract theoretical ( albeit often insightful ) sketches. W hen Gal tung " -, nploration-, in international relations did broach norma­ l ! , e theme -, . the) blended the concerns of the pure and oriented researcher. in hi-.. term-... The relationship between theory and prescription was not es­ tab ] i -,hl'd through the application of scientific method but instead was large I) a,,umed. Thi" ,, a" denwn'>trated in a discussion of the processes ol integration operating at the global l evel. Galtung a'>ses-,ed various types ot integra11, e pruce"" -territorial. organi1ational. and associational-in ternh o l their capacity to t ullill -,oci al values. expressed as systemic func­

tions.38 Typically, the values in q uestion-output, variety, security, and j ustice-were simply asserted. The exercise was described as purely ·· � truc tural" and not pre "uppo-.. i 11_1! "any thing about lllotivation or ideol­ .. ogy . e \ L'l1 though the val LIL''> (kployed happened to corre'>pond with Gal­ tung '-.. unde r-.,ta11d111 g ol po'> i ti \ L' peacL' . TIHHJ_l!h on one level hi-, " /\ Struc­ tural Tht.·or: o l l ntegr,ttion " L·,111 11L' u1Hll'l''>tood a'> an attempt to apply ah -.,tral' l -.,ociolog) t< > an analy "i" ol 111tc rnat io11al relatio11 -,, ih CL'ntral pur­ po'>C \\ a'> to e , plorc altl'rnat1vc l o rn 1 -, ol i11tegration othn than territorial. Proce" " e " ot or_l!ani1ational and a'> -,oc i;1t1011al intL'_l!ration wnc '-L'L'n to hL' proceeding at a grcatn pace than tnr1tor1al inl l'gration . pro d u ci11g '>oci­ ctie '> that ,,ere ·· o v ndn'L'lo1wd" rclatiVL· to e , i-,till,l! '>late houndariL''>. Thi'>

62

A QUESTION OF VALUES

produced a condition of "structural fatigue" in the in tern ation al order. and given the geopolitical problems associated with territorial integration . sub­ stitutes would have to be found in order to resolve the "total crisis" con­ fronting humanity. H owever, the discussion of integration was entirely ab­ stract, and no attempt was made to connect the discussion with the empirical world and verify the hypotheses. Nevertheless. the conclusions drawn were fully supportive of the normative foundations of peace re­ search as a practical activity. A similar slide from abstract theory to prescription is evident in "A Structural Theory of Aggression ." published in 1 964. The discussion com­ mences with an exploration of some hypotheses about the relation ship be­ tween rank disequilibrium and aggressive behavior by states: this is fol­ lowed by a short consideration of testing procedures. Then the reader is asked to "imagine that there was something to this reasoning" and go on to con sider the policy implications. A subsequen t paper on the same the me repeats the procedure but pay s greater attention to the mathem atics of in­ teraction between status sets and provides a tentative taxo nomy of rank di­ mensions for individuals and nations. ' 9 Both papers conclude in overtly prescriptive terms. The first asks the reader t o pretend that the hypotheses had been confirmed by "strategically placed tests" and t o accept "a value premise against aggression": the second invokes the principle of isomor­ phism in transposing theses about the effects of status on the interaction of individuals to the study of the interaction of states. acknowledging at the same time that this commits "the fallacy of treating the international :--ys­ .. tem as if it were a system of individual actors . The latter paper conclude:-­ by defending the idea of sociol ogy as "the science of the socially po:--si­ ble." committed not only to exploring the empirically existing but also to opening the range of possibilities available to "those who \\'i:--h to form a social order," such as the "social engineer." In spite of Galtung's frequent depiction of social science a s a rigor­ ous procedure entailing a move from hypothe:--is formation through t e:-- t ­ ing to confirm ation a n d finally prescription. none of his early re:--earch conformed to this model. The idea of science was central to the argument for peace research. but it remained an unrealiLed ideal providing a legiti­ mat i ng rhetoric but not a prac tice. The roles of scientist and ac tivist be­ came as one. CONCLUSION

The distinctive ne:--s or early peace researc h was built around the value idea or positive peace and the concept o f oriented science. yet the sub­ -.tan tiation of the normative premises of peace rese arc h was at best am­ biguous-esse ntial but also a potential distraction. In fact, t h e y oung

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

63

Galtung \\Tote -;urprisingly littk about positive peace even though its re­ . But. in the rn a 1111n of ih po-.,i tivi .., I fordathn..,, it rl' l ailll'd the i ndel i ble. \ Ct no\\ renderL·d illl' \plica bk. '> l a m p of ih Enlightenment

64

A QUESTION OF VALUES

ori g i n s . Sc ience may have prov ided peace research w i th a l ang uage and method . but it could only su bvert rather than substantiate its n ormative core. Thi s was a fatal deficiency given that the whole endeavo r was pre m i sed upon a spe c i fic and c ontestab le n ormat ive outlook. Perhaps its most re markable feature was the absence o f any argument for undertak i n g the enterpri se i n the fi rst p l ace. As envi s i oned by G a l t u n g . scienti fi c peace research was forced to abdicate from its own defense. One of the young Galt u n g ' s mentors. Robert Merto n . offers an i nter­ es t i ng e x p lanation for the appeal o f scien ce as a tra n s formative age nt. Cognition affects be havior: Soc i a l science i s distingu i shable from the n at­ .. ural sciences i nsofar as predictions "pecul iar to hu man affa irs w i l l "enter i nto the si tuation as a new and dynamic factor. c h a n g i n g t h e very condi­ tions u nder which the pred iction i n itial l y held true . " 4 1 Friedrich , takes up Merton ·s poi n t and suggests that i t inheres i n the very logic of '>Oc i a l sci­ ence. He c i tes Engels ·s paraphrase o f Hegel to capture the d i a l ectic be­ tween knowledge and the empi rical worl d : " Freedom doe s not con s i st i n the dream o f i ndependence from natural l a w s . but i n t h e k n o w l edge o f these Iaws."42 For Enge l s and Marx . the laws that govern soc ial l i fe were to be comprehended h istorical l y : for the soc ial scientist. they are revealed through science . Galtung did not emulate M arx ·s h i storical investi gat i on of the evolution of h u m an soc iety. nor did h e uphold the rul e s of scienti fi c procedure. B ut. i n h i s frequent appe a l s t o h i s readers to accept v ariou, h y ­ potheses a s probably true or spec i fi c v a l u e s as i nhere n t l y rea,onable . and in h i s conception of sociology as a creative. forward-looki n g science of the possi b l e . was he n ot operati n g with i n a form of d ialectical logic that sup­ posed that to posit a se l f-ev ident l y plausible v i sion was at the same time to act toward its realization? Hi ndsight suggests t hat t h i s l i ne of e x p lan ation has some substance to it. As w i l l be shown i n Chapter 5. Galtung w a s l at e r t o rework extensively h i s u nderstand i n g of science i n an effort to res o l ve the ten s i on between it and pol i tics yet ret a i n the v i rt u e s and creat i v ity of formal analysis. Galtung ' s original vision of peace research did not exhibit much in­ terest in h i story. but history. we might say. ½ as i n terested in it. During the late 1 960s the idea of social science i n general came unde r sustained attack from w i th in a re v i ved i ntel lectu al and p u b l i c rad ical i s m . and peace re ­ search could not escape critical sc ru t i n y. Only fou r years after making the fou ndational c l a i m s for the new science of peace. Galtung c ri t i c a ll y ree x ­ ami ned t h e fu ndamental as,umptions of PL'acc research and set i t u pon a new path. NOTES I . M orgenthau, Politics Among Nations.

PEACE RESEARCH AS SCIENCE

65

2 See Galtung, "Peace Research," EPR , 1 (hereafter "Peace Research"); pp. 1 5 1 - 1 55 ; and Galtung, "The Social Sciences: An Essay on Polansation and Inte­ gration," pp. 2-32. 3 The critique of traditional peace thinking is taken from Galtung, "Theories of Peace,' pp. 9 1 -92, " Peace Research : Science or Politics in Disguise?" and ·· pL' ,lL" l' RL·,c·.irdi : Pa,t E \ pL' rI L' nc'L'' and l ·u t u rL' l'cr,IK'ct i , L'' · " The o n l y con, 1,k ra .. ! I llll ,)t ,tc· t u a l . . t rad 1 1 1on a l pcaL'L' pwpo,ah i , to hL' found in a l i m i ted c i rc ul a ti on p,tpn . \\ l 1 1 c h brtdl : con, idn, pnipo,a l , b� D u bo i , and Dante i n the fou rt ee n t h cc· n t ur : . K ,1nt a n d R ou"L' a u . a n d the n i n c'll'L' n t h - n· n t ur ) w r i t i ngs o f M i l l , Cobde n . and Saint-Simon. A l l are seen a s primarily concerned with en suring the future of Europe alone. All of the proposals are deemed invalid because of their unscientific, political content. See Galtung, "Theories of Peace," pp. 93-97. 4 . In Chapter 8, I show how Galtung was later to acquire a very different un­ derstanding of the rel ationship between peace and nirvana. S. Just prior to Galtung's commentary, a comparable j udgment was made by H insley, who complained of the continuing reliance on "simple and radical solu1 1,) n , . . !,) the pwbkm ,)/ \\ ,lr and peac'e and the ah,ence of any dev elopment or re­ finement in its treatment: "Every scheme for the elimination of war that men have advocated since 1 9 1 7 has been nothing but a copy or an elaboration of some sev­ ent c'l' n t h c·c ntur: pw�ramme-a, the ,c\ enll'enth cent ury programmes were copies of still earlier schemes." H insley, Power and the Pursuit of Peace, p. 3 . 6. Galtung "Peace Research: Science, or Politics in Disguise?" p. 2 2 8 ; and Galtung, "Peace Research: Past Experiences and Future Perspectives," p. 250. 7 Galtung, •· Rank and Social Integration," p. 1 7 1 , emphasis added. 8. G altung, 'Theories of Peace," p. 25. 9. G altung, ·'International Programs of Behavioural Science," p. 1 69. 1 0. Galtung, "Peace Research: Past Experiences and Future Perspectives," p. 249. 1 1 . Galtung, "Peace Research: Science, or Politics in Disguise?" p. 229. 1 2 . Ibid., p . 242. For examples of i nstitutional structures designed to allevi­ ate national bias see also pp. 228-23 1 ; Gal tung, "Teaching and Infrastructural Pr, l h l c m , ot PL·ace Re,e arch . .. pp. 2 X0-2YO: and G a l tung. " I nternational Programs of Behavioural Science," pp. 1 80- 1 83 . 1 3 . Galtung "Peace Research: Future Possibilities and Necessities," pp. 1 92-1 93 . 14. Galtung, "Peace Research: Science, o r Politics in Disguise?" p . 229. 15 Galtung, ·'International Programs of Behavioural Science," pp. 1 76- 1 8 l . The peace movement was criticized then for its lack of professionalism, impa­ tience, and unscientific attitude but was also seen as a source of "rabid and imma­ ture but still spontaneous and imaginative inventiveness. ' 16 . Galtung, "Theories of Peace," p. 1 07. 1 7 . Galtung, "An Editorial," p . I . 1 8 . Ibid. 1 9. Galtung, "An Editorial," p. 3 . One of the few references to public opinion in support of the claim cites the survey of 500 "representative Norwegians" who , h< > \\ c·d ,l L k,1r pre k n:nu: l < >I a . . peace p h i lu,< >ph ) " th ,tt ddined peacc' a, req u i ri ng the abolition of hunger and poverty See Galtung, "Peace Research : Science, or Pol itics m Disguise?" p. 225 and note 3 . 20. Galtung "Theories o f Peace," p . 1 06. Parentheses i n the original . 2 1 . For example, the "pure" disciplmes of anthropology, history, and sociol­ ogy were descnbed as focused on the value of "the sane society," collectively pro­ ducing the "onented" science of "sociatry" and the profession of "sociatrists ." See Galtung, "Peace Research, p. 1 54.

66

A QUESTION OF VALUES

22. Ibid ., pp. 1 50-1 54. 23. The discussion of "orie nted science" is taken from ibid., pp. 1 50- 1 64. See also Galtung, "Theories of Peace." 24. For a critique of Galtung's "horror of inequal ity," see Boulding, "Twelve Friendly Quarrels with Johan Galtung," pp. 79-80. 25. Holm argues that the distinction between pure and oriented science is triv­ ial ( lri1·e/ ) and reduces to calling rast n.? \earch in i n ternat ional rel at iom · · rure " and the newer peace research "oriented. " Furthermore, it can be argued that all science draws upon prev ious research from the same and other fields. See Holm, Johan Ga/tung: "Superstar" eller " Vaekkelsespraedikant" 7 pp. 66-80. 26. James, Praf.?matism, p. 47. 27 . Galtung, "Theories of Peace," p. 1 1 5 . 28. The analogy is taken from Galtung, " International Programs o f Behavioural Science," pp. 1 70- 1 72. 29. See also Galtung, "Peace Research," p . 1 57. 30 . Ibid . . p . 1 5 7 . 3 1 . Galtung, "Theories of Peace," pp. 1 38- 1 39, especially figure 2 .6- 1 , and pp. 1 57- 1 5 8 . 3 2 . See G altung, "Theories o f Peace," and "A Typology o f Peace Thinking," pp. 1 3-28. 33 . Gal tung, "Theories of Peace," p. 1 04. -� -+. Galt ung, "Peace Researc h : Fut u re Po.� ,ibi l i t i e , and Nece, \ i t i e , . .. p . 2 2 2 . 3 5 . B urton, "Peace R esearch and Internation al Relations." S e e also Lawler, "Peace Research and I n ternat ional Relatiom : From D i\'ergence to Com ergence . .. 36. See, for example, Galtung, "Foreign Policy Opinion as a Function of So­ cial Position," and "Social Position, Party Identification and Foreign Policy Orien­ tation: A Norwegian Case Study." 37. See his suggested dictionary of correspondences between the two levels of analysis in Galtung, "Small Group Theory and the Theory of International Rela­ tions," p. 36. For a critique see Holm, "On a Major Event in the Social Sciences," pp. 67-69. 38. Galtung, "A Structural Theory of Integration ." 39. Galtung, "Rank and Social Integration." 40. Hart, The Concept of Law, p. 1 84. 4 1 . Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure, pp. 1 29. 42 . Cited i n Friedrichs, A Sociolof.?y of Sociology, p. 1 8 1 .

3 Structural Violence

Exploitation i s the essence of violence. -Gandhi

J u s t fou r y e ars a ft e r t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of the fi rst i s s ue of t h e Journal of ' Pcut c Rcscun/1 . the i nt e rn at i onal peace re search com m u n i t y became em­ bro i k d in an i n t e rn a l confl ic t . A t a series of conferences held in 1 96 8 and I 969. a group nf young E u ropean peace researchers q uest i oned the general d i re c t i o n peace re searc h was t a k i n g . Part i c u l arl y concerned w i t h the man­ n e r in \\ h i c h -.,ome American peace researc hers were anal y z i ng the role of the C n i ted S t ate-., in the Vietnam confl i ct. they went on to cri t i c i ze the con­ L'e p t u a l fou n d a t i o n -., of peace research more ge neral l y, Galtung was rare l y ret e rred t o d i rec t ! ::, , \\ 1 t h one notable e x cept ion , but h i s v i s ion o f a profes­ -., i on a L -., c i e n t i fi c act i \ i t y that was t o be . . symmetric" in i t s anal y s i s of spe­ c i t i c c o n fl i c h \\ a -., c l e a r l y a target . The upheaval enge ndered a d i v i s i o n \\ i t h i n the peace re -.,earch c om m u n i t y as t h e ori g i n a l pos i t i v i s t mode l was t r a n -., Jo rmed Im m i n n o v a t i o n i n t o an orthod o x y ag a i n s t w h i c h a newer, m or e radi c a l pcr-., pec t i ve \\ a-., be i n g cons t ructed . Galtung was a n advocate of t h e peace re -.,earch u n der q u e s t i o n . but he a l so became a pri n c i pa l ar­ c h i t ect ol a rn i -., ed model w h i l e at the same t i me d i s t i n g u i s h i ng h i s pos i ­ tion from that o f the critics. The two sides in the d i spute were of d i fferen t intellectual genera­ t i o n -, a n d l a rge ! ::, re f l e cted d i -., t i n c t addre -., -, e -, : T he -., c i e n t i fi c -,c hool c o n ­ si sted m o s t l y of A merican researchers, whereas their critics were pre­ d om i n a n t l y E: u ro p e a n . A.., a E u ro pe a n advocat i n g a -., c i e n t i fi c m od e l o f peace re -.,earch 1 n tl u enced h y A m e r i c a n soc i o l ogy , ( i a l l u n g stradd kd t h e d i v i d e . 1 D u r i n g t h l· per i od o f uphe a v a l , h e w a -., wur j._ i n g on t h L' re v i s i o n of h i .., o w n u n d e r .., l a n d i n g o f t h e m e a n i ng o l pe ace and v i o l e n c e al t h e l n ­ .., t i t u t e o f Ga n d h i an S t u d i e .., i n Va ra n a -, .., i , I n d i a . -' T h u s , a .., o n e m e m be r o l t h e mai n ..,t ream po" i t i o n w a " l a t e r t o f"l' lllarJ._ , i t i .., a n open q u n t i o n a s l o 67

68

A QUESTION OF VALUES

whether Galtung helped pull peace re-.earch toward a more radical stance. or was pushed. 3 KNOWLEDGE FOR WHAT?

The backdrop to the conflict within peace research was the complex amalgam of events on both sides of the Atlantic that made the 1 960-. a tur­ bulent decade. In the United States. the liberal con:-,emu-. that had evolved since the mid- I 950s was challenged by a serie-. of evenh that contributed to a rising tide of skepticism and ho'>tility on the part of middle-class youth toward the affluent society that had nurtured them. E-, tabli-.hment values came under critical review as the revolt of America's black minor­ ity catalyzed growing unre-.t on the campu-.e-. of \Ome of the mo-.t pre-.ti­ gious universities. The issues of civil rights and U.S. involvement in Viet­ nam combined to generate what Hodgson ha-. called .. the great -.chi-.m" in American society. 4 Universities were also a focus for sometimes spectac­ ular dissent in the United Kingdom and Europe. 5 The ferment of the 1 960s revolved around a cri-.i'> of legitimation for the Western democracies. Not only the U nited States but abo the U nited Kingdom and Western Europe were confronted by "the first bourgeoi-. re­ volt against the principles of a bourgeois socie t y that i-. almo-.t -.ucce-....,­ fully functioning according to it s own -.tandards. "n The legitimation cri-.is reflected a high level of disenchan tment with both the internal condition and external relations of the Western democracies . Habermas was not alone in detecting a growing sensitivity to "the untruth of prevailing legit­ imations" and a fun damental loss of sy mpathy for .. the sen seless, re pro­ duction of now superfluous virtues and sacrifices." Furthermore, the up­ heaval within a hegemonic group of We -.tern societies had a global dimen sion: .. Today protest is directed against a society that has le nt the emancipatory ideals of the eighteenth century the force of comtitutional norms and has accumulated the potential for their realiLation-while it has not abolished hunger in the world of potential abundance, while it has widened the gap between industrial and developing nation -.. exporting mi-.­ ery and military -violence along with mass hygiene."7 Developments within social theory were both reflective and coconsti­ tutive of dis-.ent with the prevailing con sen -.u-. in the We stern world. Al­ though a st ream of thought within American sociology had been critical of the assumptions of the dominant functionali-.t and posit ivist paradigm since its inception . the I 96(b witnessed .. a renaissance of the classical tra­ dition in sociology " and a revitali1ed emphasis on the purpose of knowl­ edge.x Sy -.tems-theoretic sociology in the Par,onian mold was increasingly ca-.t as an uncritical. technological. and scientistic rationalization of t he -.talus quo.() Unlik e in the U nited State .-; . positivism had not established

STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE

69

i tst'lf to the same lll'ial lifr. Such a refkxive participatory understanding required "'that the obj ect if::, ing. \ :due-neutral -.tandpoint of an impartial observer give way to the ,ubj e cti\ ely open. \ �due-committed attitude o f an interlocutor in a ,hared practice. " 1 ' \1 a m ,tream soci ology revealed the loss of critique in it-. m emding focu -. on the descripti on and management of the social sys­ tem. the denial ot the analytical significance of -.ocial class. the proclama­ t10n of the end of idl'ology. and the enthu -, ia-,tic identi ficati on of the po-.tindu-.trial -. clCiety characterized by abundance based upon increas ing production of material wealth. It ,, a-. not onl ::,, the dome -.tic politic-. of the indu -,trialized democrac ies that " ere he1ng ,uhj ected to critical -.crutiny but al -;o their e x ternal rela­ tion-.. In particu lar. the fore i gn policy of the United States and the legiti­ mating 1 deolo g ::, o f liheral international i -.m helectively leavcned with re­ alpoliti].._ J hL'ctme target-. of puhlic and -.chol arly critici'>m. The empirical realit) of an ex panding international co111munity of newly inm and su per-power supre macy, part i c u l arly w i th the heroic people of Vietnam. "20 The l c g i t i mac:, of t h i -. v i e wpo i nt was prem i -.ed upon the ev ident carv­ i n g up o f the po-.,t- 1 94.'i 'v\ orld in to two spheres of i n fl uence. with i n w h i c h t h e .., u perp c i e nces · objec t i v e o f c o n t ro l l i ng natur e and t he organ i '> m . peace re ,earch a i m e J to r a spec i fi c t y pe of soc i a l con t ro l t h a t d i ,t i n g u i -.. hed i t from trad i t i o n a l i n t e rn a t i o n a l rel at i o n s . T h e l a t te r ' s re­ -..e arch t oc u -.. re t k ct ed an i n tere-.t i n " e x te rn a l -horizo n t a l "' c o n t ro l : Dec i -.. i o n m ak e r-.. , o u g h t t o con t ro l '> y \ l e nh -, i 11 1 i t a r t o t h e i r o w n i n the e x ternal cm 1 ro n m c n t . Ty p i c a l o f the k i n d o l re -.earch that thi-. t y pe of contro l gen­ erated \\ a-., t h L· anal: -..i" of the hcha v i or o f other states hy n a t i on a l sec u r i t y agencies. In contrast, peace research reflected an interest in "internal-vertical" control, in which deci sionmakers sought to contro l elements above or h e l r r n t h e m I ll t h l' -..< K i a l h i e rarc h y . w i t h i n t h e i r own s y '> t e m . I n other ,.., ord '> . peace rL·-.,earch \\ a '> d i '> t i n 12 u 1 '->hed by i h a'>'>Umption of the e x i stence of a g lobal \ 1,cllll ") '>t e rn . to \\ h i c h i n '> i l,! hh drawn lro 111 the a n a l y s i s of do­ m e '> t i c '>oc i a l " Y " te m '> c o u l d he app l i ed i '>o n H >rp h i c a l ly. Thl' n u anced d i s­ .. t i n c t i on be t \\ een a . . '>)' '> te rn o f '> l a i n . . or " ' i ntern a t i onal '> Y '> t e rn . as fo und in ort hodox i n t e rn a t i o n a l re l a t i o n '> thl'ory. and an i n ternat ional .101 ·iol sys­ t e m is c ruc i a l he re . The l a t t er lorlll u l a t i on i lll pl i e -. lllore t h a n patte rned

74

A QUESTION OF VALUES

re l at ions between elements in a s y stem and al l udes to the p os s i b i l i t y o f system management g u ided by systemic needs ( o r v a l u e s ) di s t i n c t from those of domestic social systems but of a simi lar character. Schm id had prec i s e l y captured the in tent of G a l t u n g i a n peace re­ searc h: It ai med at the contro l and i ntegrat ion of the i nternational sy stem . j ust a s soc i a l sci ence sought to d o i n national system s . Conseq uent l y. "peace researchers could do what was never possi ble fo r the nation­ oriented internat ional rel ationists: draw upon the wealth o f soci a l s c i e nce theory de vel oped for the control and i ntegration of the nat i onal system . " Peace research ant i c ipated the cont i n u i ng evolution o f a g lobal soci al sys­ tem that transcended re lations between states. i n contrast to the orthodoxy of foc using on the orderly reprodu ction of the e x i sting i nternat i onal s y stem of states. The problem w i th adopt ing t h i s research orientat ion aro se out of the low level of integration of the intern ational social s ys tem and the pre­ sumption of an i dentity of interest among its ele ments in order to fac i l i tate the app l ication of functionalist soc i o l ogy. Schm id argued that peace re­ search had u t i l i zed two approaches to this i s s u e . First. it i nterpreted the in­ terests of the international system to mean that al l indiv idual s and groups i n the world share a common i n terest i n survival and peace. Gal tung ·s ap­ peal to the H ippocrati c oath as a model for peace research was an e x am­ p l e of such an approach : Both phy s i c i an s and peace researchers were working for humankind. As a h i storical materialist . Schm id was dismiss i n: of such "idealistic u n iversalism." seeing it as l arge l y vacuous and divorced from a social reality reflecting hegemonic interests. Second, peace research appealed to a consen s u al value of peace, di­ v i si b l e into negati ve and positive aspects-the former referring to the con­ trol of the international system and the latter to its further i ntegration. For Schm id. the d i fference between these goa l s and those of conservati ve functional i sm were neg l i g i b l e . Al though Galtung had recognized the con­ servative i m p l ications of restricting the focu s of peace re :-.earch to negat i v e peace. Schmid doubted that a n y con sensus e x i sted as to what t h e substan­ tive content of positive peace was. "even among people who are engaged in collective w ork for peace." Positive peace was no m ore than an um­ bre l l a concept. th e meani ng of which depended upon subjecti\' e l y hel d po­ l i t i c a l values. To c l a i m that everyone is " for peace" was tautologic a l . the equi valent of saying that everyone was fo r "the good l i fe" or the hest state of things. Why the objectives of erad icating i nternational v i ol ence and integrat­ ing the in ternational system mi ght lx' (kemed too conservative became ap­ parent when Schmid presented h i s un derstandi n g of g l obal i nterests. Writ ­ ing during the begi nning of dctente between t h e su perpowers. Schm i d saw a common concern with surv ival as reasonable in the context of t he Cold War. but the growth o f con fl i cts and contrad ictions bet ween n a t i o n s and

STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE

75

groups now n.-4uired a more critical perspecti VL'. Changing c ircumstances gave the lie to peace research ' s prL·sumption or a common glohal interest, rendering support for the needs of the extant intL·rnational system "a po­ litiL· al and 1wn-neutral act. " Peace researchns h ad to identify themselves with concrete soc i al sy stL·ms rather than universalized theoretical abstrac­ t i tH1'-. Although peace research was ch arged with looking to "the interests o f the \\ orld" rather th an those of the partici pants in specific conflicts , tlwre ,, L 'r 1..' no consensual pos itive value s to appeal to , and peace research kll back. on negati ve peace as the only sufficiently consensual value to · · sen e as the bas i s for the s y stem identifi cation of the peace researcher." The in,uffici ency of the category of pos i tive peace was compounded by the pre, ail ing sdf- i mage of the peace researcher. Galtung's notion of peace re -;earchers as impart i al " pe ace speci ali sts" serving the consensual intere sh of the inte rn ational sy stem had fed the assumption of symmetry bet\\ een parties to a confl i ct. of w h ich h is clai m "that conflict dynamics tend to mak.e part i e , relati ve ly s i milar" was exemplary. The Vietnam War made the i mplau -. ibili ty of th i -. perspective acutely apparent. Whereas a ': mmetrical approach made some sense in the case of the conflict between the ,uperpo,, er-., . the same could not be said for the conflict between the Unite d States and North Vietnam. Imofar a-., peace re search had analyzed conflict at all, Schmid claimed that it employed ·· -.,ubjectivi q models of confl ict," of which Galtung's tri ­ angular model o f conflict ( w h ich at t h e ti me of Schmi d 's paper had only been pre-., ented orally J was paradigmatic. 29 Th i s model logically distin­ guished confl ict i helf ( a reflection of goal incompatibility) from actor be­ h avior and attitude -.,. yet ih e x i stence could only be discerned i f certai n at­ titude -., or bc ha, i or \\ ere pre-.,ent. Its inadequacy could be illustrated through reference to a master- -.,lave relations h ip. The slave may have i n­ ternali Led the ...,oci al relationsh i p to a degree that no feelings of hostil i ty arc n h ih i tcd or even felt. perhaps believing h is role definition to be the onl: po, ..., i h i lity and ap preci ating a relatively benevolent master. Yet. it ,cern ..., rca-..onahle to -.,uppo...,e that there is an objective. latent conflict of in­ tere...,t betw een ma...,ter and tkemcd to lil'. at t he heart ol -..ocial conflict. But dominant. subjec­ ti n: goal-., are , i m ply "uh, l'.rted within till: ...,uperfici ally innocuou-.. equation of peacl'. with '> impel l i ng peace research w i t h i n a theory of fundame nta l h u m an need -, . Th i s move enabled h i m to reconci l e a bias i n ra , or o f t h t.? o ppre'>'>ecl and a rejection of a n y spec i fic ideological frame ­ work. A b O\ e al l . pac i fi -., m rema in ed the raison d ' etre of peace re search for Gal tu n g : \\ ithout it . \\ hat v. a-, the point'! B u t pac i fi -, m was presented anew in -,tronger term -., : It m u '>t not become an apology for fai l i ng to tackle the 4 u e-,1 i on ol \ocial confl ict for fe ar of advocating violence. nor a code word t or a de-,ccnt into a heh aviora l i ..,m that \aw conflict resolut ion in term , of a tti tudinal or hehavi oral mod i fication and ig nored the -.,tructural determ i­ nanh o t rather than exploratory : "Our guide here would probably often haw to be whether the value to be realised is fairly consensual or not. " 3 9 As to so­ matic realizations , the average life span within "the social order" was of­ fered as a crude basis for estimation. Problems of conceptual precision notwithstanding, the definition of f violence attempted to address the dl ' icicncies of earl) peace research by extending its research focus beyond the realm of direct or manifest vio­ lence into anything that inhibits individual human de\ clopmcnt. Galtung focused on six dimensions of violence: I. 2. 3. 4.

The distinction between physical and psychological violence The distinction between negative and positive influence The existence or nonexistence of an object that is hurt The existence or nonexistence of a subject who acts

STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE

8]

5 . The distinction between intended and unintended v iolence 6. The distinction between manifest and l atent violence The fir-.t d i tn L' n -. i o n i s sl' l f-n. p l an ator y . The second re fers to the v i o l ent pote n t i a l of posi t i , c i n fl uence. such as the encourage ment of consumption tl) t h e L' , l' i u s i o n l) f othn faceh o f h u m an poll' n t i a l . The t h i rd d i me ns i o n , a h o de ,ni bL·d as · · tru n c ated ,· ioknce: · rdc rs to the th reat of v i o lence oc­ c u r r i n g ,, i t lw u t a n ) n ident rec i p i e n t . the doctri ne o f a balance of power be i n g an n a m p k . S i m i l ar! ) . the de l i beratl' destru c t i o n of t h i ngs w i th the purpo,e l)f i n t i m id at i n g t h e i r owners i s an e x ample of a .. degenerate" form of , · i o k n c e . po,, crfu l nonetheless because of the sense of foreboding it can i nduce. The fourth dimension is the most important, for it i s here that the dis­ ti n L· t i o n b e t ,, e e n . . per-.on a l " and .. s t r uc t u ra l " v i ol ence is i ntroduced. In b l) t h c a , e -.. . i n d i , i d u a b can be k i l l e d . .. h i t or h u rt ." and subj e c t to i n t i m i ­ dat i o n . b u t ,, hereas personal \ ' i o lence can be traced back to spe c i fic i n d i ­ , i du a l acwr, . i n the -.econd case there may b e no iden t i fi ab l e perpetrator: . . The , i o lence i, b u i l t i nto t he structure and sho w s as unequ a l power and .. con-..e4u e n t l y a-.. u ne4ual l i fe chances_ ..io The concept o f structural v io lence o-..tens i b l y brought G a l t u n g c l o ser to the rad i c a l s ' emphasi s on l atent v io­ lence . but t he re ,, ere some -.; i g n i fi c an t d i ffere n c e s . Accordi n g to Galt u ng , m ar x i -.. m · -.. c r i t i q u e o f t h e d i stri b u t i o n o f surp l u s value i de ntified one form ot -.,truct u r:.il , i olence. but the l i beral c r i t i q ue of the d i stri but i on of power i n -.. oc i a l i -..t -..oc i e t i e -., ide n t i fi e d another. In what appeared to be a back­ h anded -.. ,, i pe at the rad i c a l -, . Gal t u ng argued that in both cases i n d i v idual s are pre, e nted from rea l i z i ng t h e i r pote nt i a l . and t h e re fore n e i t h e r of the i deo l o g i e -.. p ro v i ded a -., a t i -,factory perspec t i v e from w h i c h to comprehend , i o l e n c e . ·· s oc i a l i nj u -. t i c e " w a-., deemed a su itable s y nonym for struct ural , i o l ence . b u t --e x p l o i t a t i o n " w a-.; rejected bec ause i t b e longed to a pol i t i ­ cal vocabulary a n d was so overloaded a s t o inhibit communication. A residual scientism, an i m p licit consequentia list ethics, and the in­ tl uence of Gand h i merged i n t o an a rg u ment for emphas i z i ng the stru cture of e x p l o i t a t i o n rather than i h agent '- . In G a l t u n g ' -. hands , soc i a l i nj u stice became an a h -., t ract a n a l y t i c al c ategory. hut i t a b o re fl ected a Gandhian d i -., t i nct i on hc t ,, ee n the holder-, of oppre-,-., i ve ro le-; and the rol e i t-.e l f. G a l ­ tun g took from (,andhi a d i -.,t i nction bet ween . . actor-oriented" a n d .. structure­ .. o ri e n ted anal :, '> i '> : .. a v i e w o l human beings, bot h as, hav i n g free w i l l and be i n g w i l l ed hy , c ry '> t rong -.,tru c tu re s, . " In a pa per on pac i fi s m, written ten year-. earl ie r . (,al t u ng had noted t h at Gan d h i o ffered a viL'W of v i o l e 11CL' as, "e v i l " hut to he com prehended . nonethele'> '> . lrorn w i t h i n the u n i versal as­ -., u m pt i on o f the -, p i ritual e q u a l i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l '> . 1 1 ThnL' were two 111ea1h for compre h e n d i n g e v i l ( v i o lence ) fro m w i t h i n a ( i andhian pcr-.pec t i ve o l u n i vers,a] l o v e : "\ o one i -, po-.,-, e -., -.,ccl o f the w h o l e t ru t h a n d c annot he i n ­ co n t ro v e rt i b l y w ro n g . and the _j u d g m e n t o l an enem y s, h o u l d d i s t i n g u i -, h

82

A QUESTION OF VALUES

between the status action o f an enemy and the enemy as a status holdcr.-'+ 2 To attack the agen t s of structural vio lence i s to meet one form of vio lence w i th anot her. whereas t ru e dedicat ion to a h i m s a ( n o n v i o l enc e ) req u i red "the return of good for e v i l . " Gandhi empl oyed a theol ogic a l l y deri ved ethic of nonviolence-it was the realization of atman ( self, or soul) that enabled one to d i stinguish act s of vio lence from the ir perpetrators .-'+-' Gal­ tung offered no alte rnat i v e sec u l arized phi l o soph i c a l defense o f nonv i o­ lence. save for the implicit u t i l i tari anism i n h i s foc u s on the consequences of viol ence. Detachment from the perspec tives of spec i fic soci al actors and the e m ­ phasi s on consequences were reinforced in t h e discussion of t h e d i st inction between i ntended and u n i ntended v i olence. the fi ft h dimens ion under scru t iny. Judea-Christian ethics and Roman j uri sprudence connected g u i l t and i ntent, whereas for Galtung t h e proper connect ion was between g u i l t and consequence. A bias toward i nt e n t i on may o n l y i de n t i fy i n d i v id u a l s and e lide the signi ficance of stru c t u ral v iolence. although i t w a s conceded that focusin g solely on structural causes would be equal l y fal l acious: per­ sonal , d irect violence still m attered. Nevertheless, the analysis of s truc­ t u res and their operant logic remai ned abstract: the role of i n d i \' i d u a l s or groups i n creating exploitative structure s and ensur i n g t he i r reproduction was left u nexplored. The final dimension of v iolence u n der consideration was the distinc­ tion between man i fe s t and l atent v i ol ence. Here . the d i fference between the approaches of Galtung and Schmid became fu l ly apparent. Schmid had argued that latent confl ict becomes man i fest upon a t ransformation of con­ sciou s ness ( enter the peace re searcher ) : the s l ave comes to perc e i \' e the d i fference between enslavement and freedom and struggles for the latter. For Galtung, however, l atency i s not connected to consciousness, it is a structural potentiality: v i o lence i s be ing done to the s l ave regardless of any subjective comprehension of the fact on the part of any actor i n the e q u a­ tion. The existence of, s ay, a social consensus presumi n g the possibility of happy s l aves wou ld make l i ttle d i fference. Furthermore . both direct and struc tural v i olence can be latent or manife s t . Di rect \' iolence ma} become man i fest in cond i t ions o f soc i a l instab i l i t y : stru c t u ra l v i olence m i g h t be erad icated through re v o l u t ionary action. on l y to re appear as a new h ierar­ chical order evolves. As a pac i fi s t . Galtung c learly wanted to reject one of the practical consequences of Schmid ·s po , i t i o n . n a m e l y . that a v i o l e n t revolution of the oppressed m a y be j ustified i n t h e n ame of true peace. This objective was reinforced in the discussion of the interp l ay be­ tween person al and struct ural v i olence. The e l i mination of the members of an oppressive elite would not necess arily end structural violence if new form s of it were l atent w i thin the ideol ogical perspective o f the n e w hold­ er-. of power. Galtung ·s observation that s t ru c t u ral v i o l ence was ev ident i n postrevolut ionary soc i a l i st soc ieties in w h i c h equal ity had heen osten s i b l y

STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE

83

realized i s symptomat ic of the "'plague on both your houses" al litude to­ ward marx i s m and liberalism that perv ades his subseq uent work. Both ide­ ologi e s; ,, en:' \' in, ed as pote ntial sources of differing forms of structural violence if they become exclusively realized in practice. The poi nt al..,o connected ,, i t h tlw observation that the two categories of , i o k ncc shade into each ot her. An individual act of violence is a prod­ uct not only of per sonal dl'libcrat i on but also of e xpectations arising out of norm" inculcated as a co nsequence of the actor's status. The Gandhian dis­ t i nction be t ,, een status holders and the statu" role is again recalled: How much perSL)nal \ io knce is not an e xpression of structural violence? To use \ iolenc1..' against \ i o kncc re\ eats a failure to examine critically the longer­ term consequences of retaining a belief in the utility of violence itself. Furthermore, Galtung claimed that there were cases when structural ch ange L)CCur" \\ i t h o u t recourse to personal vioknce-although he cited no ne-and t he pre.., umption of the i ndi spensability of personal v iolence was to turn violence into a fetish. Even if personal violence was indis­ pen , ;.ible. t h i " \\ a" another rea..,on to search for alternative means of real­ i L ing ,t ruct ural change. N o t t hat Galtung forced the point: he concluded that the jury was still out on the sufficiency or necessity of personal vio­ lence to eliminate structural violence. 44 No defense of the value of non­ violence was actually offered, and the empirical evidence as to its utility was acknowledged to be inconclusive. Direct violence attracted analytical attention simply because it was dy­ namic and highly visible. Structural violence, however, "is silent, it does not show-it is essentially static , it is the tranquil waters." Perception of i h , i g n i ficance \\ a.., contingent u pon the dynamism of the relevant social order. In a static society, personal violence is evident, whereas structural violence "may be seen as about as natural as the air around us. " The West­ e rn j u ridical empha'> i '-> on per-,onal violence reflects the historical develop­ me nt of an unde r'il anding of violence within traditional, static social or­ ders. In contrast, thinking about structural violence, cl aimed Galtung, aro "e o u t of "hi g hly dynamic North-We-,t European societies" where struc­ t u ral , i o l ence become .., apparent becau-,e " it stands out like an enormous rock in a cree k . impeding the free flow. creating all kinds of eddies and turbulences. "45 This theme received no elaboration. There was no discus­ .., ion of \\ h at hnng.., about the ..,hift hetween ..,tatic and dy namic -,ocial for­ mat i o m , or w h y N ort h - We..,! E u ropean '>oc i e t i e . .., (a:-.s umahly the Nordic -.tate.., J are ..,o . . h i g hly dyn ami c : · even though the is-,ue appears worthy of further anal y .., i '-> . I t would he illumi nating to explore further the noted sen ­ -,i tivity of Scandi navi an pol i t i c al c ul t u re to i.., .., u e " of \(K ial ju stice, or the relati vely open reception of peace re c a , t i n t h e ro l e o f " fi g h t i n g fo r. " •• i m ag i n i n g , " and · · p ro n1 < 1 t 1 n { · a n c i n \ 1 o l e 1 1 1 \\ or l d . in the fu l l er sen,e t h at t h e redefi n i t i on of peace now demanded. In spite of its historical significance, "Violence, Peace and Peace Re­ search" suffered from some consi derable defic iencies. Its normative prem i -, e-., \\ ere cert a i n l y m e rt hut bare l y deknded. re mai n i ng l arge l y a" a,­ , e rt i o n , . .J udgment o f t h L· d c l e t e r i o u , L' l fr c h ol '>< K i a l ,tru c t u re "> a n d . hy e .\ tl' lh r o n . t h e fl e -., h i n g o u t o l t h l· concept ol pos i t i v e pean· \\ a-, dkc lL'd not h) appe a l to a h i , tor 1 c a l l ) o r -,oc i a l l y g ro u nded concept o l U ll l'L' a l i 1cd i n t e rn h hut to a -,ct o l es of -.etting c o n te x t , some a s p e c t s o f t h e growth of a new, more radi cal l iterature o n political devel opment are \\ Ort h not i n g . 1 1 1 Perh:.t p '> i h m m t defi n i t i ve fea t u re wa s, t h e conceptu al i za­ t i on ot c a p i t a l i .... m a n d i m peri a l i '>m a'> a wor l d system. i n contrast t o a foc u s on n at i on a l mode" o l p ro d u c t i on and c a p i t a l acc u m u la t i o n . T h e n o t i o n that u n d e r d e \ c l o r m e n t o l t h e g l o h a l p e r i p h e ry w a '> an ori g i n a l cond i t i o n was d e c i " i \ e l :, rc i e c t e d . l n '>t e:.t d . it w a '> '>een to e merge ou t o l the c x pamion of the E u ropean '- l a t e '> i n t o t h e g l o h a l peri rher y . a t h ru st t h at commenced in t h e " i \ t e c n t h ce n t LJ r) and peaked i n t h e n i n e t e e n t h cent u ry. The t e rm / 11 1 JJcriu/1 1 111 h a '> '> i n ce an-1 u 1 red a m ore general mean i n g of e x p l o i tat i v e re l a­ t i o n '> het w een '> l a t e '> a nd c l a'> '> e '> t h a t d i d not d i '>appear a -;. a u > l l '>e q u L'll l'l' o f th e p o l i t i c a l ret rac t i on o f E u ropean p o w l 'r '> i n t h e t we nl iL· l h L'L'nl u ry a11 d i s n o w '> y n o n y n10 u '> w i t h a g l o h a l i 1 ed c a p 1 1 a l i '> l l l . B u t I H > W L' V L 'r l ( )( > '>c l y l h L· te rm i '-. n o w u '> e d . i m peri a l i '> rn i n v a r i a b l y a l l u des.; lo a h i '> t m i c a l connL' C l i o n b e t ween t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h L· N o rth a n d t h e u 1H k rd L' V L' l o p n 1 L· 1 1 t o l t h L· South, historica l l y and presently.

94

A QUESTION OF VALUES

Another general fea t u re of the crit ical l iterature on g l obal p o l i t i ca l economy i s i t s underm i n i n g o f trad i t i onal perspe c t i v e s o n i nternational po l i t i c s . The inte rp retation of impe ri a l i s m as an inev i table by-prod uct of realpo l i t i k. ( or mercant i l i sm ) and geopo l i t ic a l im pera t i v e s was dec i s i ve l y rejected. as w a s real ism · s pr iv i l eging of the politic., of re l at i o n s between state s. S i m i l arly. l i beral ism 's concept of "'in terde pendence" was i m p l i c i t l y depicted a s intimately connected with t h e orthodox view o f modern i zation. By defi n i tion, i nterdependence denies or d i sg u i ses the asymmetry of eco­ nomic re lations between the g lobal center and peri phery. Consequentl y. a critical shadow was a l so cast over early peace research that i n prescriptive terms rel ied essen tial ly on a version of interdependency th eory. In contrast , the radical wing of peace research adopted along w i th their cognates i n po­ l i ti cal economy an emphas i s on a h i storica l l y evol ved g lobal '>tructu re that significant l y cond i t ioned-some woul d say determ i ned-international po­ litical relations. In reflection of the wider debate in the social sciences, radical politi­ cal economy i m p l i c i t l y or e x p l i c i t l y pre sented theory i n a n t i po s i t i \' i '-t terms-as a form of c ri t i q u e . The p roblem w i th orthodox moderni zation theory was not onl y i t s empirical i n adequacy and ahi storicis m but also i t s unacknowledged normat i v e content. Against t h i s . theory w as seen a s i n ­ tertwined w i t h emancipatory po l it ical act ion. a n d t h e orthodox \'iew that theory shou l d endeavor to be i ndependent of normat i ve assumption:-. and reflective of an empirical world e xtri nsic to the observer was U '- u a l l y dec i ­ s i v e l y rejected. Th us. i n c lear homage to M arx ' s e l eventh the " i " on Feuer­ bach. Andre Gunder Frank concl uded his seminal e ssay "'The Deve lo pment of U nderdev elopment" w i th the hope that scienti st:-, from the underde\'el­ oped world wou l d furth e r analyze the phenomenon of unde rdeve l opment because "'it i s their people who i n the la st anal y:-.is face the task of changing this no longer acceptable proce ss and e l i m i nating t h i s m i "erable reality. " 1 1 I t i s only agai nst t h i s bac kdrop that Galt ung 's anal y s i " of imperi a l i s m c a n b e adequate ly grasped . I n m a n y re spects i t \\'a'- h ig h l y deri\'at i \\? . N onetheless. it did make some spec ifi c c l ai m s to orig i n a l i t y and cannot be s i mply reduced to just another contribu t ion to the l arger debat e . I t did not fit neat l y into any speci fic perspective within that debate. and in cert a i n re­ -; pect s it was open ly promoted as a square peg in a ro und hole. A bo\·e a l l . i t was presented as a contribution t o a constructivist peace research seek­ ing to go rapidly beyond the e x positi on and e :-,. p l anation of i m peri a l i s m or dependent deve l opment to the e x p lorat ion of alternati\·e pattenh of i nter­ national interaction. Th i s was in m arked contrast to the bulk of dependency analy'-is that had fa i led to match the rapid development of theore t i c a l un­ derstanding with prescriptions for change. save for gL'neral e x pressions of a need for "tru ctur a l change ll '- U a l l y ca:-.t in ternh of soc i a l i st rev o l u t i o n . I � Galtu ng ·s th eory of imperi a l i s m was int ended to be a "'t heory of l i berat i on from structural violence ." 1 3

THE CRITIQUE OF GLOBAL STRUCTURE

95

"THE STRUCTURAL THEORY OF IM PERIALISM" The STI was written , i n typical Galtungian fas h ion, over a single \\ L'L' ke nd in :-\ u g u , t l lJ 7() and p u h l i , twd in t h L' ./011mal o( PCllh 1 111 pL' r 1 a l h ll l a , a f'L' l a t i o rh h i p tw t ,\ L' l' l l a C c n t n '> l a t e and Pl'r i ph l 'r y \ \ ale that has the fol lowing feature s : l . A harmony o f interest between th e center i n the Center state and the center in the Periphery state 2. Greater d i s h armony of interest within the Periphery state than within the Center state , ..\ d 1 , h a rn w 1 1 : L)f m t e rt? , t hl't ,, e l' n t h e pcri p hny i n t h e Ct? n l c r -, t a t c a n d the periphery i n t h e Periphery state 2 1 ( i a l t u n g d i d n ot l o L· a t l' h i " defi n i t i o n o f i m pe r i a l i -, m w i t h i n t h e w i d l'f' l i 1 L' r.1 t u rl' . L· L u 11 1 1 n g o n l : t h a t i t a r o '-> e o u t o f · · a c e rt a i n re-.earch t rad i t i o n . " ;1 p p .1 rl' n t l : h 1 , ( ) \\ n l' ar l i e r , t r u c t u r a l e \. p l orat i o n -. bt? c a u -. e t h e o ri g i m o f t h L· d l' I 1 11 i t 1 o n " l' fl' t ra c e d t o " a l o n g -., e t o f fi n d i n g -, a bo u t i n t e rn a t i o n a l 1 n l L' r;1l l 1 l ) n " t r u L· t u re " . . a " ,, e l l a " d e d u c t i o n -, a r i -, i n g o u t o f " -. pec u l a t i o n '> re l a t i n g t o , t r u c l u r a l , i o k n c e i n g l' n l' r a l a n d t h e t h e ory o f i n e q u a l i t y i n particular. "22 C ( ln l u , 1 11 g l ) G a l t u n g a l "o c l a i m l'd t o hav e borro wed from L e n i n . w i t h . \ , h ( ) m h l' -, a ,, h 1 m , e l t , h a r i ng an i n t l'rl' '-> t i n t h e rl' l at i o n -. h i p b e t w e e n c e n ­

ter and periphery Yet i t is not at al l clear that this was, in fact, Lenin's

m ;1 1 11 u l n u:rn : h e \\ J s, m ore i n t c rl' s, t e d i n t h e c o n fl i c t b e t w e e n E u ro rw a n , t a l c , t h a t aro"e o u t o f t h e e , pa n s, i on o f c ap i ta l i -,m i n t o c o l o n i 1e d te rri to­ f l l' " ( ) I I t h e g l o b a l p e r i p h e ry and t h a t -., e t the -., t age fo r Worl d War 1 . --' ' The 11 1 < ) , t n 1 de n t L o m rn on a l r t ) ,, a s, ,, 1th Ll' n i n ·-, n o t i on o f a l abor a r i \ l ocracy. l l 1 1 \\ e , er. t h L· e , t c n t t o ,, h i c h Len i n · .._ a n a l y -., i -., o f the ll'>l' o f " -, u perp ro fi h " t o h u : t h e c om r l 1 a 1 1 c e o t " t h l' l a bour kader-, a n d t h e ll/l/Jl'l'-.1 rn1f11111 o f t h L' L1 h o u r a r i s, t < ic ra c : · · ( e m r h a '-> i , a d ck d J � l et t i n g t h e m aj o r i t y o f t il l' p ro l e ­ tari at i n Center states off the hook-is commensurate with Galtung 's ,( ) !l J L· \\ h a t hro c1 c k r c l a i m t h at t h e rl' \\ ch a d i , h a r m o n y o f i n tne'->t lw t wc e n t h e t \\ < > m t c rn a l pe ri p h n i c -, I '-> a m oot po i n t . Le11 i 11 a 1 1 d ( i a l t u n _!.! c m p l o yL·d , l· ry d ! l t c rc n t d i ,c u r, 1 , e t o n e , : < > Il l' \\ a '-> h i '->t or i c a l l y '-> f1L'c i fi c . thL· ot her ( k­ c 1 , 1 , L· I : n o t . - · L , e n , o . t h l' rc \\ e re c o m m on a l i t i L' , . ( 1 a l t u 1 1 _!.! '>ll/-'/-'l' '> I L'd t h at t h e re re m ai n e d a pa rt i a l d i ,h an1 1 0 1 1 y o f i n tcre-,t hL·t weL' ll t h L' t w o '>L'ctor -, ol ( ·l· n t c r , t a l l' '> . 1 11 , p 1 te o f a " h a rL·d d i '-> h a rn ) ( ) n y o f i n tl'!' L' \t w i t h t h L· pn i p h l· ry i 11 t h e Pe r i r h n:, , t a l c r r o i n t 2 o f t h e de f i n i t i on < J f i 1 1 1 pn i a l i , 1 1 1 a p pL·a r " to c a p t u re t h h J . l 11 ck L· d . ( i a l t u ll_!.! L' lll p h a , i 1 e d t h a t i n h i " IIJ ( )(l c l thl· u n L' V l'n k , c l s, l o f t h L· f)L' ­ . ri p h c ry i n t h e C e n t rL' . . I n t h e o v er a l l , c h c m c o l t h i n µ '> . t he pni phny a rL· a-,

98

A QUESTION OF VALUES

in lkvelopcd s tate_., see t hemselves "more a_., t h e partners of t h e c entre i n t he Cent re t han as t h e pa rtners o f t he periphery in t he Pe riphery." T h u s, "alliance formation bet ween t he two peri pheries i s avo ided and t he Cent re nat ion bec omes more and t he Periphery nat ion less cohesive . . . and hence less able to develop long-term strategies. "25 Absent from Galtung 's discussion was the historical analysis of the in­ ternat ionali zation of capi tal du ring the coloni al era. "the econom ic basis of a world-h i storic phenomenon." t h a t provided the core of Lenin 's argument. The language of soc ial class was also avoided. The STI ½ as primaril) for­ mal and descript ive in sty le. containing only brief swee ping: reference, to h i s tori cal processes and clearly intended not to be compared closely to other accounts of imperialism but to provide a provocative model of the prevailing global soc ial struc t u re. Nevert heles, . the , p i r i t of Lenin " , ( and. more recently. Emmanuel's) argument was re tained. and i t wa, potent. Thus. t he global soc ial stru c t u re was seen to act as a di-,incent i \·e to t h e de­ velopment of empathy bet ween t he peripheries w i t hin Center and Periph­ e ry stares. the periphery in t he Center being effectively bou ght off t h rough a mu t u ally beneficial alliance w i th those who dominated it. A marJ..:edly lower gradient of inequali ty w i t h i n Center s tates. compared t o Periphery s tates. was obtained t hro ugh welfare polic ies leading to improvements on most dimens i ons of living condit ion. w i t h t he exception of power. Galt ung offered no evidence for t h i s muc h debated hypot h e s i -;. the intended con­ clusion being t hat it was in t h e overall interest of imperiali -.m that the in­ terest s of t he periphery and the center i n t he Center -..tatc are at ka-.t partly commensurate. There is an important qualification to the model outli ned so far. Given t he overriding s hared interest of t he t wo part s of a Center nat ion in t h e e \­ ploitat ion of a Periphery nat ion. and the fact that t he center in the Pe ri p h­ ery state i s likely to be a proportionately smalkr segment of the \\ hok. do not the interests of the Center s tate as a whole conflict w i t h the interests of t he Periphery nation as a whole? This conclusion was rejected because it blu rred t he c entral feature of h i s model-t he h armon} of inter e � t s bc t \\ ecn the t wo centers-and reduced i mperi alism to a probk m of internat ional re­ lations. Galtung saw imperi alism as a global structure of domination , which re4 u i rcd for i h cont inued e\istence .. a hri d�elwad for the Centre na­ t ion in the centre of the Periphery nation." If two states w ith horizontal i n­ t e rn al soc i al relat ion:-- were e .\ tern ally co1111L'Cted by a f" L'la t ion of dl,mi­ nance. then t h is would not co11st i t u te an i mperi ali-;t relat ionsh ip b u t one better described by a term such as looting or stealing . But if a secular in­ crease in the living condition between two such states became apparent, t hen t he researc her -.,hou ld he promp ted to 1n\·e-..1 1gate the c \ i stence of i m­ pcri ali -..11 1 . Obviously. G al1 u11� did not consider a noni mperiali st relat ion­ sh i p bet ween a dn·clopcd -..t alL' and an unlkrde\ eloped state to be a li kely occu rrence.

Tl IE CRITIQUE OF GLOBAL STRUCTURE

99

THE MECHAN I S M S OF IMPERIALISM

The Vertical Interaction Relation r r . -\L'L'l)rding to G altung, tht' L' \\ L ' L' t \\ o h a-.;ic mechanisms ( or princi­ p l e , l of imperi al i ,m: One rl' lkcted the intnaction relationship between '-PL'L ' if i c partiL'' and the other rL'krred to the larger interaction structure. · The first was that of the \'ertica/ interaction relation between centers and pcri pherie, . a, -,L'"L'd acnlrd ing to t\\ o factors: the value exchange between aL'tl)r, and thL' dkct-... of this exchange H'ithin actors. Whereas liberal and man i ,t eCl)JWm i , h ali l--e emphasi1ed the exchange relationship between actl)f-... . (3 altung included the effects of unequal exchange within actors, a pwce-....... he Iatn \\ a, to IL 'rm " in-ch ange. "�r-, Thus, an adequate "interaction budget " net>d -. to take account of the benefits accruing to the importer of ra\, materi ;il-... ( u-.ually a de\'eloped or industrialized state ). not onl y from tht' initial term, l)f trade but a bo from tht' manufacturing spin-offs as raw matcriah are proce" "ed prior to being resold with value added. Equally, tht' underde\ elopL'd -;talc i-. doubly exploited by the exchange relationship and the laL·k of po, iti w -. pin-offs. due to the tendency to import finished good, . .. \n intcraL·tion budget needs to note also that hot/, parties to an equal C \change ex per i ence costs. something that at the time Galtung right!:, -.a\\ a, ah-.ent from mo-.t analy st's of exchange relations. The iden­ ti f icJ.tion of nL'gati \ e ,pin-off effects within developed states, such as pol­ luti on ,md e x plo i tati on. fore,hadowed a s ignificant theme in subsequent \\ ri lin g : U\ erde\ elopment. The modeb of preferred developmental strate­ g 1 e , that \\ ere to tl O \\ from the STI i l1 \ ariably rejected the reproduction of de\ eloped -.uL ictie-. \\ i th in the peri phery, because of their deficiencies as paradigms of the good life. Gal tung went on to account for the emergence of exploitation on a glob;_il ,c alc h :, \\ a:, of a -,chematic and very brief account of three stages of C \ plrn tation. or •·unequal exchange. " This was claimed to be in part rep­ re,cntati \ e of the actual h i -,tory of e x ploitation a-. well a-; "ty pe-. of think­ ing about e \ plo i l :11 1 0 11 . " The f ir...,t -.tage i -. the looting of an undeveloped -.talc h:, a d e \ el()puJ -., \ ate. uwa lly hy mea m of a slave-labor force. This i , foll()\\ Cd h:, a dcri -.or) o ffer of exch ange hy tlw developed -;talc. \ Lich a'> head-. f ()r land. altlrnuµh thL· o ffer at Jca-,t ha" -.omc acknowlcdgmL'lll of in­ d i gcnou-, 0\1. ner-. h i p of the L' X ploited tnritory. In the third -,tagc a more eq­ u itable 1..· x c h an!-'e rcl atio11..., h i p emeq..1c-. . in w h ic h the developed slate has to p a :, more for \1. hatl' \ er 1 -. c \ tractcd. ( i altung admitted that thL· -., hi l't rrom the '>L'l'Otlll to the 1 h ml -.t:tµL' \\ a-., dif fi nilt to pinpoint prcc i -.,cly. It OLT Ur\ a -; a con -,cquencc o f -. hifh i n intern at ional relatiom of pown ar i -,in g , assum­ a bly, from grant in!-' of independence t() formn coloniL''-. l tkntifiL· ation of a more equal e \ c h ange rn i �,! 111 he ha-.cd u pon an analy '- i " of -.h i rtinµ attitude-, in the wcal--er party, ohjcctivl' markL'I \'allll' '- , or change-. in thL· labor valllL'

) 00

A QUESTION OF VALUES

o r the products on e i t her s i de of the e xc h ange rel at i o n s h i p . I n h i s v i e w. none o r t hese e x p l anat ions consi dered the intra-actor e ffects of exchange, yet it was the di sparity between the appearance or an equal exchange rel a­ tionsh i p and the reality o r in equali ty. detected through the employment of a comprehensive interaction budget, that is dist i nc t i v e to the t h i rd and con­ tem porary phase of imperial i s m . In the case of exchanging o i l for t ractors. for example. oil i s pure nature. wherea:-, the tractor is moving i n the d i rec­ t i on or pure c u l ture or form . The two product\ are di:-, t i n g u i shed by the vastly different levels of processing of raw materials required for their manufacture and by the differing impact on the state of orig i n . 2 7 Proces:-,­ ing acts as a m u l t i pl ier that transform:-, the host society by :-, t i m u lating the de velopment of soph i stica ted product ion . com m u n i cation . research . edu ­ cati on, defense, and tran sport systems. Thus, a Center state can reinforce i t s dom inance in the global soci al structure by deve l o p i n g a p -; yc h ol o gy or self-re l i a nce and autonomy. 2 x The defi c i ency of mo:-,t econom i "h w a s that of failing to consider t h e level of processing i n their analyses of North-South exc hange re lations. Academic research trad i t ions had evolved i n to a d i v i sion of l abor that not only m i tigated agai n s t an adequate g rasp or the total ity o f the exchange rel at ionship between the global center and periphery but. more importantly, prevented the form u l at ion of --a new pro­ gram of t rade on equal term s . '' For Galtung. gen u i ne l y equal t rade c o u l d occu r on l y i f a l l of the i nternal a n d ex ternal effects of unequal e\ change were equa l i zed. A d i s i n terest i n assess i ng i ntra-actor e ffects of nchange relations worked to the ulti mate benefit of the developed states. More provocative was the claim that it had become "natural" for even the center i n the Periphery state to see t h i ngs ..,okly in term" of inrcract i o n . a lthough the expl anat ion of t h i s was somewhat ... ketchy. I f e l ites i n the un­ . d2rdeve l oped states have primari l y thought in terms of .. being . rather t han "becom i ng." i f they have preferred ownership to processi ng . then t h e i r i n ­ terac t i o n with the deve l oped wor l d woul d appear ad\ ant ageou , t o t h e m . W hat w a s formerly nature w a s converted into nwney. \\ h i ch was furt h e r converted i nto a variety of things. I n sum, "very l ittle effort w a s needed: and th at t h i s was prec i se l y what made the e \ c h ange ..,o d i :-.advantageous only bec ame clear after some time."2 9 The elites of peripheral states viewc:d the wor l d th rough a spec i fi c and l i m i t ed de, elopmental pri ... m. Ra­ tiona l i ty itself wa" gro u nded in an in equi t ab l e L' \change rel at i o n s h i p and masked i t and rendered it SL'd u c t i v e : the true nature of the rel a t i o n s h i p would b e rc: vealed onl y when i t u l t imately impin g:1.'d upon t h e l i v i n g con­ dit ions of the center i n the Peri phery state. i n othL'r word s . the weaker of its princ ipal age n t s . I m peri a l i s m co n d i t i o ned the m i n d-sets of its agen ts and created a form of Ll i sL' con,ciousnes s . as part of the process of i�s re­ production. What Gal tunp. d i d not con:-.ider wa:-. the possibi l i t y that e l i te s i n peri pheral stales were motivated b y t h e shrewd, self-serv ing. y e t pos s i b l y very acc urate calcu lation that the benefits accru ing to them under the

THE CRITIQUE OF CLORAL STRUCTURE

10]

pre v a i l i n g rdat i o n :-. h i p o f L' \. p l o i t a t i o n wou l d l i k e l y a l w a y -;. b e better t han t hose a r i s i ng out o f a n o thn e , ch ange re l a t i o n s h i p th a t wou ld b e more e4u i t a b k from t hL' po i n t o f \' inv o r t h e e , p l o i l l'd m aj or i ty. Ci a l t u ng appeare d l oa t h e t o po i n t a n acL· u -.; a tory ri n gL'f. pre fe rri ng t o :-. l ay i n :-. i dc t he confi nes of abstract structural argument. '.\ on e t h l' l c s , . (i a l t u ng · :-. O \'l'ra l l po i n t w a s one w i t h w h i ch m an y other c ri t i c , of lH·thodo, dn e l op m e n t th eor y cou l d a n d st i l l would c o nc ur : U n ­ L' \ e n L' \ L' h a n g L' rt' l a t i o n s c o ul d not be rec t i fi e d b y ri :-. c a l adj u s t m e n t of t h e t e r m -.; o f t rad L' a\L) l l e . I n cr e a s e d ren� n u e m i ght h e l p t o fun d i nt e rn a l dev e l ­ o p m e n t , t ra t e g i e :-. i n part i a l c o m pe n s a t i o n for t h e l a c k of s p i n - o ff benefi t s \\ i t h i n Pe r i p he ry , r a t e -.; , b u t s u c h a po l i c y wou l d force d e pe nd e nt s t a t e s i n t o a p a t t e rn o f d e ve l o p m e n t :-. t i l l d e t e rm i n e d b y t h e l oc at i o n of t h e Pe­ ri ph e ry , t J. t e i n t h e g l ob a l :-. t ru c t u re . " I t i s h ard t o see ," G a l t u n g arg u e d . · · 110\\ t h e p -.. y dw l ogy o f se l f-re l i ance can be b o u g h t for money. " 3 0 A more j Lh t re c t i fi c a t i o n \\ o u l d occur i f d e p e n d e n t s t a t e s w e re free t o dec i de for t h e m , e h e, t h e i r p a t t e rn of d e v e l opme n t " w i t h o u t be i ng forced by t h e en­ t i re -.,o c i J. I m a L· h i n e r y . " A n i m portJ.nt presc r i p t i v e t he m e . t o be d e v e l oped fu rt h e r i n h i , L it e r \\ O r k . \\ a'.'- be i n g fl agged here : S e l f-re l i an t d e v e l opment i, t h e p referred ,trategy for -.,rate-., on t h e g l o b a l periphery. A g a i n . t h i s sig­ n a l e d a dec i , i \ e break \\ i t h a p re v i o u '.'- e m p h a si s o n associatii·c strategi e s o f d e \ e l o p m e n t . c o n , t ru cted a r o u n d the t h e m e s o f i nt erdepend e nc e . i nt e ­ g r a t i o n . a n d coopera t i o n . '.\ow recog n i zed a s be i n g b l i nd t o t h e s t ructur a l deterrn i nanh o f u n de rde v e l op m e n t . a s s oc i at i v e strate g i e s h a d a t t h e v er y l ea , t t o he , u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h , t rateg i e s of d i sassoc i at i o n a n d d e l i n k i ng from the global economy.

The Feudal Interaction Structure The ,econd m e c h an i -., m of i m pe r i a \ i t i ng n c l ll ', i v e l y of Periphery n a t i o n s . Further horizontal­ i zation of Center-Periphery re l a t i on s could be rea li zed by t h e g l obal i z a t i on o f t h e mean-., of prod u c t i on and commu n i cation to equa l i ze access i n order to e n -., u re t h at the needs o f t he periphery in the Periphery states were b e i ng met . I n g eneral . defe u da l ization would req u i re the estab l i shment of greater contact between the m ost distant of p arties and outside of estab l ished blocs.44 Obviousl y, such strategies would not be viewed favorably by the ben­ e fi c i arie'> of t h e e x i 'i t i n g g l obal structure . I n G a l t u n g 's eyes. t he crnters i n the Pe riphery -.,t ate'> appe ared to be t he most e x posed g roups a s t h e pawns o f the dom i n a n t c e nter-., and aho coe x p l o i ters. I n short . t h e y would have to c hoo-.,e '>i de -., . To f ac i l i t ate the proce '> '> of re a l i g n i n g the centers of t h e Pe­ ri p h ery t o \\ ard t h e i r own peripherie'> . he s u ggested some strateg ies a imed at red u c i n g h arm ony bet ween the centers. The fi r-.,t s uggest i on-somew hat e x t raord i n ary com i n g from a pac i fi st � was not so mu ch a strategy as a fa­ vorabl e c ircu m stance. If war occurred within or between Cent ers, this m i g h t pro v i de opport u n i t i c '> tor Pni phery s,tale.'> , as a conseq uence o f a re­ duced capac i ty for Center '>! ates to cxer c i '>c )! lobal dom i n ance. In add i t i o n , a breakdown i n the hri dgehead hct wccn centers ac-ros,s t h e deve lo pment d i ­ vi de-as a consequen ce o f the rise of, s ay, a popu l i st nationalism i n the

1 06

A QUESTION OF VALUES

Peri phery state -1nay camoufl age the d i sharmony withi n the Periphery state. thereby providing new strateg i c opportu n ities. Still another s et of strategies foc u sed on the reduct ion of d i sharmony with i n the Peri phery state. A gai n . the pac ifist voice was surprisin gly muted because either vio­ lent or nonviolent revolution was c ited as means for elimi nating ( quite lit­ erally. in the case of the former > di.s harmony. Alternatively. there was the more populi st strategy of developi ng greater cooperation between peri ph­ eries i n Periphery states-patterns of nongovernmental foreign policy. I n general. Periphery -generated strategics were to be preferred. s i n ce they re­ duced the likelihood of new forms of dependence being created. Fi nally. some strategi e s for transforming the Center -,tates were \'Cry briefly explored. Thus. an i ncrease of internal di sharmony. pos s i bly as a conseq uence of a decli ne i n n ationalist soli dari ty. mi ght facilitate a shift­ ing of the allegiance of the periphery in the Center state toward other pe­ ripheries. although Galtung had his doubts. On a more hopeful n ote. he suggested that the center i n the Center state ma) actually change it'> fu n­ damental goals without coerc ion as a consequence of increasing awarene-,s of the costs ( i.e.. negative spin - offs such as a threat to world peace. pollu ­ tion, a n d exploitation ) o f the imperiali st structure: .. There are man y pos-.i­ bilities [that ] may combine into qu ite likely contributions to,, ard s a d i -.­ .. ruption o f the system . Osten sibly. then . a peace pra x i s within developed states emerges here. with clear i mpli cations for the Galtung ian peace re­ searcher. But rather than develop the point. Galtu ng simply reiterated hi -. preference for Periphery-generated solutions . CRITICISMS OF "THE STRUCTURAL THEORY OF IMPERIALISM"

That the STI was one of the few of Galtung's offerings to attract pub­ li shed critica l re sponse wa-. a con-.eq uence . no doubt . of the fact that it trod on more than a few discipli n ary toes. To be frank it also provi ded an ca-.y target. as some ex. ample-, of critical commentar� ,, ill tllu -.trate. For Waltz. the concluding prescriptions reduced to moral imperati n' s that did not con sickr the structural con straints u pon L' ffec t i ,·L' action faced by a coa l ition of underdcvl'loped and resourcc-dci'ic ient statc'> . I ndeed. W�ltL cmploycd the ST I as a ca-.c -.tudy of poor inlL' rn ational relati o n s theory, si nce , among other dl'l'icicncie,. it provided little in the way of a n expla­ nation of i mperi alism or its hi storical ori g in s , the occasional brief excur­ -.i on into th1: pa,t not I,,\ ith-.ta nding. A-. Walt; correct I> ob-.n\ ed. the cla i m that " verti cal interaction i s the major source o f inequal ity in the world" was ,i1 1 1 pl) a-. -,ert L'd and rca"L'l'IL'd. More poi ntedly. WaltL claimed that be­ c;msc the concluding a '> s u m ptions were built in from the out set. the ST ! was not a theory at aJJ.4)

THE CRITIQUE OF GLOBAL STRUCTURE

1 07

The lack of explanatory content has also been noted by more sympa­ t h e t i c c r i t i c s . Palonen arg u e d . for e \ am p l c . t h at G a l t u n g · s m aj o r ind i c ator of e \ p l o i t a t i o n � t h e s h i ft i n g gap i n l i Y i n g con d i t i o n �on l y i den t i fi e s the i nt e n s i ty of an i nterac t i o n . not its d i rect i on or c a u s e .-+h Al though professi ng to sh are G a l t u n g · s n or m a t i \' e o u t l oo k. . Yan den B ergh fou nd h i s approach to h e :.,ta t i c and a h i :., t or i c a l . e \'en though the subject matter was "st ruct u red .. pwc e , , e , of -.;oc i a l dn e l opment. Gal t u n g o ffe red no more than a tax on­ l)m :, o f t:, pl'S of i m per i a l i s m t h at cou l d not acc o u n t for change . e i ther in , u pport L) f the prt'-.;nipt i n:- remed i e s or against them. He depicted a global ordt'r that ,, :h stable in spite of its i ne4 u i ty. and 4 u est ions of why and how re m a i n ed u n a n , ,, e re d . Echo i ng Wal t z . Yan den B erg a l s o c r i t i c i zed the l ad,, o f prop o , i t i o n a l statemen t s . de spite Gal tung's fre4 uent a l lu si o n to t he need to test the hypotheses arising out of the theory. 47 C hris Brown h as examined the uncertain relationship between Gal­ t u n g · , per,pel' t i , e and v ar i e t i e s of the mar xi s t tradit i on. In a compl e x cri­ t i 4 u e . B w ,, n a rgue, t hat G a l t ung's reject ion of mar x i s m . on the grounds t h at it ,, a , reduct i on i -.t in its econom ic determ in i sm . re vealed a part icularly , u l gar read i n g t h a t few m an i sb w o u l d recog n i z e . None t h e l e s s . Gal t ung w a s n o t averse to selectively drawing upon c l assical and neomarxist , o u rce , and appeared to accept "more or l e s s completely" Emmanuel ·s the­ ory of unequal exchange and, in l ater versions of the structural theory, \Yal l e r , t e i n · , \\ orld -.:, -.tern , approach as w e l l .-+� The thrust of B ro w n ' s ar­ g ument i-., t h at both the c l a-. , i ca l m ar x i s t tradit i on and the more recent de ­ pendenc) l i tera tu re u t i l i ze de v e l opmental h i storical accounts of capitali s t development that a t the very least offer a basis for a theory o f structural ch ange . It i-., aga i m t t h i -. c apac i t y t hat Gal tung ·s approach i n v i te s j udgment. According to Brown, the fun damental problem is the problematic ch aracter of G a l t u n g i an -.tructura l i s m . Purport i ng to be a n abstrac t . gener­ a l i1abk concept. Gal t u n g \ ·· -, t ru c t u re " was in fact primari l y i l l u strated by re ference to con-.,e4 uence, of the E u ropean form of i mperi al i sm dev eloped in the n i neteenth cent u ry. By genera l i z i ng from the spec i fic case. G a l t ung committed the very error that he attributed to m arxists. To be of value in i h o ,, n term , . G a l t ung · , model had to be shown to be app l i cable under a , a r i e t ) of con d i t i on -., i n t h e e m p i r i c a l wor l d . and t h i s w a s not attem pted. The i n ference that the e x t e rn a l be h a v i o r of i n g '> t r u c t u re i '> i h e l f p l a u s i b le . but in G a l t u ng · s c ase t he re \\ a'> no con'> i truc t u re i '> created and fro m then on i n fl ue rice'> w i thout he i n g i n rt uenced. G a l t u n g \ p u rportedl y ah 'i t ract '> lruct ure my,terio u '> l y ac4 u i red ontological substance, yet where it came from remained u ncl ear. In grounding the spec i fi c i t y of contcmporar) 1 m pnial i -. m in the po l i t i cal economy of E u ro­ pean c a p i ta l i -. m . marx i an v a riet ie'-. o f '>l ruct ura l ism al lea'-.l prov ided a has i -.; for a the ory o f '> l r u c t u ral c h a n g e . ( i a l t u n g w anted to a v o i d the d e p i c t i on of a c oncrete structure that was in some sense h i storically unique from

I 08

A QUESTION OF VALUES

prev ious forms of dom i nation; but i n so doing, h i s notion of structure was stri pped of e x p l anato ry suhstance:-19 Regard l e s s of i t s "dismal pol i t ic a l record, " the vi rtue of marx ia n anal y s i s , B rown argues, l i es i n the combi ­ nation of a sense of s t ructure and a sense of hi qory. Gal t u n g ' s fundamen­ tal error, then, was to confu se "an argument about the nature o f structura l explanat ion i n general w i t h a n argument t h a t concerns the nat ure of a par­ ticular structure."

CONCLUSION

To its critics, Galtung 's ana l y .., i s of imperi alism was, ah i storical . stat i c . i mprec i se , a n d lacking i n expl anatory content, defi c i e n c i e s ari'.-, i n g , ar­ guably, from the l i m itation s of the adopted methodology. I t s sole c l a i m s to origi nal ity l ay fi rst i n the identification of i ntra-actor effect'> of e x change relati ons-an i n teresti n g but hard l y dec i s i ve add i t i on to dependency the­ ory-and, second, in the dep iction of i mperi a l i sm as a general structural phenomenon, most v i s i ble perhaps i n econom ic re lations, but appl icable to any mode of social interaction. What is debatable, however, is w hether other theori sts of i mperi a l i sm or Galtung's cri ti c s would d i spute t h i s, . It i:-. hardly overextending m arx i s t and neomarxi s t ana l y ses to suggest that they c learly imply that the p o l itical economy of imperi a l i sm i "> re i n forced or re­ produced i n other realms of soc ial l i fe . s,uch as the pol i t i c a l . m i l i tary. and c u ltural. Galtung took i ssue with the economi:-.m of other radi cal cri t ique:-. of i m peri a l i s m but fai l ed to prov ide a knock-down arg ument aga inst the supposi tion that economic rel at i on s between the center and periphery \\ ere i ndeed primary. The constru c t i on of a general mode l of imperi a f om t h a t c o u l d incorporate noncapita l i s t forms of dom ination w a s undertaken at the cost of supplanting e x p l anation w i th descri p t i o n . To c l a i m that to a l l in­ tents and purposes soc i a l i st variants of i mperialis m ha\ e the :-.ame cf(ccrs as capi tali s t i mperialism is plausible enough, hut thi s is not to -,ay that they are the same thing. Galtung abdicated from pro\' i d ing a more complex ac­ count in which the di fferences as well as similarities between forms of dom i nation were more fu l l y e x pos,ed. I n stead. we are gi\'en a :-. u ggest i \' e descri pt i on of v�uious modal ities o f dom ination adding up to an i m age o f a world i n wh ich oppre s s ion and e xploitati on are rife a n d m u l t i faceted. I t m u st be conceded that the image of nonspecific i mperialist domi­ nat ion was, descri ptively at least, compe l l ing and :-. u i ted to the intel lectual t i mes. G a l t u n g 's STI can st i l l be usefu l l y m i ned for d i agra m m a t i c repre­ sentations of cert a i n arguments about the patterns of exchange between the global North and South. even i f i t s claims to go beyond thos,c same argu­ ments arc ju dged to he doubtful.:i 1 1 It can be argued. moreov er. that t o con­ s t ruct a debate bet ween h i m and other wri tns on i mperi a l i s m i s not only un l i ke ly to be very fru i tful but al,o to m i s s the poi n t . The s i g n i ficance of

THE CRITIQUE OF ULOBAL STRUCTURE

1 09

the STI can only be compreht'I1lkd within the conte xt of a rev i v i fied peace research. It p urported to itk n t i t\ . hy way of a sketched ideal type. a gen­ eral t·o n d i t i on from ,, hich to be l i beratt'd. rather than to reso lve 4uestions about when or how that condi tion came about. Withi n the discussion of im peria l i sm la) a :-ke tch of the fut ure agenda of peace research. c l ues as to the normative framework that would henceforth guide it. The portrayal of global imperialism fleshed out the concept of struc­ t ur a l , i o l e nce and n1aLk a case for plac i n g it at t he top of the agenda of peat·e re-.;t'arc h . The a n t i t h e , i , of the world described by the STI woul d p w , i de an a l ternat i , e model of world order that peace re search wou l d be charged ,, i t h help i ng to both adu mbrate and real i z e . The STI conc l u ded \\ i t h a plea that good soc i al theory should iden t i fy a l ternati v e practices and agenh of tran ,formation. A theory should be evaluated not only in terms of the pwdu ction of hypotheses to be tested against empirical re a l i t y ( data ) b u t "as much--or perhaps more-as a reservoir of policy implications to be te,ted agaimt pot e n t i a l real i t y ( goal s. v a l ue s ) . " 5 1 The e x i sting g l obal order could not realize the core values-in particular equality and auton­ omy--of positive peace. That Galtung was critical of liberalism is evident throughout the STI, b u t in spite of some normative commonalities between Galtung, the de­ pendenc) t heori , h . and marxism more generally. it a l so further i l l ustrated Gal t u n g · , perception of marx ism as a constricting perspective. Two e x p l a­ n ation, for h i " antipathy -;u ggest themse l v e s . The first, i ncreasi n g l y appar­ ent in ,ub"e4uent writing-. . is a negative j udgment of the h i storical record of marxism as practice (or more ac curately, Sov iet m arxism); socialist "tate" had not and could not re alize all of the val ues embedded in the con­ cept of po..,itive peace. Connected with this is a normative distaste for the pri , i kg i n g of ..,pec i fi c age nts of soc ial change . which was already evi dent in G a l t u n g · , re "pon..,e to Schm i d ' -, cri t i c i -,ms of the e arl y model of peace research. A second reason for the lack of enthusiasm for marxism (and liberal ­ i ..,m a , v, ell J torical a n al y s; i -, of a l l eged rea li ty ( a -., oppo..,ed to a de .-;cri ptive s l-. etch ) . strateg i e -. for mov i n g from t h e pre..,ent world t o a prc k rred wor ld would

1 1Q

A QUESTION OF VALUES

rema i n hol low, an i s sue I take up in Chapter 7. Secon d , t h e rej ec ti o n o f the two dom i n ant schoo l s o f pol i t ic a l t h o u g h t as s u ffi c i e n t to the task o f u n ­ derp i n n i n g t h e normat i v e d i me n s i o n s o f peace research meant t h at t h e v al ­ u e s that were to be rea l i zed w o u l d be detached from n o t i o n s o f e i ther cri­ tique or recht, central to marxism and l iberalism, respectively, but presumed nonetheless to have u n i v e rsal v a l i d i ty. W hat should he is i m p l i c ­ i t l y the antithesi s of w h a t is , b u t the assessme n t o f what i s wrong w i t h t he e x tant world order pre supposed an u n s u bstanti ated n o rmat i v e o u t l oo k . To be b l u n t . the STI d i d not pro v i de much assistance i n answering the 4uest i o n of why the worl d s h o u l d be equi table: no p a t h was pro v i ded beyond Ei de · s indictment of structural v i o l e nce a s a category de v o i d of m e a n i n g o u t s i d e of "the chosen goal s t ru c t u re. " or B ro w n 's equal l y c u rt observ a t i on that " i n the l ast resort. Gal t u ng 's po s it i on reduces to the propo s i t ion t h at e x p l o i ta­ tion exists whenever and wherever he determines i t exists."52 B ro w n made his comment i n 1 9 8 1 , ten years after Eide. By then Gal­ tung had begun to addres s the q ues t ion o f v a l ue s t h ro u g h re ference to the c o ncept of h u m a n nee d s . Befo re l ooki n g at his e ffo rts i n t h i .;; respec t . I shall consider the reform u l ation of science as an emancipatory practice.

NOTES 1 . Galtung, "On the Future of the International System," pp. 6 1 6-6 1 8. 2. See, for example, Krippendorf, "Peace Research and the I ndustrial Revo­ lution"; Gantzel, "Dependency Structures as the Dominant Pattern i n World Soci­ ety"; Senghaas, "Confl ict Formations in Contemporary I nternat ional Society " A more recent anthology of contemporary peace re,earch rncl ude, 1,, o paper, b� de­ pendency theorists Samir Amin and Andre Gunder Frank. even though they were not written for a peace research audience and do not refer to peace research at any point. See Pardesi, Contemporary Peace Research. 3. Galtung, "Twenty-Five Years of Peace Research," p. 1 2 . 4. Project Camelot was a CIA-Department of Defense project that ostensibly sought to promote re:--ean: h into the relat iom . h 1 p be t \\ een p 1\1L· e,,e, of de, e l opment in Latin American states and the potential for civil conflict and insurgency. Gal­ tung was invited to participate but rejected the offer and was instrumental in en­ suring the eventual cancellation of the project as a consequence of adverse public­ ity. Al though he initi ally s imply defended soc ial science against its abuse by government agencies. the project seems to have constituted a starting point for a long-term reappraisal of social science itself. See Galtung, "After Camelot": and Kelman, A Time to Speak, ch. 6. 5 . Galtung, "Introduction," EPR , 5 , p. 23 . 6. Galtung, "On the Structure of Creativ ity," p. 2 1 3 . See also G altung and G l edit�ch, "International Air Communication." 7. Galtung, " Introduction," EPR, 3 , pp. 2 1 -22. 8. In describing his own shift from the perspective of a "l iberal . . . work [ ing] within the behav iourist approach to international politics" to a critic of it, Jenkins c i te , ( i a l tu n g ·, L'arly ,t ruc t u ra l 1 , 1 paper, a, e x e m p l a r" nt '"p,yc holog 1cally reduc­ tioni st" behaviorism. See Jenkins, Exploitation, pp. xv, 82, 1 65 , 209. 9. Galtung, " Introduction,' EPR, 3, p . 24.

THE CRITIQUE OF GLOBAL STRUCTURE

11l

1 0. See Higgott, Political Development Theory; and Henriot, "Development Alternatives," p. 1 0. 1 1 . Frank, "The Development of Underdevelopment," p. 1 1 2. 1 2 . Mommsen, Theories of Imperialism. p. 1 32. See also Higgott, Political Development Theon, ch. 1 . 1 3 . STI, p. 437. 1 4. Galtung, "A Structural Theory of Imperialism: Ten Years Later," p. 1 83 . 1 5 . S T I . p . -U 7 . 1 6. STI, p . 437. B y "nation" Galtung clearly means state, and I use the two terms interchangeably 1 7 . A medical analogy is employed to make the point: Smallpox is an exam­ p k Pf ,lll q1 1dern1c d i ,ea,e. the,e J i ,L'a,es in t urn be i n g u nJer,tood in the conte x t o f "general pathology " STI, p. 438. 1 8 . STI. p. 439. 19. See Chapter 6. �O . S T I . p . � 1 3 . fn . ' 2 1 . See STI. p. 44 1 , figure 1 3. 1 . ""' ., S T I . r . � I 3 . fn . 3 . 23 Brown, "Galtung and the M arxists," p. 22 1 . 24 See "Preface to the French and German editions," i n Lenin, "Imperial­ ism," p. 640. Len i n 's l abor-aristocracy thesis is ins istent in i ts observation that only part of the working class in the imperial states gain from imperialism. See Brewer, \1arxist Theories of Imperialism, pp. 1 1 7- 1 22. 25. STI. p. 442 . 26 . Galtung, "A Structural Theory of Imperialism-Ten Years Later," p. 1 85 . 2 7 . Galtung does n o t discuss what Wallerstein calls the "semiperiphery"­ thl,,c n c \\ I� r nJ u, t n a l i u J ,tale, ach i e v i n g ,ign i fi cant growth rates based on high­ technology manufacture rather than the export of raw materials or semifinished goods Similarly, he does not consider those states that refute his claim that spin­ ( ) t t t' t le , t , ,m , i ng lr\ llll pnlL.L' '-" i n g gen erate developme n t . �tale� wch as A ustral ia and New Zealand. On this, see Mack, "Theories of Imperialism: The European Per­ spective," pp. 525-527. 28. See also Galtung, The European Community, ch. 3. 29. STI, p . 448. 30. STI , p p . 488-489. In a similar vein, if cheap credit is used to purchase !.! < H l d , ,inJ ,en I L e , t rnm CL' n l L' r ,tatL''- . the ,tructure o f i mperial i ,m remain, i ntac t . r1rce \ h t l ll _g 1.. 0 11 , u rn pt 1 1 m p;1 t t e m , v. 1 1 1 he rei n l orceJ . a n d '-pin-off benefih w i l l con­ tinue to accrue to the Center. 3 1 . S ! I . p. -l 5(J. f ig u re I L: . 32. STI, pp. 480-48 1 . 33 . STI, p. 45 1 . 34. Van den Bergh, "Theory or Taxonomy," p. 79. See also Brown, "Galtung and the \1arxists," p. 226. 3 5 . Waltz accuses Galtung of explaining international phenomena by refer­ ence to domestic criteria. Theory of International Politics pp. 3 1 -35. In fact, Gal­ tung describes the behavior of states and sectors of states as be ing governed by the global structure, a position that shares much with Waltz save for the explana­ tion of the origins of the structure itself. See Brown, "Galtung and the Marx ists," p. 222. 36. STI, p. 453. 37. STI, p . 7 1 5 , fn. 1 2. 38. See also Galtung, "A Structural Theory of Imperialism-Ten Years Later," pp. 1 84- 1 85 .

1 12

A QUESTION OF VALUES

39. But note the discussion of the three historical phases of imperialism, STI, pp. 457-459, and The True Worlds, ch. 4. Gal tung later described imperialism as a "world system," acknowledging the allusion to Wallerstein whose approach is still criticized for being nongeneralizable outside of a historical frame of reference. See "A Structural Theory of Imperialism-Ten Years Later," pp. 1 94- 1 95 . fns. 8 and 9. 40. Waltz has described the convertibility thesis as flawed logicall y and his­ torically. The invention of tanks and their use i n war preceded the opening up of the Middle Eastern oil fields, and in any case, the United States has been largely self-sufficient in oil production. Waltz, Theory of International Politics, p. 32. 4 1 . Two cases of nearly perfect correspondence are suggested: the U.S. rela­ tionship with Latin American states in the 1 950s and 1 960s and the relationship be­ tween the European Community ( EC) and the Asian, African, and Pacific states. Galtung did undertake an extensive case study of the latter. I n it he argued that the EC was "a superpower in the making" with the ultimate obj ective of reestablishing a Eurocentric world order and a united Europe firmly rooted in the West. The study was written in 1 973 during public debate in Norway over membership in the EC that led ultimately to rejection of membership i n a referendum. In an epilogue, Galtung suggests that the disparate group of "no" voters might constitute the basis for a future political platform based around decentralization, less emphasis on eco­ nomic growth and more on economic j ustice, greater national autonomy, and neu­ tralism in international affairs. See Galtung, The European Community, especially pp. 1 59-1 63. 42 . In the STI, Galtung briefly explored t h e correl ations between various in­ dices of development and trade patterns that were seen to confirm a relationship between the level of development and the verticality of trade rel ations, although he conceded that this was a test only "of a theory along the edges of that theory; it did not prove that the system is working as described." STI, p. 469. See also Gidengil, "Centres and Peripheries: An Empirical Test of Galtung 's Theory of Imperialism." 43 . STI, p. 470. 44. See STI, tabl e 1 3 . 10, p .476. 45 . Waltz, Theory of International Politics, pp. 3 1-33 . For an ill-tempered re­ buttal on Galtung's behalf, see Kaplan, Towards Professionalism in International Theory, pp. 1 3-27. 46. Palonen, "Social Science as Peace Re5earch," p . 1 1 4. 47 . Van den Bergh, "Theory or Taxonomy," p. 78 . 48 . Brown, "Galtung a n d the M arxists," p . 220. 49. Ibid. , pp. 2 23-225 . 50. Galtung's diagrammatic representation of "The Structure of Imperialism" (STI, p. 44 1 , figure 1 3 . 1 ) remains a useful teaching aid for illustrating the broad thrust of dependency theory. 5 1 . STI, p. 479. 52. Eide, "Note on Galtung's Concept of ' Violence,"' p. 7 1 ; and B rown, "Gal­ tung and the Marxists," p. 225.

5 Constructivism

In G :..i l t u n g: · � early ,, ork . the mode l of a science of peace displayed a u nit y bet,\ een i h e le m e n t:-- . A -., l ong as the u nder l y i n g pos i t i v i st pre m i ses were accepted. t h e re l a t i o n s h i p between the g ui d i ng v al ue of peace, the adopted -.,c i en t i fi r meth o d o logy . and t h e proposed ro l e of the peace researcher w as -., t rJ i g: ht fo rn ard e n o u g h . Once i t s fou ndat ions w ere c r i t i c a l l y scrutini zed, t he e d i fi c e l o oked dec i dedly k s s secure . A t th e t i m e of w r i t i ng the STL G a l t u n g: , , ;_i-., -., t i l l ret i rent to abandon pos i t i v i s m . Empiri c i sm remained an i m portant con s t rJ i n t upon dogmati sm . even if the i dea of science coul d not be red uced to the i n v e -, t i ga t i o n of the factual . 1 A l t hough the stance of ob­ jectiv ity in the form of a symmetri cal approach to conflict was now ac­ cepted as destructive of the v ery idea of peace research, which p arty or actor needed s u pport ,,. a-, to be determ i ned only by i t s posi t i on w i t h i n the "lK i a l -., t ru c t u re . not by profec,,ed i deological sentiments. I t was the struc­ ture of violence that was to be critically examined and opposed. A further, less visible theme pervading the discussion of imperialism \\ as, lu t u r i -., m . Gal t u n g: had conc l uded the STI b y emphas i z i n g the need to e , am t n e the p n? -,e n t in term , of an i m manent poten t i a l rea l i ty e x pressed as goal-, and , al ue -., . U n l i k e in s, ome of h i :--. earl i e r forays that l arge l y consisted in extrapolations of empirical trends, G a l t u ng now sought to m ake the m o re a h -., t ra c t po 1 11 t t h at e m p i r i c a l re -.,earc h w a s too he av i l y pre occ upied with establishing the veracity of knowledge of the present. 2 In his view, g ood -,oc i a l t h eory -,h o u l d a h o be i n d i c a t i v e of a potent i a l p ract i c e a n d g u i de u -., to the rea l i 1 a t i o n o f a p referred a l tern a t i v e . Theory s h o u l d not on l y be 1 c -., ted ag a i n -,t e m p i r i c a l dat a -that i s, , t h e e x i :--. t i n g or present but a h o he j udged aga i n -,t po-, i t ed val ue-, that secreted a v i -., i on of the fut u re . A t i s s u e w a c, h o w t o reconci l e this procedu re with the idea of sc ience . G a l t u n g -, t t l l d i d n o t w i s, h t o -, J i p 1 11 1 0 the l,; 1 1 1 d o r theon 1 1 ng t h a t peace re ­ -, e a rc h h ad -.,o e x pl i c i t l y rejec t e d . Sc i e nce wa'> not s i m p l y to he c :1-.,t as ide in favor of a ret u rn to re fl ecti ve, phi losophica l i deal ism or traditi onal

I I3

1 14

A QUESTION OF VALUES

peace t h i n k i ng. N e i t her co uld i t adopt the a n t i pac i fism of i t s marx i sl de ­ tractors. A sympathy for pol it ical strugg le agai n st e x p l o i tation did not e x ­ tend t o a defense of v iolence: as Galtung w a s l ater to rem ark . i f there was no taboo on all forms of v iolence. what was the point of peace research? " The stage was set. then. for a fundamental ret h i n k i ng of the very i de a of science and its u t i l i t y for peace research. Howev er. t h e attempted re­ construction of the concept of sc ience is not to be found in Galtung 's writ­ i ng s on peace research . R ather. i t took place i n some of his l esser known publ ications and appears to have attracted a somewhat d i fferent audience. This may account for the lack of reference to it i n the fe w p u b l i shed com­ mentaries and rev ie w s of Galtung ·s work . ., The core reference is Gal t u n g 's three-volume study of methodology, the first volume of which was not pub l i shed u n t i l 1 97 7 . a l t hough the re v i sed conception of science had been developed some years before and its cen tral argument\ pre -,ented in a 1 97 2 art i c l e p u b l i shed i n Sy nthi:sc. ::. To a l arge e x t e n t . there fore . the arg u m e n t for a reconstructed model o f science w a s p u b li shed ex p o s t facto, t h e m a i n t h e m e s a l ready hav i ng permeated G a l t u n g · s wr i t i n g'> on peace a n d development. THE LIMITS OF POSITIVISM

In 1 967, Galtung publi shed a monograph in which he explored the probl e m s of stat i st ic a l a n a l y s i s i n the soc i a l science s . 11 The book \\ as a success, becoming w i dely used i n undergraduate courses on social re­ search , especially in the United S tates. 7 Its contents he l d few surprises, bei n g l arge l y a straightforward anal y s i s o f the various stages of col lect i n g . col l a t i n g . and a n a l y z i n g stat i stical d a t a . T h e fac t that i t w a s \\ritten by a l e ading peace researcher was hard l y e v i d e n t . N onethe l e s s . t he tnt con ­ c l uded on a skept ical note i n that Galtung characterized the primary l i m i ­ tat ion o n soc ial research a s ari s ing not s o m u c h from methodol ogical and theoretic a l problems as from the soc i a l scie nt i s t ' s re lationship to soc i e t y. Particu larly l i m i t i ng was the concept of .. value neutra l i t y. " The t i me had come for soc iety to .. re l i nq u i sh t h i s value-loaded norm " and recog nize t he s c i e n t i st 's right .. to be engaged. to part ici pate . ":-: I n the s p i r i t o f c l a s s i ca l pos i t i v i sm . Galtung w e n t on t o ac k no \,\, kdgc that t h e othL'r side of the coi n was an obl igation on the part of the soc ial scient i st to .. hand back to soc i­ ety w hat it will al ways need most : a t ru e and rich picture of soc iety. past. .. present and fu t u re where 1w t h i n g i s tal-.L'n for granted . S c i ence must contin ue to sec!-. veri s i m i l it ude. tc stand al oof from prej udice. yet i t m u st a l so become a purposive ac t i v i ty wedded to the rea l i zation of better forms of soc i a l l i fe . It s h o u l d not he re stricted t o i n form i n g us only how t he world i s or was but should also depict what it cou l d become. The Project Camelot debac l e had al rl'ady a l e rt e d G a l t u n g: to the po­ tential abuse of so-cal l e d val ue-free soci a l science. Commenting some

CONSTRUCTIVISM

1 15

years later. (1altung admitted that h i s response at the time was to advocate .. a more symmL'tric type of project" cond u cted from the viewpoint of an ubj ect i \ e u hser , · L -r : " In other \\'ords, I believed that such archimedcan fi \.l'd points L' \ i -.ted and that these ,v crc the po ints from wh i ch objecti ve -.LK'ial -.cie1Ke -. lwu l d he p ur sued. "' 1 Similarly, ( ialtung ' s ear l ier observa­ tions on the impal·t of specific cu ltural contL'\ts on the scientifi c enterpri se el' IWL' d the pre krL'nce fL)r s: mmetr: and the u ltimate need for empirical , 1..'rification of ,oci al ,cientific hypotheses . In Latin America, for ex ampl e, he detel·ted among both conservative and rad i c a l soc ial scienti sts a pref­ ere11l'e for theorL'tica l n;p lor ation, or "meta-sociol ogy," at the expense of empi n c a l ana l : :-.i-.. l' 1rn il ling -. i mply to advocate the whol esale adoption of '.\ L)rth .. .\mcr il·an -.uciological methods, Galtung urged the development L)f an indigenou -. -.uciol ugy that did not consist entirely of "the normati ve nwde L)f "l)L'ial anal: -.i-." conditioned by "ch urch. l aw and i deol ogy" but also encouraged "fresh inventiveness in empirical sociology." 10 The,e l'l)mmenh on Latin ...\merican sociology revealed an impatience, e, c:.-n ho,tilit: . to,, ard traditional conservatism and scholasticism, coupled ,, ith a Clmtinuing belief in a redempti ve v i sion of sci ence. According to G.tltung . the ortlwdo\. scientifi c outlook was i nsufficiently concerned with ,ocia l tran-.formation and the exploration of possib le future social orders. In -.ume re,pel'h . Galtung was -,imply offering a m i l der versi on of the sen­ timent-.. e,pressed by numerous critics of mai nstream soci a l science i n the late 1 960s. However. he differed from other critics in that he did not re­ gard the ab andonment of the idea of social sci ence or the adoption of mar'\i,m and it-- cognate-., ( in either -.,cientific or nonscientific variants) as a -. u 1table re-.pon-,e to the probl em of backward- l ooking scient i fi c and ide­ olog1 c al traditiona]i-,m. Indeed. contemporary neomarx i sm was viewed as p artic ular ! : prone to -.,clrnlasticism. I f positivism was overly preoccupied ,, ith de, eloping methodological tool'>. then "di a l ectics" ( a common Ga l­ tungian euphemi -.,m tor marx i '>m ) was characteristically "verbose, possibl y -., u htl e. but inc a p a b l e o f defining clearl y ( for others) what dialectics is a l l ahout. " In -.,hon . the difference between po'>itivi-.,m and dialectics cou ld be e'i.pre-, ,ed a-. that het ,\ een "operations witho ut much understanding" and "understanding that has not been made very operational. " 1 1 The d 1 -,q u 1 d \\ ith orthodoxy of the R i ,� .dll and Left was to become -.tronger in tone. In a polemical paper. written in 1 9 7...J. and redolent or Berger '-, P_\/"u111 1 d 1 1 1/ .') (l cr ifi, e . G al tung attacl-..ed what he termed a "te u ­ . tonic intellectual -,t:, le . . e x ample-., o f \\ h i ch inc l uded nazi -.,m and " some form-., of G erman neo-ma rx i-.m_ " The c atalogue or -.,ins he l i -.tnl was c :,;, ­ ten-.ive: primaril:, ded uctive thinl-..ing, imu llicient vcr irication or hypothc­ -.,es. e'>oteric lang u age. an antagoni-.,ti c alti tude to competing perspecti V l'S . a preocc upation \\ ith j udging and l a beling other pn-.pcctive-., , l' l i ti'->111 , a ho -.,tility to dialogue, ad hornim·m argu 111cnh. and a genera l hu1nor le -.slll'"" · A gain-.,! the-.e tenlkncie-, , ( i altung arµ lll·d ror llll'thodo logic al eclcct i ci-.11 1 . the c ontinuing Ill'Cd t o L'ngage in c 111pir1cal rL · w arch in order to co 11rir111 1

�

1 16

A QUESTION OF VALUES

theoretical assumptions. and a rejection of an assumption of conflict be­ tween perspectives. Marxism might provide a useful political and episte­ mological perspective to juxtapose with liberalism and empiricism. but it suffered. nevertheless, from two defi ciencies: First, as a product of the West, it had much in common with liberalism and was therefore less novel than first appeared; second, although strong on critique, it was weak in creatively developing alternatives as a consequence of a perceived ten­ dency to embrace historical determinism. 1 3 Orthodox empiricism could not. however, provide an adequate substi­ tute for marxism 's insufficient creativity: Empiricism is based on the comparison between theory and data; and data can by definition only reflect the past, never the future. Hence, em­ piricism reflects the past-which i s perfectly acceptable as long as one is interested only in understanding the past. But peace research is concerned with the construction of a better world, to put it bluntly and naively. And this world with peace more realized than today, would h ave to be differ­ ent from the world so far studied with empirical methods. Hence, have we any reason at all to assume that the "laws" discovered by means of empiricism will be valid in a world that has transcended the world that produced the data for the scientific activ ity we engage in today? 14

Galtung was not advocating the wholesale rejection of empiricism. He was agnostic with regard to the influential debate around positivism then going on in German sociological circles (the Posiri1·ism11ssrrcin. preferring to ex­ plore the synthesis of dialectics and positivism in a manner that reflected his attitude toward the political philosophies of liberalism and marxism. Though he never displayed any interest in the complexities of marxist di­ alectics, the juxtaposition of present and future within a scientific frame­ work appealed to Galtung. It was this combination that his new model of "trilateral science," in­ troduced in 1972, was intended to address. The objective was to explore modifications to orthodox social scientific methodology that would ad­ dre ss the problems raised during the debate s of the late l 960s. In his 1 97 1 commentary on the Camelot episode. Gal tung \\ rote of now looking differently at the goal of science. It was no longer seen as "anything ab­ stract or idealistic called ' objectivity' " but as something that coul d con­ tribute to "a liberation process . . . . It is the task of science to participate on the side of the dominated party." 1 6 The revised understanding of scientific activity hinged entirely on foregrounding values as a category of equal status to theory and data. the latter two being seen as the cornerstones of orthodox conceptions of sci­ ence. Different forms of science could be conjured by variously juxtapos­ ing the three categories of data. theory . and values. Galtung argued that or­ thodox empirical science was primarily concerned with the production of

I"

CONSTRUCTIVISM

1 17

proposi t i ons and the construction of tlworiL·s. The production of proposi­ t i ons di d10tomi1cd . . ,\ orld space." the C'arll'sian domain of i nquiry repre­ senti ng all combinations o r sckcll'd variah ks that is in turn suhd i v i s i blc i nto v arious "\\ or \d points. " ThL' scienti st constructs sentences. or theses, about the d i dwtomi1at ion of the world space in which some poi nts arc i n­ cluded and some arL' L' \. c \udcd accord ing to the observat ion of variables. ThL'"C data SL'ntL'nL·c s nrn s i st in verbal reports or obser vat ion sentences that purport to iLkntif:, empirical reality according to the variables employed. Ho,, n er. thL' ,, orld so observed is not rhc world but the "empirical world," which is only one of many worlds. 1 7 Other ...,ch of scntcnce .... -theory sentences-also dichotomi zed the world "PaL·e according to ,, hether -;ome world points are ft11 1 od e rn tenor o l ( 1 a l t u n g · -. d i -.c u -. " i o n . T h u -. . to the rea l i -. 1 · s re t o rt t h a t G a l t u n g · " m odel wa'-> 1101 ph i l o -,oph)- o f "c ien ce hut pure pol i t i c \ , the idca l i " l repeal \ t he c l a i m th at \ C i c nce and po l i t i c " were i n separa­ b l e . In p m i t i n g a " i ng l e e m p i ri c a l and i m rn u tabk rL·al i ty. e m p i rical sciL'IIL' L' co u l d not but e n g age i n po l i t i c -. . /\ g a i n ..,! t h e u n i v cr "a l i " l a " p i rat i o n -. o r

1 30

A QUESTION OF VALUES

orthodox science was posi ted an alternative v i s ion of a "nonm i s s ionary." Buddhist mode l of science. the poss i b i l i t y of which was connected to t h e decl i n i n g hegemony o r We stern imperial i sm a n d i t s theological coro l l ar­ ies. 4 � Thus emerged an image or the i mpe nding d i ssolution of a domi nant We stern conception of knowledge , or l eg i t i m i z i n g myth. behi nd w h i c h lay a telos centered around a u n i fied gl obal sociopo l i tical order. I n i ts place were the shadowy outl ine s of an al ternative scient i fic practice and conse­ quently another possible real i t y. A lthough the new scient i fic method-the ru les govern ing the compari son of categories of sentence'>-may have uni­ versal app l i cabi l i t y ( a l t h ough Galtung wa'> ambiguous on t h i s point ) . i t was not i n i t se l f i ntended overtly o r covert l y t o legit imate a '>et o f u n i v er­ sal social valu e s under the g u i se of trut h . Rather. it consi '>ted of an epi ste­ mology i ntended to fi t a gl obal Galtung: s idealist -. u g ­ gc -..tcd . aL-counh < 'f reality arc ideologically or civilizationally framed. then other acc ount-.. arc a priori po '-> -.,ihlc. Then what i" this empirical world -.o in need ol tran -.. formation ·.1 b1 ually. on what ba'->i'-> do we -.elect this poten­ t i al rcalit) o , cr a1 rnthcr'! In '->hort. what arc the value-. that would enable ni t 1 c i -.. rn and c o 11 -.,1ruct 1 , 1 -., 111 . a'-> (ialt un12 defined them. yet avoid -.im ply creating another totali1ing , i'->io11? Galtun12 could haVL' addre-.sed such 4ue -..tion" if he had contemplated -..ll'ppin)! more firmly onto the tnrain o r politi cal ph ilmoph) and ethic -.,. A l tn all. c o11tc 111poraneo u -. \\ ith hi'-> trilat­ eral mockl o l -.,c i L·nc c \\ e re e 111 crµe11t di '-.co tJr'->L''- al'->o q ue -.tioninµ llltHkr­ nit) and the un warranted -.. o v er L· i )! nty or it-.. truth that -.lwwL·d littk intn­ e-..t in trying to \\ ork \\ ithin thL· '->tulti fy inµ lanµ ua)!L' and 1nethod or '->tll'ial science.

As was the case with Galtung's study of imperialism, perhaps it is a

mi'->take to pay too much mind to the < >'->lL'n..,ih k u>ncL'rll\ o l hi '-> rework in/,'.

1 32

A QUESTION OF VALUES

of the idea of science. Instead. i t mi g h t be better understood metaphori­ c a l ly. as a plea fo r c h a nging the s t y l e of utopian po l i t i c al d i scourse i n orde r to place i t on a more systematic foot i ng t h rough the app l ication o f a set of d i scursive ru les. I t was an argument. then. for the d i s'>olution of the wall between '>C i cn c e and po l i t i c s . I ndeed. G a l t u ng c l o'>ed his d i sc u s s i o n with t h i s observatio n : " People in general observe . fore see a n d prefe r and have to do so in order to l ive . . . . Let the scientist be one among a l l mank ind. w i t h goal s bu i l t into h i '> da i l y l i fe and work . makin g h i m se l f ac­ countable to others by t e l l i n g ope n l y what h i s pre fe rred world i '> . ":'i n , ,rnJ pu l 1 t 1-.:al p..irt i e , t h :11 preddine i h need, \\ i t h reg ard to the \(abi l i ty of the political system." Toward a Rational Society, preface and ch. 5 . 25 . Succinctly described by Pusey a s the "objectivist i llusion o f unreflecting science.' See his Jurgen Hahermas, p. 2 1 . 26. McCarthy, The Critical Theory of Jur?,en Habermas, ch. l . 2 7 . !--, CC. p . 5 1 .

28 See, for example, Findlay, Nuclear Dynamite. 29. See also Bhaskar, The Possibility of Naturalism, ch. l . 30. Galtung, "Two Ways of Bemg Western," p. 2 1 8. 3 1 . ECC, p. 54. 32. See Chapter 8. 33. See the anecdotal (and possibly apocryphal) reference to two American In­ diam,, overheard by a U. S . anthropologist on an airplane, discussing ways of not d 1 ,appu rn t 1 n g 11 a 1 \ c > ! >Li lli-' a n1 h rnpolog 1 , h . h 1 1 1 1 , l' lll l ll i-' IWVL'l l-- 1 1 1 , h i p ') ,tl'lll\ !or example. ECC, p. 252, note I 0. 34. Strasser, The Normative Structure of Sociolof(Y, p. 6. 35. See Chapter 6. 36. ECC p. 60. 37. ECC, p. 6 1 . 38. On this point, see Habermas, Toward a Rational Society, p. 66.

1 34

A QUESTION OF VALUES

39. ECC, p. 6 1 . 40. Strasser, The Normative Structure of Sociology, p . 1 1 . 4 1 . Ibid., p. 1 2. 42. ECC, p. 62. 43 . ECC, p. 68. 44. Lukacs, History and Class Consciousness, pp. 224-225 . 45 . Habermas, Toward a Rational Society, p. 63 . 46. ECC, pp. 65-69. 47. Compare this with the idea of "narrative archetypes" in Lyotard, The Post­ modern Condition. 48. ECC, p. 68 . Buddhism becomes much more v isible in Galtung's writing during the 1 980s. See Chapter 8. 49. ECC, p. 68. 50. ECC, p. 70.

6 From Hu1nan Needs to Global Values

The \ J l ue idea of J p l u ra l i s t . equitable g lobal soc i a l order was first ad­ u mbrated in the revised c onception of positive peace, was reiterated \\ i t h i n the "tructural c r i t i q u e of i m peri a l i s m . and also permeated the ar­ g u m e n t for an a l ternative u nderstand i ng of science. B ut the sketch of an al t e rn J t i w \\ Orl d order remai ned unpacked. even though it c le ar l y drew upon a complex '>et of v a l u e ::. . A l t hough Galtung·s t r i l ateral model of sci­ ence cou l d m a n i p u l ate soc i a l values. it could not account for their ori g i n s J n d mere l y a..,se..,..,e d t h e val idity of normati v e c l a i m s i n a c ircu l ar fash­ ion through the compari "on o f d i fferent sets o f v a l u e - l aden statements. The i nJde4 uacy of thi.., proce..,s was ::,tark enough. After all. the observa­ tion, m ade in "Violence, Peace and Peace Research," that l i fe chances in the e x t a n t g l ob:.d "tructure \\ e re unequal was s i m p l y an empirical state­ men t : it doe" not /og irn//y fo l l ow that they shoul d be otherwi s e . I n order to avoid the "natura l i q i c fal l acy." the val uative component of the critique of global structure had to be identified and accounted for. 1 Given Gal­ t u n g ·.., t re 4 u e n t l y e x p re ..,..,ed di '>dain for deri v i ng ::,oc i a l ends from p h i lo­ "orh ica l , :, ..,tern .., that retlect e x c l u s, i onary soc ial in terests. and h i s appar­ ent d i .., m i .., .., a l of pure l y philo-,ophical ly deduced val ues . the source of the \ a l uc " re4 u i red fo r the purpo-,e.., o f critic i '>m and construc t i v i s m must l ie e lse where. Galtung rejected the mere dreaming of utopias as too easy a way out . Hu m am art: nei ther .., i m i l ar nor con-,tant and con s i stent ( fac tors, . he rightly noted. t h at were often i g n ored in utopian writ i n g ) . and he thought there wa-, l i ttle v a l ue in deve loping ..,< >e i a l goa l '> wi thout reg ard to human ity in a l l ih di vers,ity. B u t even if hi.., writing e x h i bited an increasing s,cn sitivity to -.,oc i a l d i fference. a con1.,i 1.,tcnt theme aho wa.s tile ack nowledgment that there are uni ver..,al foundation.., upon w h i c h rwace research c a n he h u i l t . A l ong w i t h n u mero u .., other nor m at ive wri ter s, . (i a l tung drew upon a con­ ceptual tool that appeared to prov ide a bri d ge acrn-;1., the fac t - v a l u e and

1 36

A QUESTION OF VALUES

i s -ought d i v i d e s : h u man needs. I t was needs-talk t h a t he saw a s enabling the connect ion of the struc t u ra l critique of i m pe ri a l ism w i t h the bl uepri nt­ ing of an a l ternative world order. I n :-. hort. i t provided a meam for grou nd­ i ng the value amalgam of positive peace. It is perhaps s urpri s ing, then , that the substan t i v e anal y s i s of h u man needs took up very l i t t l e of Galt ung 's vol u m i n o u s output i n s p i t e of i t s central ity t o h i s projec t . I n h i s few brief p re:-.entati on s of i t . t h e concept o f hum an needs appears as unproblemat i c . i t s putat i v e l y non ideologicaL q u a s i -empirical qual i t i e s and appare n t sheer re asonablenes:-. s u i t i ng h i s purposes. H owe ver, the d i scuss ion o f needs was a l w a y s located w i t h i n a broader concern w i t h "human val ues" and "world goa l:-. "' w i th i n w h i c h the vari o u s terms were often used interc hangeably. 2 I n spite of t h i s i m prec i ­ sion. Galt u n g ' s presentat ion o f t h e val ues t o b e re a l i zed w i t h i n a pre fe rred world order was conducted c learly w i th i n the spirit. if not a l w ay s the l e t ­ ter, o f needs-talk. HUMAN NEEDS AND HUMAN VALUES

In a short paper p u b l i shed i n 1 97 5 , Galtung re viewed ten broad " ' \'alue dimensions,'' derived anton y m i c a l l y from a set of negat i v e soc i a l con d i ­ t i o n s , that formed the core of the World I ndic ators Program ( W I P ) of t h e C h a i r o f Confl i c t a n d Peace Rese arc h a t t h e U n i versity of Oslo. 3 The ten values and their antonyms were l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. I 0.

Personal growth Diversity Socioeconomic growth Equality Social justice Equity Autonomy Solidarity Participation Ecological balance

Ali enation Uniformi ty Poverty Inequality Social i njustice Exploitation Penetration Fragmentation Marginalization Eco l ogical imbalance

These value dimensions emerged out o f the I t) 7 J world congress of the In­ ternat i on a l Po l i t i c a l Sc ience A ssoc i at i o n that e stabl i s h e d ; t ransnational g roup to study and i m p l ement a Worl d I n d icators Program . The WIP was in tended as a contri bution to a g ro w i ng soc i a l i n d i c a�ors movement and with which i t shared a concern about the overre l iance on econom i c i nd ica­ to rs o f deve lopment . The perpe t rators of t h e l a tter were. b y i m p l icat ion . "national and internat ional bureaucrac ies" that drew upon a range of mod­ els of global devel opmcn t that appeared i n the late 1 960s and ear l y I 970s .

FROM HUMAN N EEDS TO ULORAL VALUES

1 37

partly as a con :--equL'nce of widespread conce rn s over the finill'ness of many global re-.,ourCL':-- and partly as a product of :--uhstantial improvements in L·omputn-gL'nerated data ba:--e-., and :simulated projections:1 Model:-- :-,uch a:-- that of the Club of Ronll' . the Leontiff model. and to a lesser extent the Bariloche nwlkl " ne :--L'L'n to lw too l\lalthusian in their perspective. In spite l)f their L·ommendabk function in drawing attention to a number of global L'L·ological ni-..e s . (,altung critici1.ed these models for their method­ oll)g) . ethiL·al a:--:--um ptiom . and l l'ndency to kan toward the middle-class " ideolog) of L'cologi:--m. " ' Li nder an ostensibly apolitical guise . they de­ piL·ted thL' \\ orld a-.. contlict-free and dn·oid of problems of inequality and inju-..tiCL'. He -..a,, the e '\clu-.,ion of war. the arms trade , colonialism. and impcriali-..m a-.. inncusable dcficiencie -., for model-., claiming to identify the sources of global crises. In contrast, the WIP claimed several unique features . First, it was to be \\ orld-oriented in appl) ing ii-., indic ators to "world society." The defin­ ition of wt 1 t·r_,· emplo) ed ,, a:-- . however. rather odd. Acknowledging that ,tri1..· tl ) -..peaking a dome -.,tic analogy did not hold. Galtung suggested that in " a general -..ociological -..en -., e " the world was a society because it was ,df- -..ufficient and. :--tranger -..till. because it did not depend upon a "human .. em ironment. Pre-..ented thu -., , the idea of world society was seemingly re­ duced to that of a self-maintaining system. The term societv alludes to much more than this. Connoting a set of -..ocial relation-.. bet,, een actor:-, that goe s beyond mere patterned interac­ tion. it i-.. ine-..c apabl) connected to conscious human endeavor. Galtung's introductur) di-..cu-..-.,ion of po-.iti\'e peace. written a decade earlier, at least dre,, upon the more reve aling imagery of a div erse humanity that collec­ t 1 , el::, engaged in rul e -go\'erned behavior. premised upon a fundamental ,pecie-.. identification. Thi'> original argument for the possibility of positive peace ir1 \ ited compari,on w ith the Grotian depiction of an " anarchical so­ ciet::, ot -.,ta 1 e -., · · :m d arguably offered a more substantive basis for claim­ ing the ex i -.,tencc of a global -..ociety. Like Galtung. the Grotian ( English or "rationali-.,t" i -.chool of international relations also resists recourse to a do­ me-.,tic analog) . ba"ing ih claim a" to the exi'>tence of an international so­ ciety on the authorit 1 of a number of shared principle-., that, by and large, arc uphe ld h) mmt '>late'> and without which no Uch impreci-.,l'. arguml'.11t that ( ialtung reproduced hut did not adclre -,-., the problem'> a-., -.,ociall'd with the concl'.pt of' human needs. I l e was making a ca-.,e for the generation of pure indicator.-., that wne not per 111e­ atcd with or determined by prior theoretical a-., -.,u111ptirn1-., hut ncvnthele-;s formed the ba-.i-., for a 11or111ative :h '>c -., -., ment of ', ll lTL' " " in rcali1ing I I C L' d " ­ derived goa k Thc-.,e goah provided in turn the ha-.,i-., for l'< H 1 -.,tructi11g a

1 40

A QUESTION OF VALUES

v i s ion o f a des irable soc i a l order. At no point, however, did Galtung define what he u nderstood by hu man needs beyond their description and as a consequence could not substanti ate the i r e x i stence beyond a suppos i t i o n . H e drew upon Maslow's well -known "hierarchy of needs" b u t did not d i s­ c u ss Maslow's depiction of human needs as u n i versal instinctual products o f human physiological and psychological make u p. 1 2 In spite of some ev ident commonalities, neither did he con sider the writings of the young M arx i n which human needs are depicted as the essence o f what i t i s to be human , their content changing and di vers i fy i ng in reflection o f "man 's i n ­ cessant productive act i v ity." ' -' Yet a s i m i l ar view of needs a s reflec t i ve of differing soc ial contexts was evident in Galtung 's discuss i on then, and es­ pec ially so i n his more recent wri ting. In M arx 's account, the fu l fi l lment of the wealth of h i stori c a l l y evol ving needs i s an end in i t se l f. for only then w i l l a situation arise "where man does not reproduce h i m s e l f in any deter­ m i ned form , but produces his tota l ity. "' 1 -+ Th i s seems to be what Galtung was also dri v ing at , since he depicted the satisfaction of the whole range o f h u m a n needs a s marking the rea l i zat i on of pos i t i v e peace . a condition i n w h i c h indiv id ual s e l f- real i zation becomes tru l y po -; s i b l e . T h e concept o f human needs acted a s a standard against w h i c h specific soc ial order-; could be j udged. 1 5 The lacuna i n Galtun g ' s discussion can be elucidated by considerin g a fundamental defi c iency i dentified i n needs theory b y its critics. l'\eeds­ talk appears general l y to confl ate d i ffere nt form s o f u tterance . H u man needs are presented as empi ric al statements of necessity but can also refer to statements o f logical , analyt ical , and normat ive necess i t y. 1 0 The rea l i za­ t i on of the seductive objective of a scienti fic ethics becomes stranded on the difference between clai m ing the empirical e xi stence of a need and ar­ gui ng for i t s ful fi l l ment. 17 As a consequence . needs theory is i ne scapab l y te leological-it req u i res for i t s defense a prior standard o f human n.cel­ lence upon which an ethics of needs satis faction can be grounded. is With regard to the most fu ndamental needs, such as Masllnv ·s "phy s i c a l '' and '"security" needs, this i s hard l y problemati c . since few would argue again st the i r e x i stence or the "unqual i fied c l a i m for [ th e i r ] sat i s fact i on . " l the implied con­ nection hct\\ een it and pol i tic -., : Did po l itic " preccdl' or wa-. it con-.;equent upon the real i zation of the ful l range of needs? fhe foundational , aluc d i lllL'nsions, Wl'.re -,uhdivi(kd furthn according to whether they reflected ·•di"trihution-orienlL'd dimen-.ion-.." -;uch a " divn­ sity. Cl corresponded with ··actor-oriL'nted µoa h" and \\ ere inl l'nded to

1 44

A QUESTION OF VALUES

reflect the focus of the l i beral on the consequences for i n d i v i d u a l s of the distributi on and production of soc i a l goods. The stru c t ure-oriented v a lues were seen to be compat ible with a mar x i s t outlook and were antonyms of exploitation, penetration, fragmen tation, and margi nalization. This partic­ u lar s u bd i v is i on o f v a l ues continued Galtung's recourse to the method­ ological principle of u t i l izing both sides of the Western ideological d i v i de, albeit with a decisive lean to the left. There was, however, a further re­ finement of the principle l ooming: We s tern thought as a whole was to be decl ared an ins uffic ient source of values. I t was in h i s needs-talk that Gal­ tu ng began overtl y to d i splay an i nterest , l ater to become someth i ng of a preoccupation, i n mov ing beyond the confi nes of an occ idental frame of reference.

A Note on Gandhi Given the l ifel ong influ ence of Gandhi and his teachings on Galtung, there was a certain inevitab i l ity to Galtung 's gazing beyond the confi nes of the West. Yet, tracing Gandhi 's imprint on Galtung's work prior to the 1 980s is diffi c u l t ; Gandhi was rarel y referred to d i rectl y in the ear l i er writ ­ i n g s on peace research , t h e l anguage o f modern socio logy i n h i b i ti n g d i s­ cursive e v idence of an intel lectual debt. S t i l l . Galtung's first publ icat ion of significance was an analysis of Gandhian ethics, coauthored with Arne Naes s. 28 That Gandhi provides the fundamental source of ethical i m .p i ra­ tion for Galtung was also evident in a 1 959 paper in which the concept of pacifism was explored from a sociological perspective yet equated with Gandhian ethics. 29 A more recent retrospect i ve comment on the founding motivations for peace rese arch confi rmed the centrali ty of Gandhi 's ethic:-:. from the begin n i ng. Here Galtung speaks of peace re search as originat ing out of a project entailing the mutually enriching interaction o f "a moder­ .. ately rigorous soc i a l sc i ence" w i t h "the deep i n s ight and moral command emanating from the writings of Gandhi . 3 0 Little discussion of the substance of Gandhian ethics was provided in the 1 95 9 paper. w h i c h described Gandhi ·s pac i fi s m as an ideology. the principle reference group of which was humanity. In common with most com mentators . Galtung presented Gandh i as a source of practical inspira­ tion above all , whose life was an exampl e of the technic al application of ethi c a l princ iples to politics in conditions of social connict. 3 1 Gandh i ' s doctrine of ahimsa ( l i teral ly, nonk.i l l ing, nonharm i ng ) refers to a form o f direct action, a substantive moral force i ntended to restrain expected vio­ l en ce and comparable to the Pauline concept of love. It i s to be di stin­ guished from the mere refraining from v i olence, or "unviolence," and con­ sti tuted not o n l y an i n s p i rat io nal e t h i c but a l s o a g u ide to constructing a pract ice of nonvi olence -satyagraha. Gandhi ' s conception of nonviol e nce was as a practical -moral instrument intended to achieve concrete results. 32

FROM HUMAN NErnS TO GLORAL VALUES

145

G a l t u n g c l early ,, as fu rtlwr i n s p i red by Gand h i ' s equat ion of peace not only w i th the absL'lll'L' of physical v i o k nn· but also with the rea l i 1ation of u n i v ersal j u s t ic t' . He rL'gankd L·:11npaiµ11, for the ending of conscr i ption or d i ,arm a m L' n t as s u pnfi c i a l . ai med at symptoms rather t h an causes. The primary cause of violence-its essence according to Gandhi-was ex­ p loi tat i o n . thL' ") mptonh of ,, hich ,, ere :,,ubm i s:,,ion a11d serv il i t y re s u l t i ng i n a loss of self-worth.33 C a l t u n g · , ,ub sL'LJUL'nt ,, orl--. revealed i n creasingly numerous but often ,ti l l , e i lcd hallmarl--. , of Gandh i s m . i n i n \'erse proport ion to a dec l i ning re ­ l i a n L·e UJlL)l1 ort hodo\ soc i o l og i c a l d i scourse . Wri ti n g i n 1 9 7 1 . Galtung i Lk n t i fi e d t hrL'e s i g n i fi c a n t pri n c i p l e s i n Gandhian thought : nonv i olence ( ah i m ,a l . ,df-re l i anct' ( "'' ade:,,h i ) . and self-real ization. the first two bei ng ,en ani-- of the l atter. q Gand h i ·s work was described as a bridge between tht' L)riental conct'rn ,, ith i n n e r ,ve i l -being and the occidental foc us on so­ c i a l , truct ure. a l t hough the latter i s subord i nated to the former. It is from Gandhi that Galtung took the concept of a non violent and nonexploitati v e , or lwri zontal . "LK i al ,tructure. to b e contrasted with an occ idental tendency to dn e l o p , t'rt i c a l soc i a l re l a t i o n s that constitute a s i g n i ficant source of a l ie n at i on and a barrier to ,elf-real i z a t i o n . Furthermore . Gandhi i n s p i red the i dea of autonomy a, self- re l i ance coupled with com m u n ity. The i deal \L)C i a l ,truct u re ,hould be such that :,,oc i al detachment as a strategy to a, oid ,tructural , i oknce i, po..,..,ible and the opport u ni t ies for self-realization are e n h anced. I t i , not d i ffic u l t to see the tran slation of the com b ined v a l ­ ue, o f autonomy a n d collec t i v i t y i n t o the set s o f goa l s promoted i n t h e \\" I P. a l though Galtung , a ,,· a defi c i ency i n Gandh i 's argument for s e l f­ re l i a nce ari , i n g out of the o, err i d i n g focus on i n d i v i du a l spiritual purity. Gandhi ,, a, not a ,tructural pl ural i . H ermeneutic disputes over rel i gious texts often re flected t h i n l y veiled c l ass confl icts. espec i a l l y i f a particu l ar rel igion advocated acceptance of one 's station i n l ife. He thought that such visions were hardly l i berat ing i n sec u l ar term s . Howe ver. the interact ion between c lass and eschatological v i s ion remained insightfu l because i t encouraged he terodox i nterpretations o f re l i g i o u s doctrine. within broad cosmological parameters. Like h uman personal i t i es. soci a l cosmolog ies were deemed to be nec­ essary components of h u man soc ial e x i stence . Though mal leable and sub­ ject to d istortion, their essence preceded mani pulat i on. T h i s assumption sat u neas i l y with Galtung's apparen t approval of the description o f rel igion as a man-made opiate, a v i e w t h at appeared to cast doubt upon the u t i l i t y o f rel igious v i sion. 4° F o r M a r x , rel igion w a s a m an- made di stortion o f man · s true being, an expression o f a n i mperfect se l f-awareness. As such . i t c o u l d only be a barrier to emancipation and m u s t be removed i n order t h at h u­ manity can trul y be free . For G a l t ung. re l i gion was adopted u nprob l emat­ icall y as a source of v i sions. the u t i l ity of which did not requ i re re l i giou'.-> bel ie f. I ndeed. he went on to make the c l ai m t h at oriental rel igious escha­ tologies prov i ded a much better b a s i s for t h e form ation of \' i s i o n s t h a n their occidental counterpart s. H e preferred t h e i r emphasi s o n proce ss O\'er structure and t h e i r l e s ser i n t e rest in reso l v i n g a l l contradict ions i n t h e search for absol u te tru t h . Agai n . t he analy s i s was restricted to the l e v e l of comparative description. Prefe rred e lements c o u l d be se lected from a range of cosmologies and eschatologies. but the pri nciples o f selection re­ ma ined unex p l a i ned outs i de of a de scri p t i \'e acco unt of G a l t u ng 's o w n philosophical preferences. FROM HUMAN VALUES TO DEVELOPMENT

At this point I can begin to bring together thL' various el ements of Gal­ tung·s rapidly diversify i ng oe uvre . Comparing and contrasting oriental and occi dental social cosmologies contri buted to the e x pansion of our u n der­ standi ng of the possible range of soc ial values by h i g h l ighting certain needs pertaining to the devl'l opmcnt of '"inner-man." i n s u ffi c i e n t l y recogn i zed

FROM HUMAN NEEDS TO GLOBAL VALUES

1 49

within Western tlwught. If \\ L' rL'cal l the argument for trilateral science. it required a , alue set again,t ,, hich reality ( empirical data ) and possihk al­ ternati,es le,pre-, -;ed as tlwor> senlL'nCL's ) can be assessed. Such a value set could be dniYL'd from thL' analysis of a range or fundamen tal and "al­ most fundamental" human needs. This provides, in turn. the basis for con­ , l ntL·ting paths to human social Lk\'l'lopment -in other words. the fleshing out of the concept of positive peace. Thl' intcgratiPn of dn dopment studies into Galtung 's peace research beL·aml' inc, itabk with the introduction of the concept of st ructural v io­ knL·e and the attendant downgrading of an orthodox focus on such things :i... arnh L·ontrol and disarmament. The depiction of conflict as a structural probkm meant that dfrcti\'e peacd.el'ping necessitated g loba l , structural d1ange . .: 1 In con t rast I L) his earlier enthusiasm for interdepende nce as a b :i... i , fo r e '\tcnding the realm of peace, an e xamplt- of an associative peace ,tratl'g > . Galtung '-\\ i tched to advocating se lf-re liance as a precursor to in­ tc rdl' pl' ndence. Structural t ransformation was now seen sometimes to re 4uirl' d i ,a ......ociation between social units. followed by autonomous deve l ­ opment and eventual reassociation on a more equitable basis. On ce ;.igai n . Galtung appear-.. to hav e been tapping into an eme rging normati , e and analytic;.il theme e vident in wider scholarly and activist dis­ cour,e ,. The contl i ct i n I ndochina had already stimu lated a literature that, recog n i L i ng rnar x. i -.,m ' s relative sil ence on nationalism, was arguing for a dc fen -.,e of nationali-.,m in a g lobal context of uneven development. I n pre­ maturl'I> a-., -.,urning a uni,·er-.,aliLing process of emancipation. marxism had fJ ikd to l' \arn i n e adequJtely the tenacity of nationalist se ntiments and the CJU '-.l''- of contl i ct between nationalisms. Nationalist movements cou ld be -..een a, agenh of emancipation a-, much as reaction-a response from the global pl' riphe ry to i n ternati onal inequality. I n different ways. Galtung and othe r-., " ere 110 \\ ad no,, !edg i n g that the e xtension of moral and political commun i t'.- \\ a-., an un e , en proc e -.. -., that could not be taken for granted.-1 2 The \\ l' '>tc rn cu-.,mopoli tan -.,enti men h that pervaded Gal tung's early work became increa-.,ingly i mplaus,i hlc. a'> he was to admit open ly. An emphasis on inte rdependence la ikd to comide r the multifaceted structure of in­ equalit'.- . _j u-..t a-., the orthodox approach to de velopment tended to assume "> mrnetr> hl't\\ een '> i n g , ert1 cal incqualitiL' '>. ( ialtung now argued that a superior approach req U 1 red the analy -., i -., ol meam by which vertical inequality could he ll \ e rcome. g l ohal ju-.,ti ce coul d hL· re,di1ed. and meaningful part i cipa­ tion t or \\ eak. e r ,oc ial actor-, could hL· (kveloped. It wa-., on ly through lhL' i n tegrat i on o l anal> '>l''- ot hor i 1 ontal and vertical devel opment. symmet ric and a-.,ymmetric cont! ict. and di rect ,l lld -.,tructural vi olence that till' .. thco­ rie -., and i ndeed the pract i n· ol developm ent . co11 tlic t and peace can pro­ ceed further as tools of human fu l fi l l ment. "43

1 50

A QUESTION OF VALUES

The i m age presented i n the a n a l y s i s of i mperi a l i s m was o f a world riven by d i v i sions that crossed the borders between the i nternational and domestic real m s . It was w i t h i n this world po l it ical context that the analy­ sis of the p roblems of development ( struct ural v i olence ) and armed con­ fl ict ( d i rect v iolence ) had to be l ocated. I t was a context i n which the u se of arms was not mere l y a consequence of a capac i ty to use them , or ran­ dom events, but arose fro m bas ic gl obal confl ic t formations o f which the most fundamental was imperial i s m . Echoing a polemic that i n a d i fferent version was also in fa vor w i th conservati v e writers, Gal t u ng spoke of a third world war that had been i n e x i stence si nce 1 945 . For Galtung, i t was a war between rich countries and the masses i n which the technological might of the developed world was arrayed aga inst the potential of '"people power" i n the underdevel oped world. Too great a focu s on the East- We '.'> t a x i s had masked a more fundamental confl i ct formation w i t h i n w h i c h the two superpowers were then competing for adoption as the desirable dev e l ­ opmental model for unde v e l oped states.-+-+ The s,o l ut i on to t h e problem of armaments and security l ay, there fore, in the prior resolution o f the prob­ lem of u neven global development. 45 The foc u s on dev e l opment at the e xpense o f d i s armam e n t was n o t unique to Galtung. H i s approach reflected a w ider shi ft of foc u s, i n acade­ mic thinking about i nternat ional rel at ions and international polit ical econ­ omy during the 1 970s from the East-West axis of confl ict t o w ard that of North and South. A rguably. t h i s was a consequence of not o n l y a rev it a l ­ i zed marxi s t i nput into p o l i tical economy by way of a crit ique of neocolo­ nialism but also of the combi ned i nfl uences of the vestiges of the very wave of rad ical i s m that h ad hel ped spawn a more rad ical peace researc h . the period of superpower detente. the rise of the underde\'e l oped w o r l d as a po l i t ical force i n international organ izations. and the war i n I ndoc h in a . Galtung\ approach to the question of development bore m uch i n common with the work of other contemporary \\,T iters of the period . espec i a l l y those brought together by the Dag Hamm arskj o l d Fou ndat i o n . w ho ,,·ere a l so . concerned w i th the articu lation of '"another deve lopme n t . . They too e m ­ phas ized t h e centrality of a broad concept ion o f human needs as t h e bas i s for constru c t i ng developmental goal s . the v i rt ues of self-re l i ance at al l lev­ els, and the u l t i mate objective of rea l i Ling a devl' l opment strategy that was hol i s t i c i n approach and sought to bring about the "development o f every .. man and woman and the whole of man and woman . The ir target was not only the deve lopment of th e Third World along these l i n es but also the di­ recting of the ind u s t ri a l i 1.ed worl d away from the dom in ant de velopmen­ tal model of '"th e b u 1Taucrat i c so c i ety o f pro g rammed consum p t i o n . "-+ 6 N evert he l e s s . G a l t ung and h i s contL'mporaries st i l l const i tu t e d a s m a l l group . d i s t i ngu i shable from other rad ical c r i t i c s o f t h e g l obal soc i a l order by t h e i r em phas i s on prescri pt i on over compkx anal yti cal crit iques and on the search for a lternative world orders. 47

FROM HUMAN NEEDS TO GLORAL VALUES

151

Galtung \ n o h i11g pnspectiv e 011 human dcvl' lopmcnl aimed lo go heyond a pol i t ical L'L·orwm: of dn dopme11t and exp lore how a part icular worldvie w and de, dopmental goal. the "bo urgeois way of l i fe." permeated the glohl'_-1:-- Thi s glohal tdos ,, as seen lo incorporate both undcrdcvclop­ mt'nt 011 thL' glohal pniphny and o\'crdcvdopment in the g lobal center. Though nl)( : et u ni,crsally reali 1cd. nor l'L'al i ,.able for many. it remained the preeminent , ision of the purpose of human striving. It was a devel op­ mental goal that L'mphasizcd consumpt ion. product ion. and the real i zation of mat e rial Cl)mfort o, er the fulfi llment of nonmaterial human needs. It cnL·ouragcd thL' c \ploitation l)f humanity and nature and disregarded the f i ni tl'ne , , of natural re sources. re sulting in an increas ingl y mal deve lopcd ,, orld. E,en in the dn eloped world whe re this l ifestyle had most success­ ful I: been reali1ed. it had re sulted in a developmental curve that has seen ,ol·ietie-., mo, l' from underdt',elopment to sufficien�y and on to new forms o f malde,t'lopml'nt or o , e rde, elopment. For Galtung. the bourgeois way of l ife was the very essence of a bankrupted modernity. I n contrast to a -., tultifying and imposed unive rsality. Gal tung re i ter­ ated hi, arp1ment for philosophical eclecticism as the basis for construct­ ing an alternati, e paradigm of dev e l opment that aspired to more than the realiLation of economic j ustice bet,,·een and within states. H i s critique of underdn elopment ,, a-., wedded to a cri t i que of the overdeve lopment of the We , t . and both ,, e re couched in a search for a universal val ue system that L·ould e-.,tabli ,h the foundations for g lobal deve lopment but. as important. ;.il-.,o alll rn for autonomy in identifying problems and responding to cen­ t ral i, -.,ue-., 111 ',lKial life . How. Galtung asked. could one comb i ne "small :. md b ig . red and npe rt " and realize the amalgam of human needs or pre­ fe rred , al uc-., _> The re sponse to this rhetorical question was to ask how the -.,ocial torm;.i t 1 on that generated and nurtures the bourgeoi s way of life as prac t i L· e ;.ind ideal came about. The ans \\ er lay in the analysis of "the real rock- bot tom foundation. the deep culture. the cosmology of the Western civi lization within which these social formations have taken root."49 The i dealist direction in which the discussion was heading was evi­ den t : B::, di,ce rning the cau-,ative co-,mology. ih antithesi-, could be con­ -., t rucll'd. The cau-.,al -.,ignificance of the dominant co..,nw logy underscored the creati\ e potential of an:, alle rn;.i live. Gal tung avoided a sl ide into dc­ termin1 -.,m h::, in,i-., ting !hat the relatior1,hip between co,mology and struc­ ture \\ a'> not -.,imply one of c:w ,e and e ffr c t : both we re cocon-.;titutivc or the dominant global , i-.,ion. Social -.,tructures connm·rhuralc with the dom­ inant ,, a) of lit e were rnani fc , tat 1on-., of a deep co -.,molog y, al the same time reinforcing it and allowing ii to unrold. Thi, aprwared lo be l i t t l e more than a dnc ript i , c re f ormulation o r the· well-krH >w11 h u t rnuch d i -., ­ puted marxi-.,t topology ot ha-,e :ind -.,uper-., tru c t urL·. B u t in (ialt ung:s vn ­ -.,ion t h e re \\ a-., little attempt to el ucidate thL· nat ure o l the relation,hip IK'­ twecn ide;.i-., and prac tic e: the , u h-,tit ut ion lor thL· term u lcolo i._: \' of the more

1 52

A QUESTION OF VALUES

e l usive rnsmology rendered such i n q u i ry al l the more d i ffi c u l t . I t a l so cre­ ated a pro found problem for the p raxeolog i cal t h ru s t o f G a l t u n g · s peace re search. Cosmol ogy may offer i tsel f as a richer conceptu a l tool than i de­ ology. but by using it to displace the ori g i n s of dom in a t i o n into the deep­ est rea lms of human col lect i ve exi stence. Galtung not on l y ra i sed the q ue s ­ t i o n of h o w dom ination cou ld b e fu l l y ident i fied b u t also nece ssari l y exposed the relative shallowness o f any alternative. Al p ha and Beta

Recourse to needs-talk was intended to resolve the tensions in Gal­ tung ·s model of de velopment t hat emerged in his writing during the 1 970s and were ex pressed i n the adopted labe l of "self-reliance and global i n ter­ dependence . " The Gal t ungian concept of s e l f-re l i an ce w e n t beyond con­ sideration of issues l i ke trade relatiom. per capi ta Gross N a t i onal Product ( G N P ) . or the i ntroduction of a spec i fic soci oeconomic c.,ystem to focu s on the development of "al l of man and al l men." Authentic dev e lopment re­ q u i red more than the sati sfact i on of material needs and h ad to i n c l ude the need for freedom . c reat i ve work. pol i t i c s . togethern e s s . joy. and "a sense of the meani n g of l i fe. " 5 0 I t was a perspec t i v e that reflected what has been called "the dialectic of the spec i fic and the u n i versal. " and . . the central in­ tellectual antinomy of the modern world," an expression of the threat posed by hegemon ic u n i versal i s m to n on - Western c i v i l i zat i on s . ' 1 I t is a theme that has been considerabl y devel oped more rece n t l y as a conse­ quence of a growing empha s i s in the i n ternatio nal re l a t i o n s l i tera t u re o n t h e tension s bet ween l o g i c s of i n tegrat ion a n d d i s i n tegration and t h e i m ­ p licat ions for t h e pol it i c s of identity of accel erat ing globaliza tion.=' � In Galtung 's v iew, the problem with arguments such as those for a new i nternat ional economic order ( N I EO )-the paradigmatic crit ical per­ spect ive of the t i me-was that they were a product o f the same intel lectu a l paradigm that generated the o l d econ omic order. They both e\'i nced a pre­ oc cupation with the economic sphere and a be l i e f that i ncreased g ro w t h coupled with a re form of d i stribu t i \'e pract ices \\Ould radical l y tra n s form the global economic order. To the ntrnt that it m i gh t . Gal t u n g " a , s u p ­ port ive. B u t thi s was const rai ned by h i s be l i ef t h a t it m i ght o n l y res u l t i n n e w forms of econ omic dominat ion and \\'ou l d contribute l i tt l e tn t h e u l t i ­ m a t e object ive of i n d i v idual emanc ipat ion . T h e c a l l for a N l EO foc u sed primari ly on i nc reasi ng the fl ow of c a p i t a l and good s to the u nderde v e l ­ oped states; it was a state-centric reform program that used G N P as its prime measur e and ass umed that the more produced. processed. and mar­ kl'l ed. the hL'tkr. W h at was req u i red \\' as a perspe c t i v e that assessed de­ velopment in all o f i t s ma n i festat i o n s . part icu larly the c reat ion of greater national, col lective, and individual autonomy.

FROM HUMAN NEEDS TO GLOBAL VALUES

1 53

Galtung: s prL' SL'ntation o r an alternative lkvl'lo pment paradigm pro­ ceeded in a familiar mannn: a critical description of a prevailing pattern of dc\ ' clopnwnt. from " h i ch po s itive values could be antonymically dni\·ed and L' \ JHe-,-,L'd in tnms o f the fulfillment or human needs. Two an­ al:-, tiL·al framL'\\ ork.., \\ nc L'mployL·d : a fourfold taxonomy o f social stru c ­ ture-.; that captured L"\ i -;ting and potential modds o f :-.ocial formati on: and .. .. I\\ o broad dl'\ clopnwntal patterns "alpha and " beta. Alpha represented thL' dominant paradigm of industriali zed development. The beta pattern fu -,cd idea:-. dni\ ed from Gandhian thi nking. oriental philosophy. and the co1h.- rctc de\ l'lopmcntal practices o f C u ba and Mao i st and post- Maoist China that. unlike So\ iet socialism. Galtung saw a-; still providing a gen­ u ine alternative to liberal capitalism. :.\ l pha -;tructures arc compatible with Western soc ial cosmology and a dominant bourgeois lifestyle. They are the conse 4 uences of an interaction bet\\ een a particular form of soc i al structure and a spec ific technological orientation producing the prototypical modern soc iety in i ts "private capi­ . tal ht " and ....,late capitalist" variations. Alpha structures and processes are fundamentally large and highly complex in form. They display all the fea­ ture-, o f \ crtical. or imperialist. social relations : inequ i ty. penetration. mar­ ginalization . fragmentation. and segmentation. Any soci al system or social acti\ it) . practical or intellectual. that di splays these features i s i ncluded. ..\lpha -.,tr u cture-, p roduce une4ual e\ change and in-change and i nd u ce a centralized admini-,trati\·e. extractive. productive, and distributive network that -.,egmenh. fragmenh. and thus marginali zes elements of the overall so­ cial order. An alpha model of development places no limitations on size. is dominant O \ er nature. and i-, highly diversified in the production of goods ;r nd -,e n ice-.,. ' ; The primar) -,tructural representations of alpha-type soc i al order-, arc the -,talc and the corporation. Mar x i sm could not grasp the e..,-, cnce o f alpha -,tructurcs . accordi ng to Galtung. s ince it dealt inade4uatcl) \\ ith noneconomic \ erticalitie-, and sai d nothing about the problem of -,i1e. Alpha i-, a hegemonic ctho-,, which docs not necessarily d i sappear .. "alter the re\ olution but tran -,cend'-. -,pecific material or ideological social formation -, . in reflection ol a wider co..,mological or civili zational norma­ ti\ e order. ..\ bm e all. alpha development i-, de-,tructive o l a holistic form of human dn e l opment. providing only for the ine4u i tablc satisfaction o f ba-.,ic material need-,. In ih pure lorm. then. it con -,tit utes a dy stopia -literally a hell on earth. Beta de\ L'lopment I \ the antithe-,i-, ol alpha . hut since it describe-, an unreali1ed future the call'gory i-, not a" well formed. The central feature-, of beta development v. ould hl· -,mallne-,-, . l10ri1011tal \(K ial relat ions. and a low clivi-, ion of labor with a concom itant empha"i" on autonomy and sel f-reliance. Beta develop m ent would hL· more conducive to the fullill­ ment o f the human need for togcthnne"" - participat ion. and integration.

154

A QUESTION OF VALUES

In its pure form, however, beta development could become another dystopia. The sole limitation upon the expansion of alpha is the fact of a terri­ torial state system. Lenin's shadow fell again across Galtung's claim that states as alpha structures are checked in their growth by the competitive expansion of other alpha structures. Alpha :-.tructures are not restricted to domestic socioeconomic systems but are evident in international organiza­ tion and interstate relations: Imperialism is alpha expansionism. It entail s the displacing o f the alpha periphery outside o f its own national borders, thereby making other nations the objects of multifarious forms of ex­ ploitation. Furthermore. the pathology of alpha is deepened by the inter­ nalization of alpha values by the oppressed. which leads to attempts to pe­ ripheralize others. However, Galtung also saw alpha behavior on an international scale as threatened by its own internal contradictions. for the process of reproduction results in the challenging of First World alpha states by newer Third World states behaving in an alpha fashion. Thus. the call for a N I EO was an expression of the problems of alpha growth in a materially finite world, as developing states acquired a capacity to chal­ lenge the hegemony of developed ( more accurately. overdeveloped) states over global resources. For Galtung . recession in the global capitalist econ­ omy coupled with ecological problems did not simply generate problems in the world economy but produced a crisis of greater proportions. Hav­ ing successfully globally reproduced itself. the bourgeois way of life was revealing its limitations. The continuing adherence to alpha l ogic by states and corporations '"sets nation-states on col lision courses that could not but lead to heavy increases in the levels of direct and structural violence in the world." 5 4 Alpha may have once provided a vision of a desirable society, but it could not provide the basis for a vision of a desirable world. Alpha structures are maintained by a particular cosmology that as­ cribes a naturalness to growth as the progenitor of progress . whereas beta structures do not evince such a reproductive mechanism. The catalyst of al pha to beta transformation lies in the ideational re alm-it is the product of the conscious adoption of an alternative cosmol ogy that privileges the nonmaterial over the material. emphasizes internal human dev elo pment over material development. and undermines the normative foundations upon which alpha ultimately depends. Effectively articulating classically idealist premises. Galtung saw countcrhegemonic vision� . such as that en­ capsulated in the idea of beta. as "social forces" of practical consequence. The world was made up of dominant al pha units whose competitive inter­ action provided the principle source of threats to security and welfare. Yet the millions o r vill ages, typical bet a social formations. around the world offered no such threat and suggest. in the spirit of Gandhi. an a lternative ethos or much wider application. " Dealphaization" is effectively a form of "structural disarmament."

FRUM HUMAN NEEDS TO C,LOBAL VALUES

1 55

G a l t u n g \\ as 1 w t c a l l i n g fu r a l l l' o - L u dd i t e re t re a t tu t h e v i l l ag e . The re p l a c e m e n t of an i nc r L' a s i n g l y p u re g l o b a l a l ph a s y s l l' m w i t h a p u re be t a s y s t e m \\ a -; 1wt the i n l l' l l lk d g o a l . I t ,, a s a l l t o o e v i d e n t t h a t bl' t a l i k e c o s ­ n w l o g i e s h a , L' n o t hL'L' l l s u s t ai 11 e d . h i s torica l l y . aga i n s t t h e o n s l a ug h t of t h e h u u rgL' O i , ,, a: () t l i k . I n a n y CI SL' , a l ph a m ( ) d e s o f soc i a l org a n i 1.at i o 1 1 per­ form cn t a i n fu n L· t i () n s hl' l t n t h an a s m a l l e r beta v n s i o n c o u l d hope t o do. The n e L' d ! () p w d u c e CL'rt a i n t h i n gs and t h e pre s e r v a t i o n o f a u t o n o m y s u g ­ gl' , te d Ill (-1 a l t u n g t h a t t h e rc l l' n t i o n o f c e rt a i n a l p h a st r u c t u re s was n e c e s ­ , a r: . I n t h e T h i rd Wo r l d . f o r L' X a m p l c . a p u re h e t a m ode o f soc i a l orga n i 1 at i t1 n L· a n r e s u l t i n to() m u c h i s o l a t i o n . i n s u ffi c ie n t s t ru c t u re . a n d poor ,e L· u r i t : fo r s m a l l , o L· i a l u n i h . H i g h t e c h n o l o g y p ro v i d e s be n e fi t s in the fi L' kh o f 1..: l1 m m u 11 ic a t i () n s a n d produc t i o n . w h i c h re fl ec t s a n e e d for some 1.' l' ()f1 ll m i e , o f ,cale. holated beta soc i a l u n i t s c a n he become e x t re m e l y u n ­ e q u a l a , a c u 1h e 4 u e n c e o f d i ffe r e n t g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n s . t h e u n e v e n g l () b a l d i , t r i h u t i o n o f n a t ur a l h a L a r d s . s e a s o n a l e x t re m i t i e s . a n d s o o n . A l p h a l c \ e h o f scK i a l o rg a n i L a t i o n a n d p ro d u c t i on a l so a c c o u n te d for , t1m e l) f t he c r e a t i \ e d y n am i s m of m odern i t y. I n add i t i o n . t h e h or i zon t a l l y ,t r u c t ur e d . , u pp o rt i \ e a n d c a r i n g . p u r e l y c om m u n a l bet a l i fe s t y l e i n s u ffi ­ l· i e n t l : pro \ ided for t h e e\ i d e n t h u m an n e e d to w i t h draw a n d be p r i v a t e . B e c a u , e m a t e r i a l n e e d , a n d g ro w t h a r e dow n g raded w i t h i n a beta d e ­ \ c' l o p m e n t a l per,pect i , e . ot h e r n o n m a t er i a l needs come t o t h e fore . As we ha\ e a l re a d y , e e n . Gal t u n g \ i de a o f h u m a n fu l fi l l m e n t e n t a i l e d the fu l fi l l ­ i n g o f n o n m at e r i a l . , p i r i t u a l . c o l l e c t i v e . a n d i n d i v i d u a l n e e d s . I t was a m i x o f a l p h a a n d b e t a w i t h a s t ro n g b i a " t o w a rd t h e l at t e r- t h a t c o u l d c o n ­ , t i t u t e a pot e n t i a l cou n te re t h o s . H o we v e r. t h i " m u s t '"not be m i ss i o n ary. b u t t o l e ra n t a n d d i a l o g i c al . " G a l t u n g c a u t i o ne d aga i n st t h o s e w h o w o u l d s i m ­ p l :-, re p l ace o ne \ i -, i o n \\ i t h a n o t h e r : '" I n a l l o f t h i s t h e m ajor d i ffi c u l t y w i l l b e t h o s e ,, h o p c r '> i '> t \\ i t h t h e fa i t h i n p a r t i a l i de o l o g i e s a n d v i s i o n s a n d fa h e d 1C hotom i e '> . d e ma n d i n g a p u r i t y u n k n o w n i n t h e re a l wor l d . " 55

Four Societal Models T he a l p h a - h l' l a co n t 1 11 u u m i n t e rsL· c t e d w i t h a fo u r fo ld t y po l ogy o f so­ c i a l fo rm a 1 1 o n '> . \\ h i c h a h o d i .., p l ay e d t h e i m p ri n t o r G :i l t u n g ' -; n e e ds -based '>Oc i a l \ a l u e '> . A l t h o u g h ack n o w k d g i n g t h e m a r X I '> I o v e rt o n e -, o r his t y po l ­ o g : , h e re i t e r a t e d h i -, rej e c t i o n o f e co n o m i c dt: t e r m i n i .-; m o r a l i n e a r a c ­

c o u n t of h I '> to r : . A , \\ i t l l p re v i o u , t 1 p o l o g i n . t h e e m p h a \ i s w a s 0 1 1 a h i , ­

t o ri c a l . a h '> t ral' I d n c r i p t i o n . f· u rt l l cr m or e , Ci a l t u n g c l a i m ed t h a t h i s c a t e g o r i n \\ ere m o re g e n e r a l t h a n t l rn \ L' o l 1 n a r x i , rn i n c x pre s -, i n g mo rL· t h a n re l a t i o n -, o l pro d u c t i o n a l o n e . C o n '>L' lj ll L' n t l y . t h e fo u r , o c i L' t a l t y p L' s \\ e re o f u n c e rt a i n o n t o l og y . c k a r l y i n t e n ded l o l o o-; e l y rqi rn c n t h i s t or i ­ c a l a n d e x t a n t \ oc i a l fo rm a t i o n , h u t a l '> o t o ac·t ,h i d e a l t y pe '> o r ge n n a l ­ i za l i o m a '> we l l a" to p ro v i de a 1 n e a n '> for dL· '> ni pt i v L· l y rqir e '> e n l i 1 1 g v a r i ­

ous value combinations.

156

A QUESTION OF VALUES

The typology was generated in Parson ian fas h i o n by the use of t w o pattern variables: ineg a l i tarian-egali tarian ( vert ical-horizontal ) a n d c o llec­ tiv ist-ind i vidual i st ( u niformi ty-di versity ) , although Parson s 's " i deological and empiricist bias" was rej ected i n favor of the deri v a t i on of vari able s from utopian writings "where pote n t i a l real i ty has been g i ven m a x i m u m pl ay." 5 ° The combination of t h e two dichotom izing variab le'> produces four types of society: Model 1 conservative/feudal (collectivist + i negal itarian, vertical uniformity) Model 2 l iberal /capitalist (individualist + inegalitarian, vertical diversity) Model 3 communa l/soc i a l i s t ( co l l ec t i v i s t + e g a l i tarian, hori zontal u niformity) Model 4 plura l i st/comm unist ( indi vi duali s t + egalitarian . horizontal diversity)

+ + + +

As can be seen. Gal t u n g described each social type in h i s own sociolog i ­ call y derived term s b u t confu sed matters by a l so u si n g more fam i l iar marx ist descriptions based upon hi storical modes of production . 57 He also did not address the state-society distinction. Without either substantiating his own c l assifi catory schema or refer­ ring to the compl e x debates over modes of production in underde\ el oped societies, Galtung went on to identify examples of the coe x i s tence of d i f­ fering societal types w i t h i n various e x i st ing soc i e t i e s . He cl aimed t h a t model I feudal soc i e t i e s cou l d be fou n d w i t h i n the contemporary Third World, a lthough many have e l i te s that d i splay the fe atures of model 2 soc i e t i e s , and Japan was descri bed as a mode l I feu d a l soc iety. Mod e l 2 soc ieties i n c luded the U n i ted States and the former So\ iet Union and e x ­ i sted i n pri v ate-capital i s t a n d state-c api t a l i s t vers i o n s . Model 3 soci e t i e s were repre sented b y China, C u b a , a n d Tanzania. T h e preferred model -1- so­ c i ety was, of cour s e . as yet unr e a l i zed.�:-, B y i m p l i c a t i o n . d i ffe rent soc ial sectors mmt be able to art i c u late model s contrary to the dominant societal type, a point re inforced by Galtu ng ' s own s i t uation as a radical educated i n mode l 2 soc ieties ( N orway a n d t h e U n ited St ate s ) who e spouses the fo r­ mation of model 4. Even though Galtung ,tsserted that d i fferent types of society can e x i st s i m u ltaneously . to further confuse matters he c laimed a l so that h i s schema was in fact i n tended to present development h i storical l y : Model I soc iety re pre '.-> e n t s the past . mode l s 2 and 3 re pre sent t h e pre s e n t , and m od e l -1represenh the fu tu re . al though he co ntin ued to d i savow any a s '.-> u m p t i o n of t h e inevitabi l ity of t h i s spec i fi L· pattern of soc ietal tran sformat i o n . The point he was m a k i ng was nor m a t i v e : The rej e c t i on of the nece s s i t y of

FRL)M HUMAN NEEDS TO GLOBAL VALUES

157

l i n e a r d t' \ e l opnl l' n t \\ as a d l' n i a l o f t h l' l l L'ed fo r a c a p i t a l i s t s t a g e o f d l'­ v c l o p m e n t . :\ m o d e l --1- soc i L' t y c o u l d L' \' O l \' e out o f e i t h e r mmk l 2 or 3 i f t h e corrt'ct L· o m b i n a t i o n o r t lw p r i n c i p l e s o r L'q u a l i t y a n d d i v ns i t y w a s guiding development. (1 i \ e n i h ru 11 i 11 L' " s . Ci a l t u n g · s t y po l og y m i g h t h L' best u n derstood :h a " : m bo l i L· re L· i t a t i o n i n \\ h i d1 d e s i re d v a l u e s ( g ro u n d e d in a s pec i fi c u n lk r.,, ta n d i n g o f h u m a n needs ) arc j u , t a poscd t o pro d u c e fo u r ro u gh .,, k_ e t l' 1 1 e " o f "oc i L' t a l t : pes. t h e p l a u s i b i l i t y o f w h i c h st e ms i n part fro m t h t· i r d L'" cri p t i \ L' COITL' s pondcm· c w i t h act u a l l y e x i st in g soc i a l fo rm a t i o n s . I n dk L· t . i t co1h t i t u t e s a n o rm at i v e s c a l e o f form s . soc i c t i t' s I t o 4 be i n g ranh· d i n ordn o f prde rcncc . E a c h t y pe reprc ,cnts v ary i n g l e v e l s o f sat­ i .,, fa L· t i on of "PeL· i fi c h u m an need s . Mode l l represen t s a feu d a l soc i a l order and i " dec i " i \ l' I : rej e c t e d . Mode l s 2 a nd 3 are t he t w o broad g ro u p i ngs i nto \\ h i ,: h e , i .,, t i n g states arc deemed t o fal l ( in that r,' sµect 2a and 2b m i g h t be m orL' a c c u r a t e n o t at i on " ) . a l t h o u g h 3 seems preferab l e . to Gal t u ng at l e a s t , becathe i t j .,, e g a l i ta ri a n . The t a s k i s . t h e n . to i nt ro d u ce d i v e r s it y-le s s u n i ­ for m i t : a n d m ore i n d i \ i d u a l i s m - i n t o m odel 3 soc i a l s t r u c tu re s t hereby p w d u c i n g ;_i model --1- "oc i e t y. A l ternat i v e l y. if model 2 soc i e ti e s w e re more l10 r i 1 o n t ;1l l y " t ru c t u re d . ;_i " i m i l a r re s u l t w o u l d e v e n t u a t e . T h e i ntended p o i n t \\ ;_i .,, " i m p k e n o u g h : \'a r i o u s paths t o t h e pre ferred w o r l d are avai l ­ able, and none of them i s to be h istorically or analytically privileged. The discussion of needs, the two models of development, and the so­ ,: i eta l t: pe" L· an 1 1 0 \\ be b l e n d e d toge t h e r. Model 2 soc i e t i e s are con s u m ­ m a t e I : a l p h a i n fo r m : T h e :, are m e r i t ocrat i c , i n e ga l i tari a n . c l as s -d i v i ded, a n d d r i \ e n b: an etho" o f " u c c e -, -, . :\!lode! -+ soc ie t i e s . however. reflect the \ a l u e , that form the co re of b e t a d e v e l o p me n t . t h e o verri d i ng goal b e i n g t h a t ot .., e ] f- re a l i 1 at i o n u n de r condi t i on-, o f e q u i t y . d i v e rs i ty. a n d hori zont a l ,o c i a l i n t e rac t i o n : - - o n e m i g h t d r e a m o f a soc i e t y w i t h a k i bb u t z i n o ne c o rn e r . a z e n m u n a , t c r:, in a n o t h e r. a -,c l f- ', u ffi c i c n t m e t ro po l i s . a h i p p i e c o l o n _1. . a pcor l e · -, c o m m u n e : a c o l l e c t i on o f h o r i zo n ta l u n i t s t h a t i n t he m ­ , c h c -., a rc h i g h ! :, mean i n g fu l . bu i l t aro u n d a c e rt a i n t h e m e . b u t respec t i n g ot h e r u n 1 h t h a t are d 1 l l c rc n t . " ' 1 It j .,, o n l y v. i t h i n a mod el --1- "oc i l.'ly. repre­ -.,e n t 1 n g the \ a l u c a m a l g am o f eq u i t y and d i v er s i t y c on s i st e nt l y e s p o u sed b :, C a l t u n g . t h a t t h e l u l l range o f h u m an need" can be \ d t i s fi ed and h u man r o t c n t i a l rc;i l 1 1 L·ll . It i , not an u n k n o w 11 \ i -, i on -it \CLTL' t e s t h e '>L' nt i mc n t s o f a " oc 1 a l 1 , t a n :i rc h i " m a n d i " redo l c 11 t p c r h a p '- o f S pan i " h s y 11d i c a l i s m . H o \, C \ C r. 1 1 0 1 1 L' of t h l..' rn odc l -, i , i rretri e v a b l y t i ed t o a " fKT i fi c ge ogra ph i ­ c a l l o c ;t t i o n . ll l "> t or i c a l qrnc ll . u r k H· I o l an a l y '> i '- . T l l L'Y a rc a h -, t rac t i o n -, . d e e m e d to hL· , -,omorph 1 c a l l : appl i c a h l c to a 1 1 u m hc r of k v L· l s o r "oc i a l lk ­ \ e l o p m c n t i ll L· l u d i n g t i l e g l o h a l . 1 11 o t i l L·r wor d -, , t i l l· ty polo_uy a l so prdi g u re -, a model ol an a l t c rn a t i H· to t i l l' c , 1 -, 1 1 11.u '-Y "> l l' lll ol '> l a t L' '- . T h i " t he m e w a -, t o he dn c l opcd -, u h -, L· q u c 1 1 t l y i 11 "/ li e ' /1 111· �t u 1/d, , t i l l' 1 1 c , t \ l o p p i 1 1 g point i n our journey.

1 58

A QUESTION OF VALUES

CONCLUSION

Three crucial elements were missing from Galtun g ' s vision of an al­ ternative cosmo logy to c h a l l enge the hegemony of the bo urgeoi s way of l i fe : an ex planation of the prec i se re lat ionsh i p between soc ial cosmologies and the empirical soc i a l worl d: a compe l l i n g defense o f t h e preferred values that overcomes the l i m i tations o f the concept of needs: and a c lear i ndicat i on of how the preferred v i sion i s hi storical ly and prac t i c a l l y con­ nected to the hegemon ic v ision-i n short , a theory of soc i a l change. I sha l l comment briefly on all three deficiencies. First, at this stage in Galtung's work the concept of a social cosmol­ ogy is highly ambiguous and underdeveloped. Galtung appeared to be pro­ moting a theory of cosmological hegemony of sort s . in which social cos­ mology is hi storically coconstitutive of the soc i al l i fe-world. The dom inan t cosmology permeates a l l aspect s of g l obal soc i al l i fe . i n c l uding scho l arly re flect i on upon it. thereby work ing to e n s u re the conti n u i ng co-opta t i on of the g lobal and the hegemony of the devel oped world. I n spite of a u n i ­ versalist g u i se . i t i s refl ective of a select set of i l l -defi ned but deep l y e m ­ bedded dominant i n tere s t s . O n t h e other h a n d . i n b e i n g constructed upon human needs. the proposed alternat ive cosmology is supposedly d i scerned outside of ideology or t heory and selec ti v e l y dra ws upon a variety o f cos­ mologies and soci a l prac t ices. This i s i n spite o f the i ne l i m i nablc norma­ t i ve and t e l eological content t h at permeated the catalogue o f needs and that a l so speaks to a select u nderstanding of i rreduc i b l e h u m an i ntere s t s . The s o l e difference lies i n t h e claim of t h e alternative to capture t h e a u ­ thentic needs o f human i ty. W h a t remained une x p l a i n ed was how such needs could be authoritatively known. beyond those that. i f left u nfu lfi l led. were of evident physiological consequence. Second, though v alue sentences derived from a set of human needs could e ither be used to veri fy a set of empirical sentences about the pre-.ent worl d ( empiri c i sm and crit i c i sm ) or be com pared w i th a model of a pre­ ferred world (constructivism), the defense of the value sentences was buried within the concept of human needs. In other word s . i t \\ as internal to the sentences themse l v e s . I n the end. the l i st of needs was no more than a col l age of values chosen from a variety of phi losop h i c a l -.yste m -. . as­ sumably because they accorded with Galtung ' s own philosophical outlook. The proces" invol ved a double c o l l a p s i ng of the act s of empirical ob ser­ vation and nor mat i v e cr i t i q u e : in the depiction of the e xtant i m peri a l i st world order and in the presentation of a set of human needs. Third, no account is given of how the transition from the present wor l d order to the pre ferred world order w i l l occur or who the pri ncipal agen t-. of t h i s. transformation m i ght hL' . Galtung · s fo urfold t ypology of so­ ci etal type-., takL·.s a bet L'ach way : It leans u pon a c lassical marx i s t h i s tory. hut in nor m a l i v l' l ::,. re_jec l i n g both the pri m acy of the econ o m i c and the

FROM HUMAN NEEDS TO GLOBAL VALUES

1 59

i de n t i fi c a t i on l) f a spL'L· i fi c h i s to r i L· a l s u bj e c t . t h e t y p o l o g y i s or t a x onom i c v a l ue o n l y . A n a l y t i ca l l ! . i t l ac l-.. s w h at G o l dm a n n h a s c a l k d a " h i s t o r i c c o n s c i o u snL' , s "� a n u n dn-.;tand i ng n o t o n l y o r the t y pe o f soc i e t y one i s i n a nd t h L' '- l)C i a l forL- l' s opna t i ng t h e rL· i n h u t a l so o f t h e h i st or i c a l poss i b i l i ­

ties of altering them . oo The only answer to such lacunae lies in the classically idealist as­

-.; u m p t i o n t h at t h e ctrn , t ru l' l i o n of , i s i on s has in i t se l f s u ffi c ie n t c a u !-. a l po­ k' nL· ! . .--\ fter a l l . ( 3 a l t u n g ,, a s p ro p o s i n g n o k s s than t h e c o n s t ru c t i o n o f a n a l te rn at i , e soc i a l C lh nw l o g y t o s u persede t he b o u rge o i s w a y o f l i fe i n , p i l l' o f t h e l at t n · s d e e p a n d \? \ t e n s i ve roo t s . I f t h a t i s t he c a s e , t h e n t he , c 1 e n t i fi c b u bh k t h at s u rr o u n de d t h e i de a o f peace r e s e a r c h i s i rr e ­ d e L' m a b l y b ur s t . In -; p i ti: o f the s c i e n t i s t i c fl a v o r o f t h e c o n c e pt o f c o n ­ ,t ru c t i , i , m . G a l t u n g i an p i: a c e research ha d c o m e fu l l c i rc le a n d e m braced thi: i dea l i ,m l) f trad i t i on a l peace t h i n l-.. i ng that it ,, as o r i g i n a l l y i n te n de d t o , u per,ede . A l t h o u g h n . h i b i t i n g a gr e a te r breadth o f v i si on a n d pr o v i d i n g a m ore de t a i l e d d e sc r i pt i o n o f his o wn normat i v e per!-.pec t i ve , G a l t u n g i n h i , nm -.; t ru c t i , i ,t e , e rc i ,e s added l i t t l e o f m e t h o d o l og i c a l s ubstance t o h i s e ar l i t r fu n c t i o n a l i ...,t a c c o u n t o f g lo b a l v a l ue s a n d t h e b e l i e f i n t h e c re a t i v e p o tt' n t i a l o f t h t " o c i o l o g i c a l e n t e r p r i s e . H e c on t i n ue d t o s u ppose t h a t a n ac t u a l o r po tent i a l p u b l i c c o n ,e n s u s t x i s t e d a s to the set o f v a l u e s t hat u n ­ derp i n ned h i , , i , i o n o f a des i ra b l e soc i e t y, b u t a t b o t t o m i t rested e n t i re l y u ptm o u r a L· c e p t a n c e o f a l i s t o f t s s e n t i a l l y c o n t e s t a b l e h um a n n e e d s . 0 1 T h i , i , no t t o d e n y t h at m a n y o f ..., u c h needs c ou l d b e c o m pe l l i ng l y argued for a , g u i d i n g " -, t e rn '-> . b u t i f i t i '-> t o b e co ns i '->tent w i t h t he fo u n d­ i ng p rc m i -, e o f pcacc re s,carc h . it m u \t aho hc w i t h ou t v rn l c n c e . l t d i rtc t l y c o n fro nh t h e p e , -, i m i , rn o f o rt h od o x th cor i c -, o f i n t nn a t i o n a l re l a t i o n !-. t h a t d e p i c t the t h re a t o l v i o l e n c e a ..., t h c i n e v i t a h l c b a c l-.. d ro p to a � t a b l e w o r l d o rd er c o m p m e d o f d i \ c re tc h u m a n c o l l c c t i v i t i c '-> . More re m a r l-.. a h l y, it p r e ­ , u p po '> L' '- a h o t h L· dk ct i \ e d i -, -,o ] u t i o n o f t h c m o d e rn s t a l l' . L' V c n t h o u g h t lw '-> l ate h a rd l 1 fi g u red . dc '-> cr i pt i vc l y or a n a l y t i c a l l y. i n ( , a l t u 1 1g ·..., c u m· c p ­ t u a l l e x i c o n . I t ath o c a t L' '- thc tr.t ll '->lT JH l c n c e o f 1 1 a t i o n a l i n tLTL' !-. t -.. by a L' Oi l l ­ m on g l o b a l i n tere , t . ,� h i c h at thc v c r 1 k a '-> t c o 1h i , h i n u n i v L·r ..., a l adhnL·nn· t o t h e p e ac d u l co e x i ..., t e n n· o l d i l k re 1 1t v a l u c " Y '- l e l l l '-; a n d \ ! K i a l '-> t ru c ­ t u re !-. . o p po -, i t i on t o a l l form -. o f d o m i nat i o n . a n d e q u i t y a s, a g l o b a l op n ­ a t i n g p r i n c i p l e . Ye t . t h c e m p l 1 a '> i \ 0 1 1 the d i lfr rc n c e -. hl' l w eL·n s,oc i a l

1 60

A QUESTION OF VALUES

cosmologies -and by cxtcrv, i on on the v i s ions o f a preferable world that they generate-only heightens the problem o f defending the normat i ve u n­ derpinnings o f the overa l l v i s ion. g i v en that we a l ready fi nd ourse l v e s i n a value-plural but violent world. Galtung o ffered a vi si on or a pre ferred world order in which the ten­ s i on between identity and d i ffe rence was t o be recon c i l e d : not one t rue world but many worlds true to many people. The possi b i l ity of i t s rea l i za­ t ion w as seen to arise, even if against all odds, in the very acts of i m ag i ­ nat ion a n d art i c u l at i on. Wha tever o n e ' s judgment o f i t . G a l t ung ·s v i s i o n . inc l uding t h e manner in which h e arrived at i t . was echoing and a l so fore ­ shadowing w ider i nte l l ectual c u rre n t s . The di staste fo r ideological . or cm­ mologicaL s ingu l arism that began t o mark h i s writing in the earl y 1 9 70s was prescient . stri k i ng a chord with other emerg ing versions of a rad i c a l doubting o f the tenab i l i t y o f estab l i shed di scourses of uni versal emanci­ pat i on and t h e mode rn i ty that spawned them. Et� u a l l y. I v. o u l d happi l y concede t h a t a lthough t h e c a l l for the fu l fi l lment of a range o f ba-, ic h u man needs-w i thout which the imagining of preferred fu t u re " ( or any other ac­ t i v i ty for that matter) -,imply could not occ ur-m ay re st upon shaky fou n ­ dations, i t re mains mora l l y compe l l i ng nonethe less. S uch i s the power o f needs-talk. NOTES I . Moore, Principia Ethica, pp. 9-5 8 . 2. Galtung, The True Worlds p p . 1 9-2 1 . 3 . Galtung, "Human Values," pp. 1 5 6- 1 59. 4. Galtung, "World Indicators Program." 5 . Galtung, "The Limits to G rowth and C l ass Politics,'' pp. 325-34 1 . 6. See Wight, International Theory; Bull, The Anarchical Socien·. 7. See B u l l , Justice in International Relations, pp. 1 3- 1 4; and I ntroduction in this book. 8 . All of the scholars are wel l-known progressives in their fields. and a large number are peace researchers. See the fat of participants in Galtung, "World Indi­ cators Program," p. 354. 9. Ibid., p. 355. I 0. For example, Maslow arg ues that human needs prov ide the basis for a "scientific ethics," Marcuse and Fromm refer to the possibi l i ty of deri\-ing un iver­ sal ethical standards from human needs, and Falk argues that needs add " some ob­ jectiv ity" to moral c l aims. See Mas low, Motivation and Personality p. 366; Fitzgerald (ed.), Human Needs and Politics, pp. viii-xv i . , Falk, "Contending Ap­ proaches to World Order," in Fal k, Kim, and Mend lovitz Toward a Just World Order, p. 1 55 . 1 1 . G altung, "World I ndicators Program," p . 354. 1 2. Fitzge rald, "Abraham Ma!->low 's H ierarchy of Needs," in Fitzgerald (ed. ) , Human Needs and Politin, pp. 36 5 1 . 1 3 . Duncan , Marx anJ Mt /I, p 6 1 . 1 4. Marx, c ited m Duncan, Man and Mill, p . 62. See also Marcuse, One Di­ mensional Man. especially ch. l .

FROM HUMAN NEEDS TO GLOBAL VALUES

161

1 5 . Duncan, Marx and Mill, p . 63 . See also Bay, "'Needs, Wants and Political Legitimacy," pp. 24 1-242 1 6. Fitzgerald, "The Ambiguity and Rhetoric of Need," in Fitzgerald (ed.), Human Needs and Politics, pp. I 95-2 1 2. 1 7 Taylor, ''" Need S tatements," pp. 1 06- 1 1 1 . 1 8 Ibid., p. 204. See also Neihen, "True Needs, Rationality and Emancipa­ tion," in Fitzgerald (ed.), Human Needs and Politics, pp. 1 42-1 56; and Soper, On Human Needs. ch. l . 1 9. Marcuse, One Dimensional Man, p. 1 9 . 2 0 . Neilsen, "On Human Needs and Moral Appraisals," pp. 1 75- 1 77. 2 1 . Soper, On Human Needs, p. 1 2. 22 I\eilsen, "True Needs, Rati onal ity and Emancipation," p. 1 56. See also Brenkhert, Marx's Ethics of Freedom; and Lukes, Marxism and Morality. 23. Fitzgerald, "Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs," p. 4 1 . 24. I a m thinking here o f Arendt's depiction o f politics as the h ighest form of communicative action by a plurality of equal individuals seeking consensus, Rawls ' s "veil of ignorance, ' and Habermas 's conception of the "ideal speech situ­ .1t 1 ,1n · · ,md the pn" 1 h 1 ! 1 t ) ,1f u n d 1 ,tPrteJ corn m u n ication . See Arendt, The Human Conditwn · Rawls, A Theorv of Justice; and Habermas, The Theory of Communica­ ti\'e Action : \ o/ume One. ch. 3 . 25 Galtung, "Human Values," p . 1 56. Emphasis in t h e original. 26. Galtung, ·'Global Goals, Global Processes," p. 3 5 . 2 7 . Galtung. "Human Values," p . 1 56. 28. See Galtung and Naess, Gandhi's Politiske Etikk. Naess continued to de­ velop a "systematization" of Gandhian ethics and in a later volume acknowledged Galtung's continuing contribution. See Naess, Gandhi and Group Conflict. 29. Galtung, "Pacifism from a Sociological Point of View." 30. Galtung, "Introduction," EPR, 5, p. 23 . 3 1 . " I have called Gandhi 's ph ilosophy a pragmatic spiritualism. If this ideol­ ogy i s practically followed there 1s no reason why man should not be able to bring about l asting peace on this earth." Sharma, Ethical Philosophies of India, p. 325. A number of commentators note the ad hoc, inconsistent character of Gandhi's ethics. See Borman, Gandhi and Non-Violence ch. 9; and Woodcock, Gandhi, ch. 9. 32. See Gandhi, Non - Violence, pp. 1 07, 1 2 1 - 1 23. See also the discussion in Borman, Gandhi and Non-Violence pp. 23 1 -232. A more extensive discussion of nonviolence emerges in Galtung's work on cosmologies in which Buddhism is drawn upon extensively. See Chapter 8. 33 Gandhi, Non- Violence, pp. 94, 1 1 3- 1 1 8, 283. 34. Galtung, "Gandhi and Contlictology," pp. 1 26- 1 27. 35. Ibid ., p. 1 29. 36. Galtung, "Social Cosmology and the Concept of Peace," p. I 84. 37. Galtung, "World Indicators Program," p. 357. 38. Galtung, "Human Values p. 1 59, and "Introduction," EPR. 5. 39. Galtung, "Eschatology, Cosmology," pp. 205-206. 40. Ibid., p. 230, note 5 . 4 1 . Galtung, "Feudal Systems, Structural Violence," pp. 262-264. 42. For a comprehensive discussion of this theme see Linklater, Beyond Realism and Marxism. 43. Galtung, "Feudal Systems, Structural Violence," pp. 1 63- 1 64, 264. 44. Ibid, pp. 1 7- 1 8. 45 . Galtung, "Di sarmament and Env ironment," pp. 1 5- 1 8 . 46. Nerfin (ed.), Another Development. Approaches and Strateiics; Galtung prov ided a ,m a l l con t ri hu t 1 , ,n ,· n t i t kd " ;\ l tn11a t 1 v L· L 1 k , t y l c, in R i c h Sol 1 c l 1 n . "

1 62

A QUESTION OF VALUES

..J.7. N ote here H iggott 's poi n t that dependency t heory ha� failed to adeq uately replace the prescriptive content of modernization theory. See his Political Development Theory, ch. 1 . 48 . Galtung, Poleszynski, & Wemegah, "Why the Concern with Ways of L i fe?" 49. Ibid., p. 328. 50. Galtung, Towards Self-Reliance and Global Interdependence. 5 l . Wallerstein, The Politics of the World Economy, ch. 1 5 . 5 2 . See, for example, Walker, One World, Many Worlds; and Camil leri and Falk, The End of Sovereignty? 5 3 . Galtung, "On Alpha and Beta." 54. Ibid. , p. 1 00. 55. Ibid. , pp. 102- 1 04. 56. Galtung, "Perspectives on Development," p . 322. See also his "Social Structure and Science Structure," p. 1 4. 57. The list is taken from Galtung, "Perspectives on Development," p. 323, table 9. 1 . A more detailed compari son of societal types i s provided in table 9.2, p. 325. 58. Ibid., pp. 322-323. 59. Ibid . . p. 328. 60. Cited in Neilsen, "True Needs, Rationality and Emancipation," p. 1 46. For a comparable observation, see also Cox, "Social Forces, States and World Orders," p. 1 3 8. 6 1 . Galtung claims that there is near universal consensus over the list of "fun­ damental needs," and that "many" would also agree to the list of "almost funda­ mental needs" on paper, if not in practice. See his "Human Values," p. 1 59.

7 The True Worlds

The present day global set of local sovereign states is not capable of keeping the peace . . . . What has been needed for the last 5 000 years and has been feasible technologically, though not yet politically, for the last 1 00 years ic; a global body politic composed of cells on the scale of the Neol ithic-Age community-a scale on which the partic ipants could be personally acquainted with each other, while each of them would also be a citizen of the world-state.

-Arnold Toynbee 1

G a l t u n g · , Tlzc T r ue H or Ids : A T ru11s11atio11a /ist Pcrspccti1·c w a s p u b l i shed in I Y X ( ) a-., a \ o l u me in t h e , e r i e , Pre fe rred Wor l d s for t h e 1 990s . com m i s­ -.,i on e J b:, t he Worl d Order '.\1odeh Project . W h e reas other v o l u m e s i n t h e , e r i e -., \\ e r e L'O m m i , s i o n c d to re fl e c t t h e reg i on a l perspec t i v e s of t h e i r a u ­ t h o r -., . G a l t u n g e , c h e wed t h i s i n fav o r o f a g l obal a p p roac h . M u c h o f i t s c o n t e n t h J d J ppeJred b efo re . -,ome o f i t a-, ear l y a s 1 97 1 . i n v a r i o u s papers. u n p u h l h h e d d r a fh . a n d d i -, c u -. -, i o n p i ec e -, . It can t h u s be read vario u s l y : as an exploration of world politics in its totality; as a contribution to a re­ -., e J rd1 p ro J e l'I l arg e r t h a n i he l l: and a-, t h e c u l m i n a t i on of m o re t h a n twenty years o f peace research.

THE RE AL WORLD A N D THE POTENTI AL WORLD T h e -., tart i n g po i 11 t o f The /me Vl, 'o rld1 i-, a s, n a p-.hot of a m u l t i faceted. g l o bal c ri -., i -., o f \ i o k n n· . m i '->e l) . rqirl' '-> s i o n . and e n v i ro n m e n t a l degrada­ t i on - ro o t e d i n t h e \\ o r ld '-> t ruct u rl' . The c r i '-> i -, i '-> i l i u '->t ra l L·d hy rderL'IICe t o a n u m ber o f e m p i r i c a l t rL' l l d s t h a t . u > l l c l' l i H· l y. J ff L' sen t a '->om hre i mage o f t h e l a te t \\ e n t i e t l i cen t u ry. D a t a 011 d i rect v i o l c 1 1Ce fre q u e n c y o l' wars. t h e c a '-> u a l t i n o f \\ a r. e \ po n en t i a l t rL' l l th i n arm '-> L' \ Jll.' I Hi i t u rL' s arL' '-> l l p p l c ­ m e n ted \\ i t h -., o rn c d a t a on wor ld 11 u t ri t i o 1 1 . '->JK'c i l il· a l l y c a l or i c a n d pro l l' i 1 1

1 63

1 64

A QUESTION OF VALUES

intake . Further an alysis of data on infant morta l i ty rate s, adul t l i te racy, and world pop u l ation growth confirms the poverty of the contemporary world order, al though i n the areas of infant mortal ity and i l l i teracy it is conceded that there arc sig ns o r incremental imp rovement . I n sum, the ex tant order is ju dged as doing a reasonable job i n catering to the needs of about one­ third of huma n i t y and doing very bad l y w i t h reg ard to the re st. Further­ more, these two sectors h ave very clear geopolitical addresses. The combi nat ion o r the fin iteness of the natural world and the e x pan­ sion of the hu man worl d has produced both ecological i m bal ance and so­ cial interdependence -the former spawning the twin e v i l s of depiction and pol l ut i on and the latter le ading. through the evolution o f comm u n i t i e s and the concept of terri torial possession, to the modern -,tate'> sy'>tem and ex­ panding economic cycles. These cycles re flect an increas ingly complex di­ v i s ion of labor that produces uneven acc umu lation within and between dis­ c rete comm u n i t i e s . fu rt her exacerbating ecological i m balance. The res u l t i s structural v i olence that impoverishes and a l i enates both r i c h a n d poor. a l be i t in di fferent wa y s . D i rect v i o l e nce emerge-, as c om m u n i t y j -, set agai nst communi ty. leading to the reg u l at i on of direct \' io lence t hrough the development of international relations. The upshot of t h i s thumbnail h i storical sketch is the "h ypercomp l e x " global structure w e n o w find ourselves i n : a mix of social rel ations that extend beyond the realm of states and include relations between non­ governments, or "nonterritorial actors . " Orthodox state centrism i s dis­ avowed: no h ierarc hy within the vari ous sets of re lations or actor" i s iden­ .. t i fi e d . the foc u s being on a general category of " territorial actor'- . The s ummary of contemporary g l obal po l i t i c s refers to the probl ems that e x i "t w i t h i n and between co1111111111ities. of d i ffering k i nds and at d i ffe ren t l e , ­ e l s . A theory of i nternat ional po l it i c s i s em bedded w it h i n the d i srn s s i o n . but there i s n o attempt to substanti ate i t s v arious e l e m e n t s nr addre s -, ob­ vi o us critical responses. The emphasis is on "this q u agmire of a h u man condition." The text 's character i s further revealed in the presentation of two un­ derl ying themes. The fi rst is that we a l l knO\\' ,,, here real happiness and nonvi olence lie: in a l ittle boy or girl creeping under the quilt of its parents early in the morning, a bundle of joy and warmth; in the eyes of two i n love who know they are going to have each other; in the joy of growing, of creat­ ing something, in the joy of being a source of joy and growth for others. All of this is nonviolent, inexpensive, liberat ing, respectful of nature and future generations. 2

Not intended to he s i m p l y an academ ic treat i s e . the text appeal s to the cri t ­ ical impact of social struc t u re o n everyday l i fe : vi olence. very broad l y u n ­ derstood . connects w i t h the m o s t i n t i mate of i n d i v i d u a l h u m a n e x pe r i -

THE TRUE WORLDS

165

ences. In ih varying d i su1rs i \ e tonL' , Thi' Tr11i' Worlds reads as the output of a pamphleteer as much as a scholar. 3 Furthermore, t here is hope. The reader is reminded of how crisis is wri t t en i n ChinesL'-- t \\ o d1aractns representing the dialectic of danger and oppl)flunit _\ . In ( i altung·s L'yes. the Chinese have acted in full cog­ ni1anL·e of this I L'nsion. and hope is L' Xpre,sed that we might too. Recalling a phrasL' used in hi, L'arli n ,, ork.. lw offered up The True Worlds as an cx­ erL· i ,e in 1xaL·e scu rc/1 as much as peace rL'search. Galtung was clearly not i nkTL',t ed in dwdling too long on the epidemiology of the global crisis, the pri mar:, foL·us of the bl)OK being on diagnosis and cur e . The 4uestion he posed was simply this: Can the world do better? T\, o foL· i \\ ere instrumental in the crafting of a response -the eradica­ t i l)n of mi ,er:, and the reali 1ation of c4uali ty. A shift in current production t O \\ ard b�i-, ic needs coupled \\ i th a more egalitarian distribution of pro­ dul' l i \ e out put \\ ould. he though t , produce a more tolerable general con­ d i t i l)n. ImplIL· i t in the assumpt ion that production levels should not be sim­ pl:, rai , ed to addre -,.., deficienc ies was a criti4ue of overdevelopment , and Gal tung ack.nO\\ !edged that "tolerable" might not be the phrase chosen by the rich i n de\ eloped countries whose preferred development strategy was ,impl:, gro\, th in demand and supply. In contrast, he favored the suppres­ , i on of ,upertluou, demand ( whi ch may be artificially high due to over­ ,timulat ion I a" \\ ell a" greater explorat ion and utilization of resources in order to addre , " art ific ially lov. supply. In other words. the fi x ed ( rela­ t i \ el:, ab,olute I concept of needs could be used to expose the extreme rel­ ativity of notions of supply and demand. The treatment of needs in The True Worlds added little to earlier con­ , ideratiom. \\ i th one exception. In contrast to the apolitical tone of the dis­ c u -,.., i on of need" ehewhere. here the concept of needs is overtly pol i ti­ ci ZL' li . '-. eed.., prov i de the ba, i .., for a def i nit ion of socialism: "a polit ical and econom i c , y .., tem that give.., top priori t y to the satisfaction of funda­ mental need, : ..,tart ing with tho..,e at the bottom . " The ambiguity that I have iden t i lied a, be ing charac tcri .., t i c of the c oncept of needs ( which is also central to ih appeal ) appeared now a.., an e xplic i t dualism: On the one hand. need, arc empirical nece .., .., i ties. the ..,atisfaction of which is a "co11d1t111 \ I ll or individual human e x i -.,tencc come into v i e w : heing and hav ing. What ( i altun g wanted wa:-. a

1 72

A QUESTION OF VALUES

more developed understand ing of the i n ternal and e xternal needs o f i n d i ­ v idua l s . "I should l i ke . " h e said. "to deepen the be ing s i de t o i n c l ude more internal charncteri stics and ex pand the "having" side to i n c lude l e s s mate­ rial aspects of human l i fe . . . . Somet imes they [ i n d i v i d u al s ] arc o n l y i f they have more, sometimes only if they d o not have more." 15 A curious dimension to this theme ari ses from Gal t u n g ' s s u ggestion that the p ri nc i ple of i somorphi sm could be brought into play here because the distinction between hav ing and being app l i ed also to nations and states. whose i nternal and e xternal needs were deemed comparable with those of any other soc i a l actor. Although he now admi tted that the princ iple of i so­ morphism app lied l oose ly at best. one o f his stated intentions was to con­ struct a u n i fied vocabul ary app l icable across l e v e l s of ana l y s i s . 1 6 I n h i " early work, such a u n i fied vocabul ary was de v e loped through the appl ica­ tion o f func ti onal i s t sma l l -group theory to the anal y s i s of re l ations be­ tween states . Al though the i nternational system e x h i b i ted certain distinc­ tive characteristics ( the pri nciple of territoriality be i ng a notable example ) . these were understood a s not refl ecting a n y essent i a l d i fference b u t a h i storical-devel opmental l ag-hence Galtung ·s ch aracteristic depiction o f the i nternational system as a feudal ',OC i a l order. The Tru e Worlcls did not employ the language of the ear lier discussion. but it retained the image of the i nternational system as a premodern soc i al formati on amen ab l e to a process of social development comparabl e to t hat found w i t h i n dome stic societies. B y extension, world goals cou ld be deri ved from domestic soc ial princi p l e s and app lied to the g lobal l e ve l . Equa l l y . i n depicting state s as i n some sense needy and. furthermore. vary ing i n their preoc cu pation wi th being or hav i n g , Galtung also was a l l uding to a moral typology o f state forms . It was not a theme that he pursued very far. althoug h . as \\ e shall see, it was to reappear on occasions. An actor-oriented perspect ive emphasized the primord i a l goal of "per­ sonal growth " or human fu l fi l l ment. the coro l l ary of which was the value of div ersit y. 1 7 I n spite of the rider that self- real i zation should not be taken to imply a comm i tment to We stern individualism. Galtung adm itted t hat i t was a rather Western noti on. I t i s . o f course. a tenet o f c l assical We stern l i bera l i sm, grounded i n the ontological supremac y of the i n d i v i d u a l . Gal ­ lung's indi vi dual ist sympath i e s were d i s t i n g ui shed . however. hy the free­ ing of the principle of individual autonomy from its ori g i n s i n an argument for the rights of individ ual s w i t h i n a l i bera l -democ rat ic state and further mod i fied by the emphasis on be ing over having. But the object ive was not to su bstitute one dimension of personal development with another. The de­ fe nse of di versity i s taken , in part . from Soro k i n ( whose d i s t i nction be­ tween ideational and sensate c u l t ures Galtung c l a imed to re semble h i s own schem a ) and his vi sion of an un integrated. eclect ic c u l ture. wi th a m i n i mal in fras tru c t ure , within which i s l ands of d i fferent cu l t ural types could coex­ i s t . G i ven s u ch a sett i n g . i n d i v i d u a l s shou l d have the freedom to sett l e w i t h i n t h e i r preferred c u l t ural arena. Noneth e l e s s . the val ue of h c n·ing

THE TRUE WORLDS

173

req u i re s l i m i t at i on on e c o l o g i c a l g ro u n d s hL'Cl llse of t he fi n i teness of the m a t n i a l \\ orl d . t h e te ndency t o i n eq u i t y and i nj u s t i c e i n an un t rammeled racL' t o al· q u i re m a t n i a l \\' L' a l t h . and the s u bseq u e n t i m pa i rm e n t o f o t h e r facets o f h um an existence. G a l t u n g · s N ord i c o ri g i ns \\'e re rdkctcd i n a brief critical commentary ., on tllL' soc i a l -democ ra t i c cor rec t i \' e to " u ntamed. rampant l i bera l i sm . So­ L· i a l d e nwnacy hri dged the re a l m s o f h a v i ng and be i ng b y i n t rod u c i ng p r i nc i p le s o f e q u i tahlc d i st r i b u t i o n and soc i a l j us t ice i nto t he l i be ral e q u a­ t i o n . H O \\ e \ er. l h L' e ,e m p l ary soc i a l -democrat i c s tate-S weden-re­ m a i ned tla \, e d because i t fu l fi l l ed only the m in i m a l req u i rements of it s c i t ­ i z e n -.. . i nadn1 u ate l y l i m i t e d c o n s u m p t i o n overal l . a n d e n c o u raged soc i a l -.. t rat i fi c at i o n through t h e u nequal p ro v i s ion of res o u rces. The p ro v i s i on o f m i n i mal -..tandards of h e a l t h and education. for example, w a s i n s u ffi c ient i f on l : a fe\\ C l) U l d nceed t h e m i n i m a and e njo y e i t h e r genu i n e l y c re at i ve \\ ork or e , c e l l e n t he a l t h . H i s l ov e of mathemat i c s not w i t h stand i n g , Gal­ tung rej e c t e d a q u a n t i t at i \ e defi n i t i on o f e q u a l i ty, preferring a more ab­ -.. t ract re n d i t i o n of it a s the - - 1 0 \,. d i spers i o n of havi ng" in response to ac ­ k 11l)\\ !edged d i fficu l t i e s in dn· e l oping paths to the p u rs u i t of equal i t y. The g oa l \\ a-.. e q u a l i t : as a l a s t i ng c o nd i t i o n . as opposed to e q ua l i t y at some -. t a rt i n g po i n t . 0\ e ra l l con -.. u mp t i on c o u l d be l i m i te d , perhaps , b y setti n g prod u c t ion goah a -.. the m u l t ip l e of a stan dardized m i n i m u m i nd i v i d u al l i v ­ i ng -.. t andard. an i mpo-, s i b l e goal i n a market economy where production i s g u i ded b y t h e as-..u mpt i on t h at demands equal needs. B u t v ie w ing soc i a l ra­ t i o n a l i t y a-, the aggregate of i n d i v idual rat ional i t y re vealed "the n a i v e te of ., p u re actor-oriented t h i nk i n g . Social struc t u re made a mockery of such as­ s,u m p t i on -.. . -, i nce it d i -,tributed the products of l abor u pward w h i le fai l i ng to -,at i -.. f: the fundam e n t a l needs of t hose at the bottom of the social p i l e . .-'\. fu rt her \\ eakne-,-, i n an actor-oriented perspective stemmed from i t s i nca pac i t ) t o capt ure t h e necess ary s, t r u c t u ra l preco n d it i on s of personal grow t h . G a l t u n g c a -, t i gated it as u t o p i an . '-> i nce w i t h o u t s i g n i fican t s t r u c ­ t u ra l change t h e \ al u e -, promoted c o u l d b e enjoyed o n l y by a fe w. Aga i n . S weden v- a-, c ri t i c i z ed f o r '-> Ub s t i t u t i n g red i s t r i b u t i on fo r s t ruct u ral r e ­ form a .. l i be ra l an .., \\ e r t o a l i he ra l probl e m . " 1 X C l as s i c a l l i be ra l i s m ac­ krnm ! edged h u t cou ld not re .., o l v e the t en -, i o n hetween h a v i ng and be i n g . a n d t o t h i -, c a n b e added a n ecological p ro b l e m : ' " H a v i ng m a y s t a n d i n t h e way o f h a \ i n g . then: m a y h e l i m i h or ce i l i ng s on g ro w t h . " 1 '> A g a i n s t t he J i heral u n d c r-,t an d i n g o t '> < K i a l j u .., t i c e a'> an ' "eq u a l i t y o f h a v i n g " rea l i zed th ro u g h g ro w t h , Ga l t ung pmi ted an acco unt of soc i a l j u s t i c e a s the i nde­ pendence o f what one /1 1n from w h at one i\ . ag a i n a d i s t i n c t i on deemed appl ic able to i n dividuals, n ations, and states.

Structure-Oriented Goals G a l t u n g · .., d i '->C U '-> '-> i o n of . i n condcn-,ed form . the main t h e m e -, of

174

A QUESTION OF VALUES

mu ch o f h i s work s i nce the in troductio n of the concept of structural v io­ lence and the structural theory of imperi a l i s m . A struct u re-oriented per­ spective i n terrog ates the uneven acc u m u l at i on o f re sources u s i ng the concepts of equal and uneq ual exchange. T h i s leads to the goal o f e q u a l exchange with regard to both the hav i ng a n d bei ng d i m e n s i o n s of a l l t h e part ies to an i nteractive re l at ionsh ip. G a l t u n g s a w t h i s as e n s u r i n g that both acc u m u l ati on and personal ( o r nationa l ) growth would be eq u a l . 20 However, certain l i beral and marx i st re-,ponscs to the problem of exc hange had to be rejected because of their occ idental "econom istic, outer-man ori­ ented t h i n k i n g . " The theme of " i n -change" found i n Gal t u n g · s ear l i e r anal y s i s of exploit ation reappears here. A l though he conceded t h a t t h e concept of a lienation pointed in t h e r i g h t d i rection , marx ism \ critique o f e x p l o i tation l arge l y foc used on e xpropriation between actor'> i n an e x ­ p l oitat i ve exchange rel ationsh i p and insufficient l y comidered the uneven. i nternal consequences-spin-offs-of unequal e x change whether i t be be­ tween states or individuals. A structural perspect i ve h i g h lights the goals ( va l ues ) of equity and au­ tonomy. For Galtung, autonomy is "power over one-,e l f"-a capac i t y to inoc u l ate onesel f against the power of others . The ant idotes to the ideo­ logical . remunerat i v e , and p u n i t i v e forms of power ( produc i n g s u b m i s ­ s iveness, dependency, and fear, respect i ve l y ) are the attributes of s e l f­ re spect , self-suffic iency, and fearlessness. I n a worl d order domi n ated by the powerfu l . various efforts to deve lop a p h i l o sophy of national s e l f-re­ l i ance were a l ready evi dent, the w r i t i ngs of Gandh i . Mao Zedong, and Korea ·s Kim II S ung bei ng c i ted as e xample s . In the case of the latter two, Galtung's si lence on the absence of h i s treasured goal of i n d i vidual auton­ omy and growth w ithin these col lect i v i st , stat i s t . and profoundly undemo­ cratic mode l s of se l f-re l iant de velopment was deafening. He quite l i teral l y took M ao and Kim at their word. By considering inte rac ti on patte rn s , fu rther structure-oriented v a l u e s c o u l d be identified. Again . fam i liar themes were b e i n g re iterated : S imple asymmetric interaction patterns fragment soc i a l actors , and horiLontal in­ terac tion margi nal izes weak actors . W hat was needed were comp lex m u l ­ t i l atera l and horizontal i n teraction patterns that re fl ected t h e v a l u e s of " sol i darity " and "partic ipation," the antonyms of fragmentation and mar­ ginal izat ion . By com b i n i ng these with "autonomy" and "e4uity." a struc­ tu ral ly derived. fo urfold l e x icon of values can he generated. Furthermore. the four goa l s were presented as general characte ristics of social inte rac ­ tion, applicab l e at a l l levels of analysis.2 1 The Taxonomy of Goals The two dialectical l y connected perspectives w ere presented not merely as analytical devices hut as refl ections of soc ial l i fe itself. Galtung \

Tl-IE TRUE WORLDS

1 75

objective \\ as not restricted to the advocacy of evenly balanced analytical eclecticism. for con,trul'livism · s purpose was to transcend concrete social e \.istL 'nct' thro ugh the conCL' J1 l uali1atio11 and realization of an alternative global soL·ial ordn. In combination. thL' values derived from both the actor and struL·tural pnspL'L·ti\ L ' S enabled the adumbration of a synthetic. norma­ ti\ L' ··tht'or;, of '-OL'iL ' ty. " The list of values was part of "an effort to e scape from the CUITL' n t sd1i1ophrcnia in social analysis whereby different families of terms and L'OIKcpts arc drawn upon for those three aspects [ data collec­ tion. theory formatil)n. and \'alue reali1ation l of scientific activity. " 22 l'nfort unately. the attempt at synthesis proceeded in a convoluted manner. \\ ith an: thing re sembling a theory of society hard to discern. The lack. of clarit: aro-.e from the introduction of a further taxonomy of con­ L'L'ph-po,, cr. de \ eloprnent. conflict. and peace. Galtung wanted to show ho\\ thL' Y rt'lated to each other as well as to sets of values. Thus, "power" ,, a, , u bdi\ ided into innate. resource. and structural power, which in com­ bination gent'rated what he felt was a plausible image of the contemporary ,, orld order. T: pes of powe r were convertible into other types, and this con t rib uted to the O \ erall accumulation of power in the h ands of specific social actor, at the top of a global social struct ure. Such a world was one in \\ hich ine4uality. inj u -.,tice. exploitation. penetration, and fragmenta­ tion e\ist. and realiLation of the preferred values requires u s to "work for a reduction of the power differential. " This was simply a s ummary of \\ hat Galtung had long been arguing: A better wor l d wou l d be structured more ,ymmt'l rically. h orizontally and eq u itabl y. A preferabl e model of J c \ eloprnent cntailed thc realiLation of all values and t herefore a reduc­ tion in the po\\ e r differential. Alternatively. development cou l d also be described a-., ··-.,ocial gro\\ th " in the holistic, Galtungian sense. Again, nothing ne\\ wa-., bcing added h ere-conceph were defi ned by reference to oth c r conccph t h at -.,eemed to mean e-.,sentially the s ame thing. The aholition of une4ual po\\ er wa-., not, however. an argument for the erad­ ication of po v. er ihelf hut for a shift in its locus. The reduction of power o \ e r other-., re-., ulh in an increa-.,e in powe r over one -;elL the J es-. differ­ ence in pcm er the re i-.,. the g reater autonomy there mu-.1 be. The objective \\ a-., to f L .1tten tile pov. er lamhcape. with the e xception of innate power. the po v. e r of hl'tll ed upon eq u i table e x c h ange. As a consequence . ,uch a ,oc i et 1 \\ ould not be wealthy compared to contemporary developed "oc i e t 1 e , . h u t . he boldly a'>'->erted . the day-., of We stern concepts of mater­ ial ,, e a l t h ,, ere probably numbered. Mobi l i t y of people and i n format ion bet\\ een co m m u n i t i e '-> wa.., c.., ..,enti a l and should be freely available. Soc i ­ c t i e -., ,, o u l d he obl iged to guarantee a m i n imum level o f subsistence. with no o h l i g a t i o n on t h e part of in h abitanh to -.,e l l t h e i r l a hor. S u c h freedom ,, o u l d he faci l i t ated b 1 the U\e of automation. the rc -.,ou1-ces for which ,, ere a , a i l a h k hut deployed on \ Uch t h i n g.., a-; m i l it ary ha rdware . Le i s ure and work would blend into each other and both would be enriching p roce '-> '->C '-> . \\ i lh automat i o n a h o hc ing U '->cd a'-> a means for e l i m inating a l i enation ot l a bor. EducJ.. '-> \\ mi ld i n c l u (k the promot ion ot d i .'-> s i m i l arity. in­ con -.,tancy. and in con -, i -.,tency , h \oc i a l value'-> . It would haVL' to hL' freL' and free l y a v a i l a h l c . a fea t u re ( i a l t ung \CL' " a-, poten t i a l l y rc al i 1 a h k ( a nd a l 1110-,t rc a l i 1ecl ) in '-> Orne n i '-> ti ng m odel 2 ( l i hcral - c a p i ta l i '-> I ) soc i L' l ics. h ­ nal l y. pol i t i c '-> v-. o u l d 1 1 0 1 h e vie\\ ed " " a pro k '-> '-> i o11 hut rl'lurnc d to the pop­ ulace for citizens to participate in, but only if they so des ired.

178

A QUESTION OF VALUES

This image of domestic soc1et1es was presented in the loosest of terms, and it is debatable how much scrutiny it was intended to sustain. Sweep ing in its vision and the scale of reform anticipated, man y of its themes could be located within identifiable political philosophies. in par­ ticular radical forms of liberalism. utopian socialism. and anarchism. Its realization would entail the total restructuring of existing socioeconomic orders, p articularly those of the liberal-democratic West. It entailed a blending of two broad value ideas-freedom and equity-but the com­ plexities of the sy nthesis were explored only with regard to their institu­ tional implications. The overall vision was also far from precise. Ostensibly developed around two fundamental levels of social organization-the domestic and the global-the vision in fact required three: the global. the societal. and the communal. "Societal" appears to connote some form of poststate or­ ganization, whereas "communal" clearly refers to the subsocietal level. Consequently, it is difficult to discern precisely what was meant b y the "domestic" realm. Within specific model 4 societies would be model 3 (communal-socialist) communities some of which might not reflect Gal­ tung's preference for untrammeled diversity and individuation but, in ac­ cordance with those same principles, must be allowed to exist. In other words, there is a tension between the commitments to tolerance and to freedom. For example, Galtung·s advocacy of sexual liberation might not be shared by all, yet those who would prefer to live by an explicit and re­ strictive code of sexual conduct must in principle be allowed to do so: "Freedom to practice what one believes would have to be given the status of a human right in model 4 society." Of course, such a freedom might also cut across the taboo on all forms of exploitation. Similarly. Galtung·s definition of economic exploitation may be disputed. vigorously defended. subordinated to other ethical precepts, or simply not recognized as such by others. Galtung assumed that no person who truly comprehended his or her situation would wish to be exploited. What was missing was a considera­ tion of the means by which communal or societal values would be publicly generated and, further, how they would coexist across different levels of social organization. After all. certain religious and moral codes enshrine social hierarchies-in Galtungian terms, vertical social interactions-on the grounds that they are part of a God-given or natural order of things. Given that s ubsocietal communities were defined as type .3. the principle of equity appeared to take precedence over that of diversity at the local level at least. But if the principle of diversity were to be strictly applied, then those who so wished it would have to be allowed to live in inequality. If not, then a preventative structure would have to be created, and that would raise a numbn of uncomfortable questions with regard to Galtung·s consistent taboos on violence and domination.

Tl IE TRUE WORLDS

1 79

The escape clausl' from the ten-.ion hl'lween equity and diver-.ity wa-. provided in the form of a principk ol unhindcrL'd movement for individu­ al--; hL' tween communities. Co11 sequL'll tly. (ialtung · s vision required the de­ cisi\ e abandonmL' nt or ortlwdo, conceptions or sovereign statehood and citi/l'n-.hip. although he made no at l l'mpt to consider the complex ethical is -. U L' S l'I11L' rging out ol thL' L·onflict hl'lweL'n the right to leave and a right to entL'r. DL' I \\ L' L'n thL' co-.mopolitan principk of free movement of peoples and thL' commu11 1 tarian dekn-.e of rights of membership of hounded com­ munities . Hi-. preferred world \\ ould to all intents and purposes be border­ le-.-.. apparL'Ill ly \\ itlwut refugee-. and con-.isting of numerous small soci­ etie -. . ThL' '-e would tw -.mailer than most contemporary state s . Here the co11eept of beta de\ elopment come-. into play. for it was only in small so­ cial u 11 1 r-. that he thought that the di-.tance between ruler and rul ed could be contained in order to pre-.en e " self-expres sion" for all. Thus, currentl y largL' and po\\ erful -.iate-. -.hould be -.ubdivided. and the resulting multitude l)f -.mall '-l)L'ietie" \\ ould be enmeshed in a web of nonterritorial organiza­ ti()n -., . Gandhi \\ a-, c redited with the view that if the fundamental social u11 1 t -. \\ ere gOL)d. then e\ er::, thing else would sort itself out t hrough "oce­ :rniL· circle-., of cooperation. " But even Galtung had to concede that such L1ith \\ a-., hard to -.hare gin·n that aggre1htra i ned hy the rcc ol:-'-n i t i on of a l og i c a l contra­ diction-c onfu ses reason with what he sees as m oral instinct. He arg ues th at moral it) den H· , ih t: nt:rgy from pri l l l a l '> O ll I C L' '> and t hat reason al one c a n n o t pro v i dt: goal -., . H u m a n -, rn pect hcnl'f ac t or -., 1 1 1 orc it they ln· I that ach o f fr i c mh h i p refl e c t a n a t u ral i nc l i n a t i o n rather than a pure l y rat ional

182

A QUESTION OF VALUES

decision to be friendly. J I This raises an important question, to which Gal­ tung gave no clear answer. Was he claiming that humans are essentially benevolent because they are rational, or was it the product of a primal, moral drive? The difference between Galtung and the ethologists per­ suaded by a conception of human nature as consisting in primal drives is that for Galtung, apparently operating upon a notion of a damaged or sup­ pressed innate human goodness, the exercise of discovering other forms of social structure is not preventative but restorative and creative.-' 2 This view speaks to an emancipatory form of reasoning. upon which rests the viabil ­ ity of his proj ect, but its origin and form were left unexplored.

Strategies of Transition Armed as he was with only a sketch of the origins of the contempo­ rary global crisis and an inconclusive depiction of human motivation. Gal­ tung offered a discussion of transitional strategies in The Tru e Worlds that was particularly weak. He conceded that an extrapolation of existing social trends cast doubt on the attainability of his preferred world but maintained there were grounds for optimism nonetheless. Simpl e extrapolation was naive; just as forces produce counterforces. so too do trends produce coun­ tertrends.33 Wisely, he acknowledged that it could not be assumed that a countertrend would necessarily lean in the direction of the preferred world: "I believe that society possesses no Natu rgesetzlichkeit . . . that we are guaranteed neither bliss nor catastrophe. neither Paradise nor Inferno. " This led to a second point: W e live in a "double world" of empirical and potential reality in which human beings are prone "to deve lop conscious­ ness of goals as well as existing reality with its instabilities and trends and to engage in concerted action. based on this consciousness." The possibil­ ity of a preferred future lay in the combination of "some trends" and "de­ liberate goal-directed action. " 34 It is the precise nature of the agency-structure mix that matters, how­ ever, rather than the banality of simply noting that it exists. Gal tung's im­ precise notion of a "consciousness of goals" is uns atisfying. reflecting y e t again a normative disposition rather than cogent argument. Galtung did not address the self-evidently ideological dimensions of a consciousness deemed to be the progenitor of meaningful political ac tion. This reflected a long-standing re fusal to be identified unequivoca l ly with existing ideo­ logical l abe l s . although what he understood by an ideology or a perspec ­ tive has always been something of a mystery, a product perhaps o f his preference for a taxonomic all y tidy two-ness. He frequently appeared to hold the view that reality itself was m erely a construct, delimited by the chosen ideology or perspective ( actor or structure oriented). All perspec­ tives were criticized for their ideologically driven incompleteness as ac­ counts of the social life-world, even if they offered useful analytical

THE TRUE WORLDS

1 83

insight-.. Ry n lL' n sion. any "potrntial rL·ality " must be equally mediated by specific and p a rti,1 1 intnprl' l ations of l hL' prL'sent. unkss an escape from the bind, of idL·olog: a nd pa rtiality L'an lk' demonstrated. Contrary to the a -; se rtil)n , or truL' bclin n, in a sciL·ncc of the social ( including the young Galtung). this would be a remarkable achievement. Fl)r all of thL·ir anal: tical blind spots and sik nces. political ideologies o tlt' r an account or the rl'latio n ship 1-wtwcen pa st. present. and future ,, ithin or again ,t ,, hicl1 an understanding of the reflexive political subject can be dn eloped. G altung · s purportedly antiideological posture robbed his account of this , ital function. in -;pile of its unequivocally political aspi­ ration .... E, en though his an alysis of the prevailing human condition in The Trnc \\or/d., ck arl:, t'mpathiLed \\ ith specifi c social groupings. he also de­ l'lared that any "ocial theory that p rivileged "a limited category of the in­ habitant" llf \Ol'iety ·· ,, as to be rejected · ·regardless of how well it may ha, e corre ... ponded ,, ith facts in the past. " The truth content of a social the­ or: ,, ,h thu" "ubordinated to the moral requirement that social theories did not "introduce a new vertical distinction in society between those desig­ nated to be the /1 m c 111 orria of history and those not. " 35 Any theory that did not uphold thi" antiexclusionary principle could not in his j udgment be :1 peace theory. The imposition of this normative constraint u pon theory rende red any " Y stematic investigation and defense of agents or strategies of tran..,formation difficult. to "ay the least. In the end. the forces for social change ,, e re to be dete rmined purely normatively rather than through the analysis of historical possibility. In The T r ue H urlcls the p reconditions for theorizing the possibility of ... oc ial ch:1nge \\ e re -.,een to arise from the existence of unfulfilled human need-., . ... ince a combination of perspectives on needs gene rated an under­ -.,tanding ot a " Uppo-.,edly we l l known ( Lrnder dilfr ren l nallle '. ) and '. O tl l c have hL·en tried with '- llCCe'-" · There i-., "nothing rn y -.,tcriou'. or e-.,otnic a bout tht: t n , ··

1 84

A QUESTION OF VALUES

and they requi re only that people ·'understand, organi se and act i n manners that are perfectly rational and reasonable."37 I shall not consider the technical feasibility of the various proposals, given that their presentation was both highly speculat ive i n tone and drawn in very broad strokes. Instead I want to focus on the discussion of the agents of transformat i on. According to Galtung. they are to be i dentified by way of two "scanning devices"-mot ivat ion and capabili ty. Moti vation arises out of a condition of deprivat ion and despair that only becomes en­ ergizing if an alternat i ve can be perceived and therefore i ndividual and collective frustrated expectat ions will ari se. This may result i n l im i ted at­ tempts by individual actors to improve their circumstances, but "it may also lead to a more genuine political consciousness and group action. . . . Pol i t ical man and woman are capable of solidari ty, of collect i ve ident ifi­ cation beyond private goal s.''3X The adj ec t i ve "politic al" suggested that a necessary condition for motivation was a specific form of consciousness, but Galtung's understanding of the pol i t ical was buried within the concept of an alternative vision offered by those such as himself. In assessing the question of capability, Galtung saw a disjunction be­ tween moti vation and power. H i s di s in terest in s iding with specific soc i al actors resulted i n the presentation of opponents of change as being devoid of motivati on or i nsight rather than possessed of a competing: and incom ­ patible vision backed by power. A commitment to preserving one's inter­ ests by shoring up the status quo is presented in negative terms, in accor­ dance with Galtung's normative disposition, but he offered no critical analysis of the ideological premises of antireformism or its tenac ity. H e appeared t o assume that i f alternat ives could b e articu l ated and shown to be viable, their appeal was self-evident. In the case of the arms race, for example, he argued that although numerous conferences were held, in­ volving the most significant actors in the mi l i tary -i ndustri al complex. the results are negligible due not to a lack of power but a lack of motivation. He failed to consider the obvious retort that this supposed lack of moti va­ t ion can equally be interpreted as a di!f'c rent motivat i on that might well produce results, but not those that Galtung would like. Galtung located the key to change in the decision by key actors-re­ search scientists working on weapons systems. for example-to upset the equilibrium. Similarly, the oppressed. underpriv i leged. and exploited should engage in mass action: polit ical space existed and therefore act ion i s possible. The target of such act ion. however. was not to be other people but the structures of oppression that continue to exist partly because of some complicity on the part of their victims. But why do those whose ac­ t ions would have such a transformative effect not act. given that they are also de picted as those most mot ivated to do so'? According to Galtung ·s logic, it is not because they are without power in the orthodox sense but because they are not empowered by any vision of an alternative reality. The ostensible implication. aga in, is that those who do not seek chan_ge are

THE TRUE WORLDS

1 85

s i m p l y l ac k i n g i n m ot i \' a t i o n ( i . L' . , \' i s ion ) . but i t i s e q u a l l y p l a u s i b l e to s u ppose t h at thL' i r e rror i -. that of !w ing \\'ro n g l y motivated. at lea-.t from a G a l t u n g i a n po i nt of , in, . I n thL' attempt both to avoid advocat i n g con flict and to escape i deological l a bl' l i ng . G a l t ung offered little m ore than a pre­ s um ption of a my sterious capacity of visions to empower. :-\ -. 1 h a , L' a l ready 1wtL'd. (1 a l t u n g \\ a-. res i stant to t he not ion that a de­ fi n i t i \ L' h i -. toric a l agent cou l d or s h o u l d be ident i fied. When a l l was said and d on e . t h i -. anwun!L'd to a reject i o n of the c l ass pol i tics of the orthodox f L L ' t . :\ ! t h o u g h G a l t u ng did h i m se l f s u bd i v i de h u m a n i t y into two broad group" -t he oppre -;sed and nonoppressed. or e x p l oi te rs and e xploi ted-hi s arg u m e n t abl) "ecreted a n O\'erriding eth i c al cosmopol i ta n i s m . H i s depi c ­ t i lH1 of ·· o , erdn el opment" pai nted u s a l l a s v i ct im s . act u a l or potential . o f t h e g e n e r a l p h e n o me n o n o f " m a l deve l op me n t . " T h e pri n c i pal weapon a g a i n -. t the ce ntcr-pe r i pher::, '- l r u c t u ra l format i o n , that w e re the u l t imate L·a u -. e of , i o l e n t m a l dn' e l opment was the doct r i n e o f self- re l i an c e . Th i s L·a rr i e d a l arge . perhap-. a n i mpos s ible. b u rden i n Galt u n g ' s exp loration of a n a l t e rn a t i , e p o l i t i c '- . Se l f- re l i ance was a genera l prin c i p le of soc ial ac­ rion and t h e b e d ro c k. of an a l t e rn a t i v e pract i c e : i t w a s t he fundamental princ i p l e of peace pol i t i c s . It was not mere l y an abstract formu l a but a h i s ­ t o r ic a l proce " " t h at req u i red m a -. " acti o n . N o r w a s i t t h e same a s self- s u f­ fic iency or aut arc hy. S e l f-re l i ance was defi ned as both a "psychopol i t i cal" a n d -.oc i oeconom i c c ategory and appeared in e ffect to be a s u b s t i tut e for pol i t i c a l p h i l o , o p h y i h e l t. It w a -. concerned w i t h the e n u n c i at i on of spe­ c i fi c p r i n c i p l e .., of -.oc i al i nterac t i o n . and it ex pressed an i deal soc i a l a rrangement t h at re tl ected a n umber o f normat ive princ i p l e s . part i c u l arl y eq u a l i t ::, a n d per-,onal d e n l opment ( w i t h a further range o f n ormati v e theme-., furt h e r ..,ub.., umed w i t h i n t h e latter ) . S e l f-re l i ance was not j u st a n a­ t i o n a l ,trateg::, of ac t i o n b u t a l ..,o an e x pre s s i o n of an i nd i v i du a l h uman con d i t i o n . Ye t . i t ,, a-. not -. i m p l y a p h i l o-.ophy of i n d i v i d u a l i sm bec ause, for G a l t u n g . "> e l f-re l i a nce w a-. a pri n c i p l e of eq u i t able soc ial interaction. Hern t h e n doe"> one achieve the u l t i mate tri parti te v i s i o n o f peace. de­ , e l o p m c n t . and -., e l f-re l i a n c e '! The True Worlds concl uded by out l i n i n g -.,ome broad parameter"> w i t h i n w h i c h a peace po l i t i c s cou l d b e concei v e d : J _ H i -.,tory "> h o u l d he .., e e n a "> a proce"" · n o t a -;tru c t ur e . C u rrent e ffort s t o realize preferred futures are part o f a h istorical stream and not indicati ve of an impending and dramatic turning point. ' T h e re i.., a need to c u l t i vate a g l obal con '>c i o u -.ne-.s t h at ex presses a dedication to al l of h um anity but also recogn izes the primacy of those most in need. 3. A l l leveh of action are re levant. -1-. The dri ve for peace -. h o u l d avoid c reat ing new vert i cal d i v i s i on s of l ahor-d i ffcre nt cap ac i t i e .., and opport u n i t i e .., .., h o u l d be recogn i zed but not translated into terms of power or prestige or both. 5 . Both actor-oriented and structure-oriented strategies are relevant.

1 86

A QUESTION OF VALUES

6. Peace action must be spontaneously generated. In s u m . the model of a pro fessional i zed peace research develope d in G a l ­ t u ng's earl i e r w o r k was now depicted a s a spec i e s o f caste form at i o n . re­ su l t�i ng i n u n acceptable soc ial fragmentation. A s members of a p ro fe s s ional and i n t e l l e c t u a l e l i t e c l a i m ing au thori tative k n o w l edge. peace rese arc hers could them selves be c arri ers of a form of structural v iolence g iven that they may set t h e m se l v e s u p a s monopo l i zers o f k n o w l edge. FJ W h a t w a s n o w needed was a s e t of n e w "peace-strategic" roles that could "distrib­ .. ute democrat i c a l l y the t a s k s o f peace . These i n c l uded c i t i ze n s · i n i t i a ­ t i v es-"a pl u ra l i t y o f rev o l u t i o n s at the m i c ro l e v e l " : noncooperat ion w i t h c o rpora t i o n s a n d gov e r n m e n t agenc i e s : t h e rende r i n g t ra n s parent o f t h e work i ngs of soc i e t y : and t h e appl icatio n of science a n d techn o l ogy to t he fulfillment of human needs. 40 CONCLUSION

For all of its activist senti ments and avowedly political tone, The True

Worlds e x h ib ited r e s i d u a l con t i n u i t i e s w i t h the fo u n d i ng c o n ce p t i o n of

peace research in i t s host i l i t y to any semblance of i deological c o n t a m i n a ­ t ion . Whereas t h i s w a s prev i o u s l y a coro l l ar y of pos i t i v i sm . he re i t was t h e product of an overri d i n g n ormat i v e oppo s i t i o n to any form of ideological dom in a t i o n a n d a com m i tm e n t t o t h e value o f d i ve r s i t y . A " t o \\ h at c o n ­ s t i t uted the prim ary e x p lanat ion of G a l t u n g · s vers i on o f "ant i - po l i t i c a l po l ­ itics," the answer remained unclear. 4 1 Galtung resorted u l t i mately t o t he rest at i n g of a comprehe n s i , e set of h uman needs that c o u l d be t ran s l ated into world goa l s . Tru e to t h e re­ q u i rements of c o n s t ru c t i v i s m . t h i s val ue set wa-; u sed to c ri t i c i Le t he p re­ sen t world order and j u dge propo s a l s for a n a l t e rn a t i , e ,,· o r l LI o rd e r. one example o f w h i c h w a s offered u p for scru t i ny. But j u st as the constru c t i , i st mode l o f s c ience e l ided a defe nse o f adopted v a l u e s . so too did Th e True Worlds. A v a l ue set was pusitcd. t he present wor l d was c r i t i c a l l y desnibed ( but not e x p l a i ned ) . and a bl ueprint o f a prefe rred ,, orl d was offered. Ab­ sent w a s the phi l osoph ical cement that m i g h t bind the d i sparate c l e m e n t s . The True Worlds did n o t pro v i de a c o m pe l l i n g arg u m e n t i n defen s e of i t s n ormat i v e fo undat i o n s . ofkring l i t t l e to persu ade the s i-- e p t i c a l read e r. I n this respect, it reads as a strangely disengaged text. G a l t u n g did a l l u de to a foundational p h i l osophical s t rat u m in h i s c l a i m t h a t d i v ersity as a creat ive force a n d a w o r l d goal - w a s a p re req u i s ite o f h u man fu l fi l lment . Eq ual l y. thL' recogn i t ion of a neL'd for a s pec i fi c form o f c o n sc i o u sness i n order t o e ffect gl obal tra n sform ation sugge'>ts t h a t peo ple se e k some fo rm o r a u l h L' n t i c se l f- u nderstan d i n g . G a l t u n g c l'm m e n d a b l y -;o ught to theori 1L' g l o bal tra n s format i o n o u t s ide of a n y s i n g l e ideology o f

THE TRUE WORLDS

187

change. yet t he probl ems arising from the promotion of soc i al diversity w ere only shallm\ly addressed i n either their t heoret ical or structural man­ i festat io n :-, . Arguabl y . rea l i 1 i n g the \' alue of diversity on a global scale re­ quires a substantial, even heroic, level of tolerance if it is to result in a globa l lHdcr d i s t i 1Kt from the prL'sent. Yet. the absence of a h i storical ac­ count of human social and intelkctual developme nt or an argument for the pos:--ibi l i t::, of e:xte n d i n g po l i t ical and moral commun ity beyond the water ' edge was all too evident in the efforts to develop transitional strategic-, _ :-\ rad ical t ransformat i on of the global social structure was pro­ pose d. but a pol i t ics of transformation remai ned elusive. Not only were the social forces that might engender the dissolution of the state system u n i dentified. but becau:--c of normat i v e constraints agents of transformation remained i l l definL'd. and the fe\\ pol itical tactics proposed simply articu­ lak'd a preferem·e for \ oluntary popular action. Ultimately. Galtung ·s vis­ ion of a de-,irabk \\ orld rema i ned detached from the present world, in both theory and practice. As such, it falls prey to Carr 's famous criticisms of earlier utopian writings on international politics that, in his view, set up et hical :--tandard" supposedly i ndependent from politics and sought to make international politics conform to them. 42 To believe i n the possibility of Galtung's vision set out in The True Wo rlds requires either a leap of faith or a resort to the classical idealist assumption that as rational beings, in conditions of crisis humans will come to their senses and act diversely but harmoniously to bring about a new world. Nonetheless the various silences and inadequacies of Gal tung's "\\ eeping \ i " ion do not undermine the undoubted saliency of many of the concerns he expresses. The True Worlds espoused an antipolitics of de­ cency t h :ll \\ a" to re -,onate with currents of dissident t hought that threaded t h roug h the momcntou-, revolt-, aga i n '>t oppression i n Eastern Europe dur­ i ng the l ate I 9 X (h . only to fade with the onset of Westernization. Perhaps now even more so than when he was writing, world order is characterized b: i n tegration and d i -, i n tc grat ion the former occurring primari ly i n the economic realm, the latter in the political, social, and cultural arenas. Gal­ tung · -., pn>,cic nce i ,., re flected in the now burgeoning l iterature on alterna­ t i \ c path-., to g l obal and re g i onal securi ty that i s re fl ective of the internal and c , tcrnal c h al l enge.., to the "i tatc as, the primary form of social organ i ­ zation and provider of security and welfare in the post-Cold War era. Galtung was certainly not alone in daring to suppose that we are ap­ proaching, or should be seriously considering, the "end of sovereignty"; but few contemporary writers are as willing or bold as Galtung was to make the move from identifying the multiple crises of modernity to s,ketc h i n g a blue print of alternative world order. One of the pri nci ple con­ straints acting upon them appears to be a heightened sensitivity to the problems of identity and di fference a-, e x pre-,-,cJ primarily in the realm o r cul ture. Another is an increa-, i n g s, 1--ept i c i "irn a-, to the vi rtue .-.; of the overtly

188

A QUESTION O F VALUES

progressivist and programmatic politics that have periodically marked modern ity. Galtung tried to avoid modernist teleology but in the end sim­ ply buried it out of sight. The True Worlds was only a stopping point on a still continuing jour­ ney. In his more recent work Galtung turns to the cultural realm in his ex­ plorations of the sources of violence and the prospects for peace. In so doing, he shifts his peace research even further away from its original positivist certitude and toward what we might now describe as a postmodern ambiguity laced. paradox ically perhaps. with a greater sensitivity to the question of values and ethics. The key to this combination lies in Buddhi sm.

NOTES I . Toynbee, Mankind and Mother Earth , p. 593. 2. The True Worlds (hereafter referred to as TTW) , p. 6. 3 . Galtung describes the treatment of parts of the problem as "technical" but the treatment of the structural whole as "political." TTW, p. 3 . 4. nw, p p . 1 9-2 1 , and p . 3 6, note 22. China and t o a lesser extent C u ba are seen as exceptions to this tendency. 5. Kolakowski, "The Opiate of the Demiurge," in his Marxism and Beyond. 6. TTW, p. 26. 7. See Chapter 5 . 8 . TTW. p . 30. 9. TTW, p. 27. 1 0. Engels, "Letter to J. B loch in Konigsberg," in M arx and Engels, Selected Works, p. 682. 1 1 . nw, p . 28 1 2. nw, p. 44. 1 3 . See Chapter 4. I 4. The difference is illu strated by the preference of the mass media for "news"-ch anges expressed in terms of discontinuous events-resulting in a ten­ dency to adopt an actor-oriented perspective and promote a l iberal point of view. Social structures are much harder to identify and present to an audience in a stim­ ulating and economical manner. See Gal tung, "The Structure of Foreign News," pp. 1 1 8- 1 5 1 . 1 5 . TTW, p. 45. Emphasis in the original . Galtung acknowledges the similari­ ties between his approach and the approaches of Fromm and All ardt but claims his was developed prior to t heirs and i s superior in its inclusion of a structural per­ spective. See TTW, p. 74, note 1 4. 1 6. TTW, p. 74, note 1 7 . 1 7 . Bay's claim that individuals have a "basic right" to "develop according to inner propensities and potentialities" is cited by G altung as an exact expression of W his own understanding of personal growth. TT , p. 46. 1 8 This is an extraordinarily thin reading of Swedish democracy as either phi­ losophy or pract ice. Ga l t ung appears 10 adopt the common depiction of the Swedish model as a pragmatic response to the social problems of a market economy. For a contrasting view see Tilton, The Political Theory of Swedish Social Democracy. 1 9 . TTW, p . 50.

THE TRUE WORLDS

1 89

20. B oulding sees Galtung's "passion for equality" as a problem-a truly egal­ itar i a n \lK' iety L'll u l d not prodUL'l' a ( , a l t u ng . for example. G a l t u ng c l a i m s to sh are B u u l d i ng · , d i \ l a '-IL' fpr , 1 111 i l a ri l ) . 'L'l' " 1 11 g u n l y to "el'P i 11e4u al i l ) w i t h i n hounds; a l'L' i l i n g a, \\ L' I I a, flppr i n l 1 1lL' \\ i t h ILka, found i n B uddhi,111. Chri , t i a n i ty. and socialism. See Boulding, "Twelve Friendly Quarrels with Johan Galtung," pp. 75-86. For G altung's response see the introduction to EPR, 5 . 2 1 . Good research must also avoid exploitation, penetration, fragmentation, and marginalization occumng in the relationship between researcher and re­ searched. See Galtung, "ls Peaceful Research Pos sible?" pp. 263-279. 2 2 . r/1\ . p. ri 2 . 2 ., . f l \ \ . p . t-,(1_ 24. Waltz. Man . the State and War. ch. 4. 2 5 . This idea underpins recent claims that liberal states are inherently more peaceable. See Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man; and Doyle, "Lib­ .. c r:t l i ,111 ,1 11d \\ L1rld PL1 l i 1 1c, . .--\ ,L1L· i a l-demonatic Y ariant that incl udes concept iom ,1f 1 n t e rn:l!H11Lil _1 u , t 1 L·e , , n i t l i.: al l ) e,ami ned i n P ra t t ( ed . ). /11 rcrnario11a lis111 Under Strain ; and Pratt (ed. ). Middle Power Internationalism. 26. TTW. p. 87. 27 771t- . p. 9 3 , and p. 1 05 , note 2 1 . 2 8 . TTW. p . 3 80. Peacekeeping was a fallback position. Such strategies tended to focus on the instruments of violence rather than its ultimate source and were in­ creasingly irrelevant in a world in which distance and geographical separation mean less and less. 29. mv, p. 95. Other model communities include Israeli kibbutzim, Gandhian vi ll ages, and Chinese communes. 30. TTW p . 99. 3 1 Lorenz On Aggression, pp. 2 1 2-2 1 3 . It is difficult to reconcile Lorenz's ( )p t 1 111b111 :rnJ h u m a n , , m " it h t he con,en ati�m that G a l tu n g attributes to him. A l ­ t hl1ug h l 1 ft e n n g an aL·count d i ffe ren t from G a l t u n g · \ as to the origim of aggression. he ,h,tre, the \lbieL· t i \ e nf attempt ing to under\tand aggres�ion i n order t o avoid i t . Equally, Galtung's v ision of a beta social order seems to share some of Lorenz's a" umpt1on , re gard i n g the e ffech of overcrow di ng and the sources of confl i c t be­ tween communities. Lorenz argues also for the promotion of val ues but is more sensitive to the problem of defending them. See On Aggression, especially ch. 1 4. 32 Camilleri points out that the factors peculiar to human psychology and e t h n l 1 L e n t r 1 L 11:-, are ! l H l ea\ll ) d 1 , m l \ ,ed by (i a l t un g . 1 ½ ou l d add that they need not constitute a problem for Galtung but require a closer look at cultural determinants of and constraints upon violence, a point Camilleri also alludes to. See Camilleri, "Review of The True Worlds," pp. 95-96. 3 3 . The notion of opposing forces was probably premised upon a principle of physics rather than social theory. Galtung frequently draws an alogies between so­ c i al and med1 a11 1c a l . h 1 l llogical and Lh em 1ct l ,y-.tem,. For e x ample . ,ee h i , "'Struc­ tural Analysis and Chemical Models." 34. TTW, p. 1 00. J5. II \\ . r- .1 % . 36. TTW p . 398. 3 7 . J '/1\ . p . I ( ) 1 . 38. TTW, p . 394. 39. However, Galtung made himself available to both the United Nations and the Canad ian g c o u n t r i e s and n a t i o n s . e v e n a c ro -, -, con t 1 n e n h . and t h ro u g h o u t v a .., t '> [)an-, of t i m e . " .:' T h i -, defi ni t i on i s not c o n -, i -, te n t l :,. adhe red to . howe ver : At var i o u -, po i n h "c i v i l i za t i o n " ap­ pear-, commen -, u rate \\ ith n a t i o n a l c u l t u re : on ot her occa -. i o n -. it i s a :-,yn ­ onym tor re l 1 g 1 on that l ater hL-come-, -,ynon y m o u .., w i t h "mega-c i v i l i1.at i o n . " Ra ther t h a n p r O\ 1 d e de t a i l e d a n a J y .., i -. o f t h e e 1 1 1 ergence and e v o l u t ion o f civili zations, G a l t u n g endeavors to grasp their essen tial idiom. H e a h o adoph t h e -,1 a n d p o i n t o l t h e ou h i d c o h -,nvn hcct U \C one j .., J c , .., l i k. c l ) to become m e -, m e ri 1ed h y in t e rn a l e t h n i c . rL·l i g i o u " . and l i n g u i -.t i c

191

1 92

A QUESTION OF VALUES

borderl i nes. A capacity to step outside of a c i v i l i zational matri x i s also i m ­ plicit i n t h e objective of iden t i fying the .. anatomy a n d pathology" o f spe­ c i fic c i v i l izations . i n c l u d i ng the Western c i v i l i zation from which he s e l f­ ev i dently comes. Wisely. Galtung does not c l a i m the status of observer i n any strict sense. To d o so wou ld. o f course. run agai n s t h i s o w n c ri t i que of We stern scientific neutra l i s m. Nonethe l e s s . h i s tendency to obje c t i v i ze the categories of c i v i l ization and c u l t ure suggests that. intentionally or oth­ erwise . the mantle of scient ism has not been entirely d i scarded. A plethora of cautionary a s i de s notw ithstanding. Galtung 's analy s i s of c i v i l i za t i o n s a n d c u l t ure s proceeds as i f t h e y can be unequi vocal ly di scerned i n depe n ­ dently of d i scourses endeavoring to i n terpret t h e m . G a l t u ng moves rapidly from hypothe s i s to conc l u s i o n . or from the critical-descri ptive to the con­ structivist voice. As has been the case with so much of his work. the for­ ays i n t o the comparat ive anal ysis of c i v i l i zations and the i r cosmologies are a means for arriving at a creative takeoff point very quickly. I n G a l t u n g · s eyes. the Wes t is shifting from e x pansion to .. postmod­ ern" contraction.-' It i s an exhausted. deepl y trou bled c i v i l ization : --vertical . i n d i vidual i s t . expansioni s t . e x p l o i t a t i v e on the v. orld leve l . demoral i sed. ful l of contradiction s . " An adequate explanat i on of the cyclical fort unes of .. the We st req ui res an i n v est igat ion of i t s u nder l y i ng .. social cosmology . By this is meant the "'vast. ephemeral and deep" states or processes-what Galtung sometimes c a l l s the .. deep ideol ogy. " c i v i l i zational program . or "'social grammar"-of a specific c i v i l i zation. The cosmo logy of a c i v i l iza­ t ion may not be apparent at the surface level characteriLed by facts and ar­ t i fact s and where the gloss of d i fference w i t h i n and between soc i e t i e s may mask under l ying invariances. Social co smo logy cannot be s i m p l y compre­ hended in Cartesian terms as the realm of the ideal . d i s t i nc t from the ma­ teri a l : i t i s embedded part ly i n .. the deep structures of the materi a l . human and non-human organi sation of the soc ieties in that c i \' i l i zation " and partl y i n "'the deep ideology. t h e world maps. Weltu11sclza111111 gc11 . co.1 1110 ,·isioncs. of that c i v i l i zation . "-l G a l t ung deri ves from B e nedict the analogy of cos­ mology and personal ity type: Social cosmology i s to a c i \· i l i 1.ation as .. the psychological cons t ru c t of a persona l i t y" i s to a h u m an be i n g . W i t h i n a cosmology l ies a c i v i l izationally spec i fi c u nderstan d i ng "'of the fi nal goa l . the u l ti mate telos o f huma n k i n d . " The social cosmology of a c i v i l i zation can appear as natur a l . so normal as to be unquestioned and pos s i b l y e v e n u n k nown as such to t h e in habitant\ of a c i \' i l i z at i o n . I ndee d . when c o n ­ fronted with an account of their soc i a l c o s mology. G a l t u n g a\·ers . " ' t h e y w i l l usually accept s o m e i t e m s . h a v e a questioning a t t i t u de to others and reject still others."5 Three concepts are u sed to regulate the u sage of the term social cos11wlog ,·. Fi rst . there is tlw fam il iar theme of the i somorphic re lation ship be­ tween .'> lKial stru ctures. epi stemological pri nc i ples . and gl obal in teract i o n pal l c rn s . Secon d . '>(K i a l cosmologies arc hol i s t i c : as .. deep ideolog i e s "

PEACE AS NIRVANA

1 93

they pro v i de the L'ement that bi nds apparent l y d i s paratl' i deologies such as Chri s t i a n i t y. l i bera l i s m . and man i s m . Third . there i s a y i n-yang aspect to cosmolog i e s : W i t h i n a speci fi c c i v i l i 1 ation can be found dom i nant and re­ c e s s i v e \ ariants of the soc i a l c o s nwlogy i n const ant tension w i th each other: i n effect . there is a mani kst cosmol ogical core and a l atent. peri ph­ eral alter ego. Soc i a l Ct)snwlo gy is not . then. a neolog i sm for dom i nant ideology. We stern cosmology is not assumed to be spat i a l l y and tempora l l y i nvari­ a n t . but challen gL's to i t-from both w it h i n and outside-add up to a po­ tL' ntial alternat i \ e L' Osmology that cannot be captured by simple reference to the boundari es of prevai l i n g i deolog i e s . The We st con s t it u te s a d i s ­ cern ible c i , i l i Lat io nal fo rm . w it h a s e l f- image o f consi stency and order ma-..k i n g a more troubled sea of cosmological underc urrents. The error o f lm hodo, analy-.. i s i s . t he n . to fai l t o look beneath the pati na of i deological d i -..putation and i n t rac i v i l i Lat ional variations. To borrow a more contempo­ rary phra,eolog y . it can be said that Galtung is e x ploring an e xc l u s ionary. totali L i ng metan arrat i ve of the West that threads through all realms of so­ c i a l thought and pract i ce to cement together an apparen t cacophony of \ o i c e -.. . I t i-.. t h i , dominant voice that secretes de fi n i t i ve accounts of i ntel­ lectual and social practice. "Ideally," Galtung suggests, "one should be able to invoke a cosmol­ ogy by one figure alone. an i mage so powerful that the essence of that c i v ­ i l i za t i on i -.. carried i n that i mage alone ." B u t t h i s i s fol lowed t h e caveat that · · \\ e are not i n po-.. -..e..,..,ion of \UCh an i m age so our approach w i l l have to be more anal) ti cal . " Nonethele-,s. Galtung frequen t l y attempts to capture the all-im oking key to \ ariou.., co..,mologies. For example, in a brief but tell ing commentary on French civilization Galtung writes: A cosmology is expressed in the street patterns of Paris with its centre at the Etoile ( Place Charles de Gaulle) and the avenues radiating outwards, the road map of France with its centre in Paris and the routes nationales radiating outwards, the airline network of France with its centre at Roissy (Charles de Gaulle again) and the airlines radiating outwards, above all to the Communaute Franr;a1s; as in certain unquestioned ideas and concep­ tions French seem to have about the primacy of French civ ilization. 6

The de-..cri p t i o n -.,u ppme d l y i l J u ..,trate.., t he fah i ty o f d i chotom i z ing the i deal and the material and locating \l>e i a l co..,mol ogy or its cognates only w i t h i n the former. Thi.., i .., a rea..,onablc. if hard l y nove l , po i n t in i t s e l f. But what i.., part i c u l a rly he nch about roath rad iat i n g out from capital c i t i e-.;, or a i r l i ne ro ute-.. re flect i n g the c e n t ra l ity of a nati ()nal airli nL' ·.., ha..,e ai rport? S u ch i m agery appear.., appl i c a b l e t() l l lO\t , if not a l l . contemporary c i v i ­ l i zation.., ( n a t i onal c u l t u re '-> more acc urate ly ) po-,..,c,..,L'd o r c a p i t a l c i t ie s . road .., , a n d national a i r l i ,ie..,_ f· rance m a y e x h i b i t a h i g her level o f ad m i n i '>­ trat i ve and geograph ical centra l i 1 at i ( )J1 i n compari..,on to other devel oped

1 94

A QUESTION OF VALUES

states. but a be l i e f in the primacy o f one 's c i v i l i zat ion i s hardl y i t s e xc l u­ sive preserve. I f c i v i l i zational arrogance can be detected i n states l acking the adm i n i st rat i v e centra l ism o f France. and t h i s doe s not seem a too dif­ fic u l t research task. then Gal tung's imagery beg i n s to crum ble. E q u a ll y. i s the nam i n g of c i t y squares and ai rports after dead w art i m e leaders and long-serv ing presidents of world renown a pecu l i arly French act i v i ty'? Ar­ guably. a s i m i lar i somorphism between the materi al and the idea l-be­ tween the ( q uite l i teral l y ) concrete struct ures of quot idian l i fe and the idea of a d i s t inct comm u n i ty-could be detected in numerou s non-Western s tates i n which symbolic representations of the soc ial hi erarchy of a com­ munity figure l arge. Of course, it may suggest something about the occ i ­ dental i zation ( and certai nly t h e industrial ization ) of non-Western c i v i l i za­ t i ons. But that serves only to muddy the imagery and render it less helpfu l i n tel ling u s much about French civilization. Galtung's im agery doe s te l l u s something about the s t at e . and one migh t save h i s argument by suggesting that t h i s is a u n i versal phenomenon of We stern ori g i n . I n th i s case Galtung ·s observat ions wou l d e x h i b i t com­ monal i t i e s w i t h contemporary postmodern writ ing on world p o l i t i c s that a l so foc u ses on the u n i versal and e x c l u sionary "sovere i g nty of the d i s ­ course o f sovere i gnty" a n d the manner i n w h i c h i t margi nal i zes or tri v i al­ izes alternat i v e form s of commu n ity. Such an argument does req u i re a nu­ anced discussion of the complex interaction of civilizations, logics of global ization. and the hegemony of stat i s m . Galtung does not con-.i der the issues of state format i o n and nat iona l i s m in c i v i l i zation a l term-. t o anv great depth. even though he e xpresses an intense d i s l i ke of the "the u g l y ideology of t h e nat ion-state. another catastrophic idea." B o t h t h e -.tate and nationa l i s m are depicted as sec u l ar forms o f occi dental re l i g i o u s e x c l u ­ sivism: "The state can also be seen as one of the successors to God. inher­ iting the right to destroy life (execution) , if not the right to create it. "7 Simi l arly. Galtung describes the " i deology of nationafom " a-. " rooted .. i n the figure of Chosen People and justified t hrough re l i gion or ideolog> . to be seen in conjunction with "the ideol ogy of the state, stati sm." If the ideology of the nat ion-state i-. combi ned w i t h "a theological l y ba-.ed Cho­ sen Peopl e complex" the stage is "set for di saster," as i l l ustrated by the "rel atively cl ear cases" of Nazi Germany. I srae l . Iran . Japan. South A frica. and the U n i ted S t ates. Wri ti ng in 1 990. Galtung suggested that the Soviet Union under Gorbac hev wa-. probably st i l l l abori ng under the i l l u s ion o f be ing a chosen people. chosen by Len in ( a -.ec u lar but god- l i ke " H i m " ) a -. the first socialist state. France 's arrogance, however, i s in a c l a s s of its own. as exempl i fied by Napoleo n · -,. taking o f his cro\, n from the hand-. of the pope and placing it on hi-. own head . s A-. such a -; i de-. i l l u -.t rate . G a l 1u11g·-. account of c i v i l i 1ations i -; often anecdotal in form a n d . in contrast to c l a i m s ab�n,t the i n v e s t igation of cosmology penetrat ing to the depths of ci v i l i zat i o n s . cond ucl L'd largely in a descript i v e and s u perfi c i a l v e i n .

PEACE AS NIRVANA

1 95

A l t hough he nwre u,u a l l y rekrs to a gennic Western c i v i l ization. what ap­ pear to lw 11ario110/ c u l t ures arc somet i mes desc r i bed as c i v i l i 1. a t i o n s or su hc i Y i l i 1ation s . On the othn s i de of the c o i n . compkx cultural vari ations are often suhsumed u nder the ru hric of a singk c i v i l i 1atio11 on the hasi s or cert a i n , t ru c t u ra l , i m i la r i t ie s lk teL'tL'd i n core be l iefs. An example of the latter is thL' L' l ass i fi cation of I s l am ( as re l i g i on . c i v i l i zation. and the ideol­ og: o f h l a m i s m ) a s a genus of the spec i e s Occ ident, the latter l abel used to CO\ l'r "tlw area L'O\'CI"L'd by the peop les adheri ng to. if not be l ie v i ng i n . re l i gion, o f the 1-. iruh ( Old Te stamen t ) . " To these are added t he two "recent .. ,e c u l ar o ft\pri ng, of l i beral i s m and marx i s m . Thus . a shared h i e rarchical and u n i \ L'r,al ist outlook.. grounded i n a part icular u n derstand i n g of the re­ la t i o n -; h i p bel\\ een the i nd i Y i d u a l a n d God. i s seen to warran t the icono­ c l .1 , t i L' plac i n g o f the Christian We st . marx i sm . and the Judaic or I slamic M i ddle East under the same c i v i l i zational rubric. Galtung establ i ,hes the commonal i t i e s between occ idental di scourses large I: through a l i teral read ing of brie f excerpts o f a very select set of ( nw,tl: rt' l i g ious l texts and somet i m e s on no substant i v e evi dence at a l l . C i \ i l iLation , are seen to b e " i n i ncessant i nteraction. lendi ng a n d borrow­ ing . ,e11 Ll i n g and recei Y i n g . imposing and subm i t ti n g as people. t h i ngs and i dea-.. mo\ e in -..pace" and as such are not to be taken as "watert ight com­ p;1rtm e nh . ·· '-' G i Yen t h i s . the poss i b i l i ty of i solat i ng out a defi n i t i ve cos­ mologicJI key or b l ueprint from the dynam ic i nterac t i o n of complex c i v i ­ l i z at i onal form-.. to b e u t i l ized as an explanatory master c ategory appears to h e . at the \ ery l e a " t . questionab l e . Yet. that is what Galtung constantl y ,ee k. , : t h e primary. the fu ndamental . the e sse n t i a l . Even i n t h e i r i nterac­ t i on . ··occ ident and Orient '>eem to act and react d i ffere n t l y and these dif­ fere nce-.. are them ..,elves of prim ary s i gn i fi c ance i n understan d i n g t h i s .. c i , i l i -.,ation . G iYen the poverty of substant i at i on . Galtung's taxonomy re ­ tl ech a "ubjec t i v e a n d reduct ion i st mapp i ng of c u ltures that precedes the Jct of c i , i l i1.ational analy " i '- . Th i '> i-. con s i stent w i th the sc ientistic ( and oc­ c i de n t J l , procedure of hypothe .., i s., fo rmat ion prior to some form of confi r ­ mat or: or refu t:.t t i onal proce " " · I n t h i '> case . however. the l atter i , hardl y appare n t alth ough G a l t u n g fre4 uently '>uggesh i t b e undertaken . 1 0 To reit­ erate an earl ier po i n t . the taxonom i c exp lor a t ion of c i v i l i zations and the i r co-.,molog ie " ap pear-.. to be int ended n o t a'> a defi n i t ive contri bution to c u l ­ tural analysi s b u t as a means t o a l arger e n d . T H E SOCIAL COSMOLOGY O F THE WEST

In an early e x erc i 1.,c in com parati ve co-.,molo):!y, ( i altun):! roc u,L'S on the hermeneutics of the word f> recour-,e to -,uppress,ed. more oriental dimensions of the oc c i dental co-,mo log i cal amal gam a-; the avai lable repertoire of re­ ..,ource-, hecome-, exhau'->ted. But the e x ternal environment also presents a decisive chal lenge a-, part\ of the non- West respond to glohal i zed occiden­ tali-,m often hy turning occidental techn i lj Ue'> ( aggressive trading policies and the like J agai n .., ! it. The We-,t la l l -, victi m o f ih own -;uccess as the ··barbarian -, " learn the techn ique'> o f power. Non - We'>tern civi l i 1,ations en­ teri ng pha'>e'> of expansion hear the hal lmark-, o f occidentali1ation. thereby engendering at the -,ame time hoth the continuance o f much that can he cal led We-,tern and also the mitigation ol ( i nner) We-,tcrn dominance. One

200

A QUESTION OF VALUES

conseq uence i s a s h i ft on the part of the West from bel l i gerent expansion to a more be nign contracti ng phase characterized by a greater w i l l i ngness to look w i t h i n and a posture of w i thdrawal from confron tation with the outside . The prescrip t i v e task become s the e x p l oration o f nonoccide n t a l c i v i l i zations and cosmologies as contri butors to the e n v i sioning of a fu t ure beyond a moderni ty, h i t herto dom i n ated by a Western cosmology w hose "teeth are being extracted or are withering away. " 1 8 I f the Wes t needs a dentist. i t i s n o t y e t ready for the undertaker. The Occident exhibits a cont inu ing internal v i gor and variety that the dominant "inner West" appears yet fu l l y to acknow ledge . Galtung depicts two broad c i v i l i zational fo rms w i t h i n the occidental amalgam. Their di s t i nctiveness can be grasped h i storica l l y : When t h e Occ ident moves i nto a crisi s-driven contrac t i ng mode. i t engenders t h e manife station of a l at e n t . u s u a l l y pe­ ri pheral , cosmology comparable to the more i n ward- l ooking m e d i e v a l "oriental pocket" i n Western h istory a n d w i th aspects of oriental cosmol o­ gies. A s a consequence of "structura l fat igue" and the e x haust ion of cog­ n i ti v e capac i ty. t h e "expan s i v e . o u t ward-directed i mp lementation of the usual centre-periphery cosmology with a steep gradient running from t h e Wes tern top to the non-Wester n bottom" i s rep l aced w i t h i t s oppos i t e : "inner-directed. m u c h less concerned w i t h tran sform ing the ouhide \vorld. engaged in work inside the We st . . . and with the inner- l i fe of h uman be­ ings . " 1 9 It is because of its overextension in the modern period that the inner sanctum o f Western c i v i li z at i on "may now be ready to enter a dia­ logue w i t h less aggre s s i v e cosmologi e s w i th potent i a l l y i m portant conse­ q uences for global c i v i l i zation. " 20 Typical ly. the empirical and t h e norma­ tive are being b l u rred here. I n making the c l a i m over a dec ade ago. G a l t ung offered l i t t l e e v i dence of the Occ i dent ac t u a l l y e x h i b i t i n g such openness to the oriental "other." nor did he explore the quest ion of agency in this regard . The idiom of contemporary debate about an emergent new world order suggests that. i f anything. the re ve rse i s more probabl e . Nor­ mat i v e l y. however. Galtung i s c lear enough : The Occident should both en­ courage the emergence of i t s softer. more oriental alter ego and engage in a more eq u i t able dialogur with the world outside. The praxeolog ical i m ­ pl ications for peace research are a l so appare n t : rel i ance upon a n y s i n g ul ar c i v i l i zation and i t s const i t u t i v e soc i a l cosmology m u st be put a s i de i n favor o f a dialog i c encounter w i th a v ariety of c i \' i l i zation- spec i fi c d i s ­ courses o n peace a s the basis for a "world p o litics o f a richer peace con­ cept. " 2 1 Th i s i s to be done in "a spirit of see k i ng solutions rather than mak­ .. ing condemna t i ons . a l t hough Gal tung proves t o be not averse t o a l a rge dose of the latter. So. the instability of the prevai l i ng world order creates a sense o f ur­ gency and should re inforce t h e necessity for change. Yet ch ange does not ensue. I ndeed . Galtu ng sees the anticipation of i m pendi ng cri s i s as part of Western social cosmology itself. It reflects a "dramatic." cycl ical conception

PEACE AS NIRVANA

20 I

o f time w i t h at kast se\'L'n L' lcment s : parad isc-fa l l -darknc ss-cnl i ghtcnmcnt­ progress-cri s i s-cat hars i s . It i s . he has l"LTL'nt ly suggested. a Christian con­ ce p t i o n o f t i me that pos t - E n l igh tenme nt I in earity obscures but docs not e l i m i nate . � � Not i ons of progre ss an.' always connected with a sense or im­ pe n d i n g cri , i s or apocal: p-.;e, and thL' source of threats to peace is seen to L' manate i l1 \ ari a b l : from o u t s i de of a peacef u l center. Gal t u n g reads t he constant re production o r an L' ssent i a l dual i s m-good w i t h i n . e v i l w i t h ­ o u t - i n t o ,ul'11 not i on s as .. the triumph o f t h e Lord . " t h e j u st w ar. "the gl or: of thL' nati l) n ."· the conqUL'St of nature. the threat o f the barbarian. and so on. B u t thL' L'\ ii outside is also detected w i t h i n the West in the form of peripheral ideo log ies and re l i gions. such as I s l am . marx ism. and J udaism. ,, h ic h are pcr c e i ,cd as threats to the dominant cos mology and e x h i bi t d i f­ ferent cycles of expansion and contraction. In term, o f deep i deo logy. t h e n . i ntraoccidental dialogue can offer ,)11 1 : l i m i ted benefi t s . A contrac t i n g i nner Occident may be more open to d i a l ogue ,, ith the periphery of the c i v i l ization-the second and t h i rd Oc ­ c i dent-;-but g i , e n that t h i s is a dialogue of occidental i sms. the l i kely con­ ,equence i-. -. t i l l -.ome form of the Occident in an e x pansionist mode . The , ariou, h i ,tori cal re �pon,e, to int rac i v i l i zational crises-such as marx ism. i nd u -. t ri a l i z at i o n . a m i l i tant hlam. Z i o n i s m . and nationa l ism-ended up generati n g new cri�es rather than addressing fundamental problems in the underl y i n g c i , i li z at i on a l gramm ar. In sum. w i th o u t recourse to nonoc c i ­ dental , alue-., a n d pract ices. the Occident w i l l remain as a project, consist­ i n g i n a proce-..-., of -.,ort i ng good from evil and driven by a variou s l y de­ fi ned t e l o -., : the pe rfect market . pure communi sm . or redemption in t h e e) e-., o f a G o d . F o r G a l tung. the i rreducible cosmology of the West can be gra-.,ped t h rough the t h e i , t i c metaphor of the angst-ridden individual stru g ­ gl i n g to ac hi e , e redempt i on and eternal sal vat i on by t h e grace o f a n om­ n i potent Creator. T h i , ,, ou l d e x p l a i n the defi n i t i ve occidental preoccupa­ .. t i on ,, i t h con , ert i ng the general ized . . other to the right state of mind and '> req u i re i i . D ! to < >LT i den t a l cosmol ogy. ' 1 1 I t s v i rt U L'S i n c l ude a c a pac i t y t o ab-,or b and adapt t o o u h i dc in l'l uL·n cl' '> and t rad i t ions a n d t h e ah'> leering process in which humanity i s guided tow ard an uneq u i v ocal l y right des t i n y i s, absent . If the Orient has a project a t al l , clai m s Galtung. it com i -,t. there i s no claim to universal it y. there i s no soul . . . and the goal is not eternal life through salvation, but ext inction from the cyc l e s . nihhana . through e n l i ghtenment . "-+h The ab­ sence of a personal God proves dec i sive i n Galtun g:s representation of the generalized oriental alternative cosmology. The primary virtue of oriental c i v i l izations fo r Galt ung i s their toler­ ance of eclect icism: "like being Jew. Chri stian. M u s l i m . l i beral and marx.­ ist at the same time-a combination characterised as i nsanity in the Occi­ dent and as wisdom in the Orient. "-+ 7 It is not that any ev idence i s provided in support of such roman t i c i s m : i n his paraphrasing o f Gandh i . G a l t u n g seemingly forgets certain aspects of actuall y e x i sting oriental c i \ i l i1ation s . Tru e . t h e y may n o t genera l l y e x h i b i t the aggre s s i \'eness o f t h e \\'e s t . b u t the i r eclecticism clearly has i t s l i m i t s . as G a l t u n g g o e s on to concede . For a forei gner to be accepted fu lly i nto J apanese soc iety is v i rt u a l l y impossi­ ble. S im ilarly. the observation that we might all have a bit of the H i ndu in us obsc ures the point that one can only be born a H i nd u . Losing one ' s sta­ t u s as a foreigner i n Chinese c u l t ure i s also notoriously d i fficu lt. Ewn so . on Galtung ' s readi n g the Orient offers up a range of conce pti ons o f se l f and other pre ferable t o the genera l ized occ idental model . e\ en i f t h i s t i l t i s clearly only a matter o f degree. Let u s concede the point: I f the oriental worldview-insofar as i t can be i dentified at all -exhibits some greater tol­ erance of ( or disi nterest in ) the other. it would pla u si bly be more conducive to g loba l stabi l i t y and order and the reduction of d i rect \ i o lcnce . B ut the coro llary i s that it i s far from evident that tlw OriL'nt offers an integrat ive or em brac ing visi on of humanity as a bas i s for moving beyond a stru ctural l y violent status q u o o r a decisive alternative to the West. Of the nonocc idental cosmologies. H i nduism w i t h a strong B u ddh i s t com ponent meets w i t h most approval from G a l t u n g . hardly s u rpr i s i ng g i ven h i s l i fel ong in tere s t in Gandhi 's l i fe and teachings. For the H i ndu . "what comes fro m the outside i s received and enve loped. s i n k. i n g down into the gelatinous, amorphic body of a c ulture so rich that almost

PEACE AS NIRVANA

21 1

anything is pu:-. :-.ibk. sin king until it meets and h knd, with it:-. opposite number in Hindui:-.m and i , transformed. " 1 s In particular. Gandhi ' s b knd of Hindu eckL·tici:-.m and Buddhist rejection of viokncl' not only provides a CUITL'L'ti\'e to thL' militant ll'ntknciL'S in Hinduism and its structurally vi­ t)knt. :-.ometimL''- dircL·tl: ,iu knt. conception of castt' but abo offers a motkl t1f oriL'ntal , al UL''- to ju,taptbe ,, ith the patlwlot�Y of occidl'ntalism. The chalknge to the WL'st lie-.. then. very much in a vision. of which the actually existing Orient gives barely a glimpse.

BUDDHISM, PEACE, AND PEACE RESEARCH A di-,ti1Kti,e Buddhist ci,ilization is a later addition to Galtung's cat­ alt)guc of ci,ili1ation:-. . although its cosmology is not overtly connected to the hi-,turiL·al practice :-. of ,pecific state s or empires. This would be a dif­ fi L·ult ta-,L -,ince the o,ertly Buddhi:-.t state appears to be nonexistent. al­ tlwugh the continuing :-.un i\'al of the spirit of Tibet ( in spite of the vio­ lence of China · , effort:-. to eradicate it ) suggests a certain potentiality. Gi,en the diwr-,it: of ,choob of Buddhism and their complex interaction ,,ith tHher -,tream-., of oriental co-.mology. the very idea of a Buddhist civ­ iliution appear, contrived_-iY Nonetheless. its introduction points up the third function of the taxonomy of civilizations-as a prefatory exercise to the main game of e ,ploring Buddhism's potential. Effectively. Galtung come , to re duce the conte,tation of civilizations to a contrasting of Chris­ tiJ.nit: and Buddhi,m. the t\\ O -,ymbolizing the core of the Occident and the Orient, respectively. Galtung · , 1 11tere,t i, in the tran-.latability of Buddhism into a practical di-.,cour,e of peace-a contemporary ,atyagraha-rather than in exposition of ih philo,ophical ,ub,tance. In thi-. respect. his work differs little from the bulk of We ,tc rn ,uiting on Buddhi\l moral philosophy that has largely been confined to the hu,ine..,, of " -.implc de-.criptive ethics . " " 1 1 Yet. the reading of Buddhi..,m j .., not entirely pa..,-,ive: Galtung: -.ee k s to get beyond intra- H uddhi,t divi..,iom \ Uch a.., that between Hinayana ( or Theravada ) and \Liha:-, ana Buddh i ..,m and the correlative di,tingui..,hing empha-.e-. on a,oid1 11g d11/.J lw ( the chicl characteri\lic of mortal life -.uffering ) or re­ ali1ing 1 11 � /io r h J i .., .., or joy J . ' Although he gen erally avoids judging spe­ cific "chool.., of Huddhi..,rn C ,altung -.eelll\ k .., , L'tlthu..,ia-.tic about tho-.e that approach the oc-c1 (kntal norm ol v.or ,ilip and pctitionary prayer or e lllpha­ ,i1e nwna..,tic '0. ithdra\\ al and more .., y 1 npatiletic to the more activist Ma­ hayana end ol the Buddhi..,t ..,pectru rn . Thu.., (ialtung approvingly rdn-. to the S oka-Gak kai ( Value- Creating Society J that Ile J ia.., de,crihed a.., having evolved into a "major part of the world peace movement. " The Soka­ Gakkai ·-. empha"i" on \ Lich thing"> a, ,ocial ju..,t1ce. peace action . and the :--ynthe,i, of capitali,rn and ,ociali-.1n rL· , onatL' '- with tilL'llln foun d 1

212

A QUESTION OF VALUES

throughout Galtung's wri t i ng s . a l though he makes no re fe rence to c l a i m s t h a t its spread i n the 1 9.50s had a v i olent, authoritari an dimension. 52 The v i rtues of B uddhism from the poi n t of v i e w of Galtun g ' s peace re­ search are man i fold. Above a l l , it i s the only major system of thought that does not promote some form of d i rect or structural v i o l ence. Galtung de­ scribes it as a h o l i s t i c nonmetaph ysical moral ph i l o sophy. Whether B ud­ dhism i s nonmetaphy sical is a moot po i n t . b u t it has freq u e n t l y been de­ scribed as a nontheistic rel igion w i th an overt l y pract ical orientation. The B uddha rejected b l i nd fa ith and lik ened his t e ac h i ngs to a raft upon which the fol lower could cross the river from the dangerous shore of the "cond i ­ t ioned world" to the peacefu l shore o f n i rvana."' B uddh ism acknowledges the e x i stence of personal gods ( clc rn ). b u t it den i e karma.""0 1 G a l t u ng w a n t s to s y nt h e s i ze t h e et e rnal I J ,, of k a r m a a n d occ idental not ion s of l i m i ted t ime frames a n d ac­ c o u n t ah i l i t : . Of cour-.,t'. he i s not alone here: various attempts at blending B uddh i -.. t and C h r i -, t i an concept ions o f respons i h i l i t y also color the modern h i -..tor: of B uddh i -.. m i h c l f . 0..i Furth ermore. the e x tent to w h i c h G a l t u ng ac­ t u a l ! : a-.. ,enh to the aut hori t a t i v e doctrinal tenets o f B uddh i s m . as opposed to m t> re l y , i e w i n g t h e m a s i m i g h t fu l a l l egori e s or metaphors for t he human condition, rem ains typically and conveniently unclear. W h e n i t comt>-.. to e x p l o r i n g ": nthe1., i s . G a l t u n g s h i ft s h i s attention t o , e c u l a r i zcd repre -.. e n t a t i om o f re l i g i o u s l y i n sp i red c i v i l i zat i o n a l forms . Th u -, . C h r i , t i a n v e rt i c a l i t y i 1., reprod uced i n t he Western legal trad i t i o n and t h e , u b -,t i t u t i on of c r i m e fo r 1., i n . Sec u l ar i z a t i o n p re serves t h e form of Ch ri .., t i an mora l i t;, h u t 1.,ap1., i t of ih complex s p i r i t u a l content . A l t hough no d i re c t l y com parah l e -,ec u l ari1at i on of B udd h i -.,t e t h i c -., i1., ident i fied. a s i m i ­ la r p roc e -, -, o f -, p i r i t u a l e , aporation i s, s u ppmecl . Deve lopments i n t h e ac ­ t u a l 1 : c x i -, t i n g Ori e n t -,u g g e ',( t h a t con fl i c t i -., i n c rea-,ing l y v i e wed in v e rt i ­ c a l terms and as a con sequence " w e would expect l aw, l awyers and l i t i g a t i o n to he on t h e i n cr e a s, e i n the B u ddh i s t part o f the world . " ti � '.\"onethe l e -, -, . B u ddh i -,m o tle r1., prac t i c a l i n 1., i _[.! h t into con rl i c t rc 1., o l u t i on i n ­ -,ofa r a-, i t -,h i t h our f< JC u -, away from t h e i n d i v idual act or a c t o r tow ard a re l at i on a l . or -,truct ura l . v i e \\ po i n t . ""The c l o'->e'-I We stern appro x i m a t i on to a B u cl clh i '-> t per'->pec t i v e . ·· G a l t u n_l! -, u g _l! e '- 1 " . " wou l d he a m u l t i la t nal con­ fere n c e \\ ith a l l part i e -, aro u nd the tahk and a l l i 1., 1., uc 1., on thl' t a h il' . art i cu­ l at i n g a nd p roc e '-> '-> I n _l! all co1 1 fl i c h i n thL· 1., y -, !L' 111 . pas t . prnL·nt and fu t u re . w ithout pre-conditions. Highly holistic and dialectic, mature." 66 The g l ohal i m p l i ca t i on-, o l the B u dd h i -,t 111oral -, y -, t e rn c a n a l -,o hl' i l ­ l u -., t rated h y re ference to the mor a l precept o l a h i m sa nonv i o l c m·e t o a l l

216

A QUESTION OF VALUES

thi ngs. If the idea of the d i sti nctive. elemental self or other is rejected in favor of an emphasis on the in terconnectedness o f all elements. then vio­ lence toward other living thi ngs becomes effectively violence ag ain st one­ sel f. I n this context Galtung refer:-- to Gandhi 's interpretation of ahimsa and its premise of an es senti al unity of human kind. Altho ugh the appeal of ahi msa to Galtung q u a pacifist is hardly surpri sing. the simple adoption of thi s moral precept is res i sted. I n a violent world ahimsa may be in suffi­ cient as a peace policy and in need of supplementation with co ncepts of defen sive defense. Such pragmat i sm appear:-- aho compatible. however. with the Buddhist doctrine of the Middle Way that counseh agaim.t the ex­ tremes of laxity and rigidity. Though certainly not entirely implau sible. Galtung ·s, reading of Bu d­ dhist ethics as supportive of his long-standing distinction between negative and positive peace verges on the i d i o syncratic. It is an i nterpretation that presupposes the privilegin g of realizing suklw ( eq uated with pos,itive peace) over d11Uha (equated with negative peace J. According to Peter Har­ vey, for ex ample. i t is the overcoming of d11Ulw. both in oneself and oth­ ers. that is Buddhism's central concern, and the primary ethical activity to be developed is that of g ivin g (dana) as the bas,is for fu rther moral de\'el­ opment and movement toward nirvana. In purs uit of thi-.. the Buddhi-.t en­ deavors to cultivate virtue (shi/a ) through adherence to the five negati\'e precepts or abstention s contained in the panclw-shilu. But preci-;ely what adherence entails is vari ously i nterpreted between the school-. of Bud­ dhi sm and according to the degree to which Buddhism constitute-; part of a larger amalgam of bel iefs. I t is fu rther constra i ned by the doctrine of the Middle Way. 67 There are positive implications in the language o f abstention . as e.x ­ .. pressed i n the principles o f "lovingkindne -. -. (merru ) and compa:-, -. i o n ( ka runa). and clearly Galtung wishes t o emphasize the transformati \'e po­ tential of a Buddhist morality. He is forced to concede. lwwewr. that Bud­ dhi st scriptures are not terribly helpful here. The claim that Buddhi:-,m pro­ vides substance to the du alism of positive and negativ t' peace ( in other word s. that it clearly proscribes structural and cultural v i olence a-. well as d i rect violence) l oo k s especially weak when the nH)\'e from et hical pre­ cepts to soci al i-elations is con-.idered. Fi r:-,t. a-. I ha\'C already noted. Gal­ tu ng describes Buddhism as most insightful with regard to intrahuman and human-nature relation s but undndevclo ped a -. "a canon of thou ght and practice for social space and world space. " N e,·crthelcs s . Galtung attempts to s k etch the sociospatial i m plicatio n s of Buddhism : "There is a basic un ity-of-man assumpt i o n . hut also a multicentric con struction of space, each centre hei ng restricted to its own area of concern rather than control1 ing othe rs. "s This is no more than an idcali 1ation in contrast to the con­ crl'l i1.ation or other civili 1ati on al accounts through reference to the practices of states. It is , nonethcks-;. the preferred variety of oriental cosmology. lt

PEACE AS NIRVANA

217

a l l o w s fo r u n i t y a n d d i ffc re n c 1.' h u t w i t h o u t t h 1.· c e n ter-per i ph e r y grad i e n t o f o t h n c o s m o l o g i e s . De , d o p i n g t h e po i n t fu rt h e r . Ci a l t u n g s e c s B u d ­ d h i s m a , prnnwt i n g t h 1.• i 1.k a o f · · s m a l l i s beau t i fu l " bec a u se t h e c o l l e c t i v e s t r i \ i n g fo r B u dd halwod r1.• q u i re s a k \' l' l o r i n terac t i on t h a t c a n o n l y b e a c h i e \ 1.' d i n s m a l l e r ,01.· i a l u n i t s . Th i s c o n ne c t s w i t h h i s earl i e r e x p l orat i o n s o f a n a l l L' rn a t i , 1.' b e t a nw1.k l o f dn e l o p m e n t . w h i c h I d e s c ri bed i n C h a p­ tcr o. a l t lw u g h it i, an o p e n q ue s t i o n a s to w h l' t h e r B ud d h i s m was an o r i g ­

inal influence or only discovered later as a supportive source.

S e 1.· 1.) n d . B u ddh , , m · s t o lerance c an s l i d e i nt o q u i e sc e n c e t o w ard d i re c t a n d , t ru l'! ur a l , 1 n k n c e . G a l t u n g c i t e s Japanese B ud d h i sm a s fai l i n g t o pro­ \ i 1.k re , i , ta n ,:e to m i l i t a r i s m a n d t h e perp e t u a t i o n of i n t e rn a t i o n a l s t r u c ­

t ur a l \ i u kn1.· e i n t h e fo rm o f aggre s s i Y e trade po l ic i e s . Thai B uddh i s m h a s a h o a p p e are d t 1.1 a c c e p t a c o n cordat w i t h a m i l i t ari s t i c s t a t e . 09 O f c o u r s e . , u d1 o b :-- e n at i o n , rai , e c o m p l e x q u e :-- t i o n s a s t o w h a t B u ddh i sm a c t u a l l y o b l i g a l t' , i t-.. fo l l o \\ ers t o d o i n c o n c re t e p ol i t i c a l c i rc um s t an c e s . b u t G a l ­ t u n g i , r i g h t t o n o t e t h a t c e rt a i n i n terpre t a t i o n s of B u ddh i s m promote c o n ­

templative retreat from the world rather than engagement with it.

T h i , l e ad, to a t h i rd mo re t e l l i n g po i n t : I f d ec l i ne fol l owed i n e v i t a b l y

b: r e \ i , a l i , s e e n a:- a n i n e s c a p a b l e c o n sequence of t h e c y c l i c a l n a t u re o f e x i , t e rK e . t h e t u rn i n g o f t h e w h e e l . t h e n fat a l i sm c a n e n su e . H ere G a l ­ t u n g · , c o n cern s. h o w s o n c e a ga i n t h at h e h a s n o t fu l l y abandoned a n oc c i ­ d e n u l u n der,t a n d i n g of soc i op o l i t i c al t i me o r t he deci s i v e ro l e o f p u rpo ­ ,i \ e i n d i \ i d u a h dedi c a t e d t o c h a n g i n g t h e m a t e r i a l c i rc um s t an c e s in w h i c h t h e: f1 11 d t h e m s. e h e s. . B u d d h i sm m a y prov i de i n s i g h t i nt o G a l t u n g ' s p h i l o ­ -.,o p h 1 1.· a l a n d m o r a l o u t l o o k b u t n o t t h e c o m p l e t e p i c t u re . T h i s i s perhaps n o t -., u rpri , i n g : c \ e n in -., u c h s. y m p a t h e t i c hands. t h e s ub s t a nt i ve c o n t r i b u­ t i o n o t B u d dh i -., m to a pract i c a l . g l obal pol i t i c s o f peace pro v e s to be t h i n

o n the ground.

CONCLUSION G a l t u n ,{ -., \\ r i t i n g on c i v i l i 1.a t i o n s a n d t h e i r c o s m o l og i e s proc e e d s t h ro u g h t h ree '> l a g e -., : a cr i t i q u e o l t h e Oc c i d e n t : a s u r v e y o f a c t u a l l y e x ­ i s. t i n g n o n o c c i d c n t a l a l t e rn a t i v e " - t h e o r i e n t a l ot h e r : a n d more recen t l y an

exploration of a Buddhist counterpoint to occidental Christianity.

T h e t i r-., t '> l a g e c a -, i -.. h i '> e '> t a h l i -, h e d c r i t i q u e o r t h e We s t in a n o v e l

l i ght t h ro u g h a rcd u c t i o n i s,t c rn p h a '> i '> 0 1 1 t h e t h e i s t i c u n d e rp i n n i n g s o f oc­ c i d e n t a l c i \ i l i 1at i o n . At "omc a na l y t i c a l co '> l . ( ; a l t u n g e n deavor, to c a p t u re t h e · · g e n e t i c c o d e · · ol t h e We s. I ,h a m e a n '> t o re t h i n k i n g t h 1.· p ro b l e m a t i c t h a t c o n fr o n h peace re '>e a rc h : Oc c i de n t a l '> o c i a l c o s m o l ogy. i n part i c u l ar the deep i ck o l o g y o t t h e • • i n n e r We '> t " ( more rece n t l y rc k rrcd t o as ( kc i ­ d e n t 1 ) . i.\ v i o l e n c e . Gi v e n t h i '> c o n c l u '> i o n . t h e fac t · · t h a t there i s peace i n t h e Occ i den t . s,orn e t i m e '> e v e n c m a nat i n )! lro rn t h e Occ i de n t . i s someth i n g

218

A QUESTION OF VALUES

of a m i rac le. " 7 ° That m i racle is a prod uct of the other "softer, " more ori­ ental Occident (Occident I I ) l atent in the first. The second stage is c l early the s h a l lowest and as s u c h does consider­ able damage to the normat ive authenticity of the t h i rd. R e ferences to such th ings as "the oriental m i nd , " coupled w i t h anecdotal l y based genera l i za­ tions about spec i fic c u ltures or cosmolog i e s-( espec i a l l y the N i pponic and H i ndu ) and simpl i st i c su mmari e s of complex c u l t ural wholes. render the whole exerc i se suspec t . I t i s tempting to assume that the connec t i o n s be­ tween cosmology and the concrete behavior of stat e s arc most apparent with regard to those of which Galt ung disapproves. In contrast to the more detai led explorat ion of the Occ ident, i n which Galtung draws upon m uch of h i s ear l i e r work, his treatment of the Orient i s far more sketchy and i m ­ pressionistic. C i v i l izations or cosmo logies are reduced t o a fe w re l i g i o u s epithet s. selective re ference to e vents. and potted summaries of h i storical epoc hs. In this respect, the essen ce of Said ·s fury against those who wou l d suppose that there i s a "real o r true" Orient o r Occident-al though c u t t i n g across Galtung's particu lar c i v i l izational part i tion of t h e worl d-is entirely understandabl e . A s Said p u t s it. "The not ion t h at t here are geographical spaces with i nd igenous rad i c a l l y " d i fferent" i n habitants who c a n be de­ fined on the basi s of some rel i gion. c u l t ure or rac ial essence proper to that geographical space is . . . a highl y debatable idea."7 1 I n Galtung's account of the constit u t i v e assumptions of the dom i n ant Western soc i a l cosmology. we m i gh t hear the echoes of various postmod­ ern res istances to e x c l u s ionary intel lectual practices. Yet . Galtung · s analy­ sis of cosmology is itself a l arge e x ercise in definitive e ssenti alism pre m ised upon a core dual i sm of Occident and Orient . even when belat­ edly moderated by the adm i ssion that i t risks reduction i s m . The cri t i q u e of the Occ ident and the depiction of the oriental other are hoth m arked by the forc ing of description and analy s i s into a l i m i ted set of rei fy i ng c ategories j us t i fied i n terms of the apparent sugge stiv eness of the e \ e rc i s e . -� The sometimes i n s i ghtfu l . often obscuring. bl urri ng of the l i ne hetween s u g ­ gestive ahstracti ons a n d empirical truth c l a i m s i s consistent w i t h Galtun,g:s preceding work. I n spite of the sketchiness of h i s presentation of d i fferen t c i v i l i La t i o n s . cosmo l o g i e s . and c u l t u re s . there i s l i t t l e re t i cence to j u mp from hypothe s i s to conc l u sion. J u st as modern psychiatry can be acc used of forc ing a di verse humanity into a l i m ited set of person a l i t y types. often for quest io nable soc i a l p u rpo.-; e s . so too can Gal tung · s abstrac t i n g of the cosmology of a c i v i l i zat ion or c u l t u re s l i de into claims such as i m p u t i ng cult ural arrogance to the Frenc h . a preoccu pat i on \\ i t h being "chosen" t o J e w s . and a s u periority c o m p l e \ t o the J apanese. The u s age o f t h e cate­ gories of c u l t ure . c i v i l i 1.ation. and cosmology tends to su ffer from a su per­ fi cialit y. and at t i mes a cras.-; nc .-; s , that be li es the analytical s i g n i fi cance of a foc u s on "dL'L'p" c i v i l i 1.at ional code s . G a l t u n g · s choice of i n-gro u p or out-grou p . his prefe rred "other." may accord more w i t h contemporary

P[ACE AS N I RVANA

219

prngre s s i \' i st fash i o n . but i n so st ark. l y ue ) i n s cr i bi ng the bo undaries be­ t ween i n s i de and o u t s i d e . or good and bad. he s i m pl y pnpetuatcs those features of oc c i dental ism that he appare n t l y despi ses.n In any case. the ac­ tually n. isting Orient pw,·es some\\' hat d i sappointing i n Galtungian terms; hence m y suggL'stilln that ana l y s i s of i t be treated as a preface to the con­ st ruction l)f an ideal i1ed oriL'ntal other in the form of B uddhi s t c i v i l i zation. J udgment of the third s tage is of necessity open-ended, since i t is clearly an u n fi n i s hed p roject. But i t must also be more posi t ive. for i t i s i n t h e imagi nar) dialogut' of epi stemologies and c i v i l izations. rather than i n t h e cru d er j u \tapllsition of t h e actually e x i st i n g Occident a n d Orient, that the creat i , e . s ugge s t i , e s i de of G a l t un g i an peace research comes to the fore . Galtung ,ees B uddhism as hav i n g a tremendous i f yet untapped po­ tential as a social and political doctrine. I t is an ethos, he suggests, "per­ haps in search of a concrete s tructure." Yet the translation proves to be dif­ fiL· u l t i ndeed. and the de l i neat ion of that structure emerges as an ongoing L'hal lenge to both peace research and B uddhi s m . Thus, "the i dea that B ud­ dhahood is something we reach together . . . the self-realisation of all" is ,een a, a principle that can be appl i ed to "world space." The overall i m age transpo sed from B u ddhism to peace research is of collective striving t h rough a nn er-ending Ill) riad of sm a l l , coordinated efforts to real ize an open-ended condition that can be called peace or nirvana. Galtung l ikens nirvana to a condition of "maximum entropy," which h :.h been another long--.,tanding metaphor for pos i ti v e peace. Of course. he is also playing with the more u s u al understanding of entropy as the ab­ sence of kinetic energy in a system. For Galtung, entropy refers to a con­ d ition of messiness or di sorder but not in a pejorative sense. The incap ac­ i t.: of a ".: 'tern to Cr) -.,tal l i 1 e or e..,tab l i sh order perm i t s greater comp l e x i t y and d i \ er-, i t ) and m i t i gate.., the re i fication of v i o lent structure s . 7 --1 Against the occidental C hf r, t i an image of the con fl ict cycle as exhib i t i ng genesis­ m atu ration--,ene -.,cence-death can be counterpo i sed a B uddhi st conception of perpet u al confl i ct e nergy that doc.., not die but attaches itself to the i n­ t' \ i t able co n fl i c h that attend l i fe i t self. Con fl i cts generate more po s i t i ve (love-nonviolence) and negative (hatred-vi olence) conflict energy that is "reborn, negatively or positively, into several conflicts . . . as part of the karma of the parties and actors in those conflicts ." Seen thus, the notion that conflicts c an be progressively and cumulatively solved i s illusory. R;.i l her. energ> a'-> hoth con-.. cim1 -..ne-..-.. and action i s there and a l ways w i l l he. a n d t h e 4ue-..tion hec(JTilC "> that of tran -.,for m i ng confl i ct from negat i ve to positive rather than endeavoring to resolve it.7 5 Given the increasingly overt adoption of the B uddhist alternative in his more recent work, i t is not surprising that Galtung is now reticent to defi ne the purpo-.,e and goa l -.. ol peace rncarc h . Such ret i cence a l so s u i t:-; these intellect u al times. The very idea of positive peace takes on a more cont i ngent 4 u ality. -..peak ing to prncc-.. -,e-, and value.., rather than st ruct ures

220

A QUESTION OF VALUES

a n d fi nal outcomes . I n s tark contrast to an earl i e r programmatic c e rt i t u d e . G a l t u n g has now conceded th at .. I t h i n k we s h a l l n e v e r c o m e to a n y t hi n g l i k e a fi n a l conc l w, ion a s t o what · peace · m ig h t mean " a n d , perhap'- m ore tel l i ng l y. "nor do I t h i n k we sh o u l d e v er h o pe for that to h a p pe n . " 7 h At t h i s h i s to ri c a l conj u n c t u re . t h e appeal o f t h e d i ffu se concept o f n i rv a n a as a met aphor for po s i t i ve peace i s understandabl e . I t e n a b l e s t h e ret e n t i o n o f m o r a l and prac t i c a l pu rpose , w i thout req u i r i n g the i de n t i fi ca t i o n o f s o m e d e fi n i t i v e end po i n t t h at c a n b e au thori ta t i ve l y k n o w n . The g e n t l e s p i ra l o f M ahayana o p t i m i s m rep l ac e s the c e rt i t ude o f the u pward - po i n t i n g oc c i ­ dental arrow o f progre s s . Once aga i n , G a l t u n g 's peace re se arc h adj u st s t o fit with a shifting inte l l ectual m i l ieu, if never quite t o accord with it. NOTES 1 . Galtung, Buddhism, p . 27. The "certain sense" refers to the concept of en­ tropy that Galtung sees as central to both peace and nirvana and to which I return subsequently. 2. Galtung, "Western Civ ilisation," p. 1 46. 3 . Galtung, Heiestad, and Rudeng, "On the Last 2,500 Years in Western H istory," p . 353. The term "postmodern" is used innocently by them. 4. Galtung, "Western Civil isation," p. 1 46. 5. Ibid. , p. 1 47 . 6. Ibid., p. 1 47 . 7. Galtung, "Cultural Violence," p. 299. 8. Ibid., p . 299. Napoleon was in fact a Johnny-come-lately· I n 1 697 King Charles X I I of S weden took the crown from the bishop of Upsala and placed it upon his own head. Todhunter (trans ), Voltaire's History of Charles XII, p. 1 6. 9. Galtung, "Western Civilisation," p. 1 49. 1 0. In ibid., pp. 1 50- 1 52, for example. I 1 . Galtung, "Social Cosmology and the Concept of Peace," p. 1 9 1 . 1 2 . Galtung's two sources are Bouquet and Murty, Studies in the Problem of Peace; and Ishida, "Beyond the Traditional Concepts of Peace." 1 3 . Note Piscatori 's observation that between varieties of Islam "the hi ghest common factor is not very high" and "in practical terms though not theology there are as many Islams as there are muslims." Piscatori, Islam in a World of Nation­ States, p. 10. 1 4. For an account of an intermediate dar-al-sulh, see Lewis. The Political Language of Islam, ch. 4. 1 5 . I shida, "Beyond the Traditional Concepts of Peace," p. 1 37 . 1 6. Galtung, "Cultural Violence," p. 30 I . 1 7 . Ibid., pp. 296-299. 1 8 . Galtung, Heiestad, and Rudeng, ''On the Last 2,500 Years in Western History," p. 352. 1 9 . Ibid., p. 343. 20. Galtung, "Western Civilisation," p . 1 45 . 2 1 . Galtung, "Social Cosmology and the Concept o f Peace," p . 1 96. 22. Galtung, "Conflict Resolution as Conflict Transformation," p. 5. 23. Galtung, "Cul tural Violence," pp. 29 I, 294. 24. Ibid., p. 295 .

PEACE AS NIRVANA

22 1

25 . Galtung, "Theory-Formation as Development," pp. 1 4 1 - 1 57 . 26. Galtung, "Dialogues as Development," p. 7 8 . 27. Galtung "Peace Research, Peace Studies and Peace a s a Profession." 28 On this point see Galtung. Buddhism, especially the prologue and ch. I . 29. Galtung, "Cultural Violence," especially p. 299. 30. Galtung, "Western Civilisation," p. 1 5 I . 3 1 . G altung. 'Peace and the World," p. 34 l . 32. Zimmer, Philosophies of India, pp. 1 25- 1 26. 33. Galtung, "Peace and the World," p. 342. 34. G altung, The Way Is the Goal, p. 5 . 3 5 Galtung, "Peace and the World," p. 346, note 1 9. 36. See Braun, "Asian Power India: A New Equation"; and Rueland, "Europe: A Model for A-,ia?" 37 Ishida, "Beyond the Traditional Concepts of Peace," p. 1 38 . 3 8 . Galtung. The Way Is the Goal, p p . l - 1 3 . Note especially the commentary (p. 1 3 ) on Gandhi's murderer-Godse-and the rejection of Gandhism by Nehru . 39. On this point see his rel igious mapping of the world wherein Gandhism is l l,�'.1ted ,it the ,,1me �wrn t be t\\ een OL'L' idL'nt and Orient as H i nduism in i b i d . . p . 1 .5 . table 2. 40. Galtung, "Western Civilisation," p . 1 55 . 4 1 . Ibid . , p . 1 56 42. See Galtung, "Methodology, Epistemology, Cosmology," pp. 1 5-27 (re­ rn,d uced 1 11 G a l t u n g: . B u ddlu 1 111 , u ndn t he c u r i ou '-> t i tl e " B uddh ism and C u l tural Adequacy"). 43 . Galtung, Methodology and Development, EM, 3 p. 4 1 . 44. See Galtung, Buddhism, ch. 4 , especially the chart o n p . 1 07 . H e advises that his comparison of religious atti tudes to nature should be taken "cum grano sal is " 45 . An example is the Japanese education system, which is ruthlessly compet­ itive but does not threaten the underlying verti cal social order. Galtung, "Western Civilisation," p. 1 60. 46. Ibid., p. 1 60. 47 Ibid., p. 1 62. 48 Ibid., p. 1 67. 49. Harvey An Introduction to Buddhism, chs. 2, 7. 50. Keown, The Nature of Buddhist Ethics, p. 4. 5 1 . G altung, Buddhism, pp. 26-27. 52. Galtung approvingly cites the Soka-Gakkai president's extolling of the vi rtues of M ahayana B uddhism as "further away from the source, . . . freer, more creati ve, population oriented, directly concerned with laity in everyday life, more practical, down-to-earth ." Buddhism, p. 1 47, note 22. Compare this with an earl ier version of the same discussion that cites the Mongolian B uddhist Ochirbal thus: "\\ hat Ill:1 l ln, 1 , n 1 >t h 1 n :l \ ana m maha v;tna hut hudd h ayana ' " Sec G a l t u ng. "Peace . and H uddh 1 , n 1 . . p . - U .2 . r;< >k 26. h >un�kd 1 1 1 I lJ �O . the SoL1- ( i aH. a i nm.\ c l a i ll l \ a membership of 1 .26 million in 1 1 4 countries and promotes the teachings of the t h 1 rtn· 1 1 t h L L' n t u n rL· l 1 u 1 1 >u , f 1 u u 1 L' f\. 1 c h 1 1 c 1 1 a, t hL· trU L' B udd h r , n 1 . Oat< > r dc,nihc, the Sok a - ( ia k k ;u· ;1, mco rL' K :1 i1 t 1 a n :rnd pra.u rn ;1t i , t t h an B u dd h r , t and re in, ( ( ) t ill' pa,t c m p l 1 >:, r m·n t ()f h 1 g h l : 1 nt 1 1 1 1 1 < Lt t ( ) r: tl'l' i 1 1 1 1 q uL·, k no\.\ n a, " h rL' a k i n g and ,uh . J u m f.! . a, a lllL'arh ()f c < > n \ L'rt r n g pcopk Dat1>r . .\ olu (iuUt1i. and l l a rn·y : 1\11 In trod�ction to Buddhism, pp. 285-286. 5 3 . Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhism, p. 1 1 . 54. Galtung, Buddhism, p. 14.

222

A QUESTION OF VALUES

55 . Ibid., p. 7 . 56. Ibid. , p. 27. This reading is controversial, although Keown's The Nature of Buddhist Ethics prov i de s a m ore s u b �. tan t i ve argument i n s upport of a teleolog ical reading of B uddhism. 57. Galtung, Buddhism, p. 23. 58. Ibid., p. 24. 59. Galtung, "Confl ict Resolution as Conflict Transformation," p. 1 1 3 . See also Galtung, "Methodology, Epi�temology, Cosmology," p. 20. 60. Humphreys, Karma and Rebirth, p. 1 5 . 6 1 . Ling, Buddhism, p . 1 8 . 62. Galtung, "Conflict Resol ution as Conflict Transformation," p. 1 1 5 . 6 3 . Ibid., p. 1 1 6. 64. See Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhism, ch. 1 2. 65 . Galtung, "Conflict Resolution as Conflict Transformation," p. 1 1 7 . 66. Ibid . . p . 1 1 9. 67. See the discussion in Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhism, ch. 9. 68. Galtung, "Peace and the World," p . 3 36. 69. Galtung, Buddhism, pp. 28-29. 70. Galtung, "Cu ltural Violence," p. 30 1 . 7 1 . Said, Orienta/ism, p. 322. 72. Galtung claims, nonetheless, that in offering at least two readings of the West (a soft peri phery and hard or inner core ) h i s met hod i" u l t imately not reduc­ tionist. "Cultural Violence," p . 304, note 1 9 . 73. For example, after arguing that concepti ons of mental disorder are filtered t hrough "all kinds of c u l t urall y defined d i s tinctions and d i s c r i m ina tion�.-- G a l t u n g goes on t o suggest that " a white South African/Israel i behaving t o his family l ike .. he does to a Blac k/Pale stinian would be considered craL'., . The underl y i ng poi n t h as undoubted force. b u t the di�cour"e employed further i l l u" t ralc'" the prob l em i n question: B y definition, a "white South African" o r a n "Israeli" becomes racist. See Galtung, Buddhism, p. 77. 74. Galtung, "Entropy and the General Theory of Peace." For a critiqu e see Boulding, "Twelve Friendly Quarrels with Johan Galtung." 75. Gal tung, "Conflict Resolution as Conflict Transformation." 76. Galtung, "The Next Twenty-Five Years of Peace Research," p. 248 .

9 Conclusion

As a v isiting professor . . . in the Federal Republic, I was often asked: "Aber wer sind S ie e1gentlich?" (Who are you really?) Answers to the ef­ fect that "I feel guided by something l ike 70% Marxism, 70% Liberalism and 60% something asiatic relating to inner man as opposed to the two major Western doctnnes" did not alleviate the uneasiness, probably even leading to suspicion about my arithmetic abilities . -Johan Ga/tung, J 973 1

F i n d i n g a pi geonhole for Gal t u n g i -. not easy. and h i s w r i t i ngs con s i st e n t l y -., u gge,t t h at t h i " i '> how h e l i ke -. i t . Th i s co u ld b e i nterpreted as a s i g n o f h e a l t h ) e c kc t i c i -.,m . b u t a J e -., -, generous reading w o u l d detect an evas ive­ ne,-., t h e price of w h i c h i-., a l ac k of -.u b-.tance -a p h il osophi c a l g l ue hold­ i n g the p i ece" together. I h ave argued t h ro u g h o u t that the orig i n s of t h i s i n ­ adeLJ u ac 1 l a) i n t h e m a k i n g of G a l t u n g i an peace researc h w i t h i n t h e po , i t i \ i , t .... c i c nt i fi c t rad i t i o n . I n t h e " p i r i t o f t h e c l as s i c a l e x ponents o f · · p o -., i t i \ e p h i lo-.,oph) ·· ( accor d i n g to M a rc u -. e . i t -. e l f a contradict ion i n ad­ in ru I he r c fu ...,ed to b u r) h i -., peace rc ...,carch in metaph y s i c s or contempo­ rar) ideo l o g i c a l debate ) c t proc l a i med the redem pt i v e power o f sc ie n t i fi c k n o \\ l e d g e . The -., h ado\\ o f c ] a .., -., i c a l pm i t i v i s m w a -. p l a i n to s e e i n G a l ­ t u n g · .., appl i c a t i on of a tech n ocrat i c m i nd-..,ct to the -.carch for a moral and po l i t i c a l co n d i t i on cal led peace. I n -. o d o i n g he adopted a form of d i -.­ co u r-.,e t h a t w a '> i n c a p a b l e of art i c u l a t i n g i t s o w n n or m a t i v e comm i t m e n t and c o u l d o n l ) a '> \ert t h e r i g h t n e \ '> of -.eei-. i ng g l obal peace 011 t he b as i s of o h ..,c r v a h l e coopera t i on and i n t e ,!-' ra t i on be t ween d i -.crete h uman c o l lec t i v ­ ities. I n fact, t here was l i ttle attempt t o su bstanti ate even t h i s c laim, a l ­ t h o u!-'h i t m u -., t h e '> a i d t h at at the ..,a,nc t i m e "ec l i o n " of t h e i n te rn a t ional re l at i on -. -., c h o l arly com m u n i t y \\ L 'f L' L'lldca v ori n!-' lo do j u -.t t h at . W h at G a l ­ t u n g cl i cl w a " to t a p i n t o t h a t !-' ro w i n !-' "cn "c of i n c rc a -; i n !-' g l o b a l in terde­ pendence and p roc l a i m the e m p i ri c a l C \ t c n -., i o n o f crnn111 t111 i t y a e ro-,.., the boun d a r i e .., o f ... tatn a " i n d i c a t i v e o f a pot e n t i a l con d i t i o n o f JHl.., i t i v c

223

224

A QUESTION OF VALUES

peace. which perforce peace re search was ch arged w i t h brin g i n g abo u t . The impatient dismi ssal of "traditio nal peace t h i n k i ng"-a Galtungian e u ­ phem ism for a l l varie ties o f phi losoph ical l y oriented refl ections on the i n ­ ternational system-reflected an overriding i n te rest in the drawing up o f a s u itable re search agenda of practical consequence. The nove lty o f the very idea o f i n s t i t u t ional ized peace research appeared to hold sway o v e r the need to develop a more sound theoretical and normative base. The young Galtung of course was aware of the need to provide foun­ dations for the normat i ve content o f his peace re searc h . but his c apac i t y to do t h i s was crippled b y h i s adopted soc i o l ogical standpo i n t . A'> I argued i n Chapter 2. a l t hough h i s reading of structural func t i onal i sm endeav ored to sever the perspective from i t s original biomech anical 'iystemic as,sump­ t ions. this was not done conv incingly. The functional req u i s,ite'> of a s,oc i al system were equated w i th v a l u e s , to be u l t i m ately deri ved from the s u b­ ject ive understand ings of the members of a social system and not the ab­ stract i mperat i v es of the system itse lf. B u t when a l l was said and done. t hose values were largel y i n t u i ted by Galtung h i m s e l f. For al l of his d i s ­ d a i n for trad i t ional peace t h i n k i n g . h e shared w i th a l o ng-standing body of l iberal . cosmopol i tan thought the v ie w that the trend to w ard an e x t en­ sion of community beyond the boundari es of nat ion-states ( and the e x i s ­ tence of a consensus a s t o the desirabi lity o f such a n extension) could probabl y be supported by empirical re search and. in any case. was s e l f-ev­ ident l y a dev e lopment to be encouraged and n u rt u red. The u se of "health" as an analogy fo r the v alue of peace was i n tended to u nderp i n t h e sheer reasonableness of his project. Peace re search was portrayed. then. as on a par w i t h the physician ·s craft : an adm i x t ure of soc i a l s c i ent i fi c s k i l l s ap­ p l ied i n accordance with a H i ppocra t i c e t h i c a l o b l igation to i mp rove the health of the emergent world comm unity and not any one of i t s const ituent e l ements ( states, nations. c lasse s . races. and so on ) . Medical science pro­ vi ded a descriptive i m agery that Galtung continued to fal l back on nearly thirty years later. 2 This S ai nt-Simonian vision of the peace researcher as savant with a hi gher loyalt y t o hu manity cou l d not l a s t . I n t e l lect u a l res i s t ance t o posi­ t i v i st soc iol ogy combined w i th the countercu l t ural u pheavals of the 1 960s and part icular events w i t h i n the peace research com m un i ty to ens ure that i t wou l d be chal lenged . B u t the v i sion was i n te rn a l l y i nsec ure a s wel l . A s Herman S c h m i d had rightly noted. G a l t ung · , peace research had embed­ ded its normat ive commi tment w i t h i n a systems perspect i ve that imputed to the international system the stat u s of a soc iety-not mere l y a society of states. moreover-w ith a capac ity to be managed. I t had assumed the pos­ s i b i l ity of re form guided by values that su pposed ly reflected the u n i versal in tere s t s o f members of that society. The skept i c i s m of orthodox i n ter­ national re l a t i o n , . which was pre m i sed on e i ther t h e absence or l i m i ted presence of an intl'ma rional soc iety. was not systemat ic a l l y addre ssed but

CONCLUSION

225

s i mp l y swept a s i d e . E q u a l l y , ref l ect i on u po n t h e i de o l o g i c a l content o f c o n c t p t s of g l o h a l i n t er de p e n dence-S ch m i d ' s part i c u lar c o n c e rn - fi g ­ u red little. It is u n fa i r n o n e t h e l e s s t o saddle t h e y o u n g G a l t u n g w i t h t he l i m i ted i nterest in c o n t ro l and reg u l at i o n w i t h w h i c h S c h m i d had tarred a l l main­ s t re a m peace re s e a rc h e r s . Gal t un g · s m et hodology was ort hodo x , b u t h i s po l i t i L' s ,, a s a l w a y s t ra n s format i o n a l i n i n te n t . Even h i s earl i e s t w r i t i ngs re , e a lc d the t races of a rad i c a l po l i t ical s i de to his scholarly persona. G al­ t u ng · s early \\ ork. m i g h t have employed the barren language of soc i a l sci­ e n c e . but it \\ as st' l f- e \' i de n t l y mora l l y i n formed , not to m e n t i o n p l ay f u l i n i t s spirit. H e w as a conscientious obj ector infl u enced by Gandhian e t h i L' , from an e a r l y age. He d i d leave the sociological com m u nity i n the l' n i ted S t at t' s t o ntab l i sh a peace research i nst i t u te in N orway a t a t i me when such a move was l ikely to b e seen as foolhardy. Only a few years after proclaiming his p e ac e research, he was inviting critical reflection upon i t-the i m i ta t i o n to w hi c h S c h m i d responded. It was h i s adop ti on of a p art i c u l a r fo rm of soc i o l og i c a l d i scourse t h at rendered adequate e x p l i ­ cat i o n of t h e g u i d i n g mora l - po l i ti c a l v i s i on of h i s peace research a neces­ , ari l y e x t radi , c u r , i v e ac t i v i t y. G a l t u ng e x t e n s i v e l y e x pl ored w h at peace re,e arch m u ..., t do and how it m i g h t do it, but in the effort to escape the l im ­ i t at i o n , of legal -ph i l osophica l orthodoxy. t h e reason why i t shou ld b e done was left e s sentially unanswered. Yet the fleshing out of the i deal end state-pos itive p e ac e-di d require a complex mix of philosophical and n ormative discussion i n defense of its own validi ty as well as substantive p o l i t i cal a n a l ) s i s in s u pport of c l a i m s as to i t s possibility. A s Schmid also ob .... en ed . the po.., i t i ve content of "peace" was i n fac t so weak l y defe nded that it effectively collap sed into the singular value of "nonviolence. " With the benefit o f hindsight, w e might engage i n reconstruction and s ubstitute the S anskrit " ah imsa" for "nonviolence," thereby giving Schmid's assessment e xtra acuity. As I noted in Chapter 3, it could be in­ fe rred t h a t Ga l t u n g ' s pac i fi s m was, a l w a y s groun ded i n Gandh i a n e t h i c s , and t h e i n t ro d u c t i on of t h e concept of s t r u c t u ral v io l en c e o n l y s t re ng t h ­ e n e d t he connect i o n . Gandh i an e t h i c s, were. after al l , compat i b l e w i t h b o t h 'i i de " o f the v i o lence c o i n as wel l as t he d i s t i n c t i o n between negative and po-., i t i v e peace. L n lo rt u nately. G a l t u n g at t he t i me said l it t l e about Gandhi beyond t h e occa -., i on a l e x p l oration of the tran s l atabi l i ty o f G andh i an e t h ics into p r i n c i p l e -., o f '-ioc i a l act i o n . Even the more rece n t e x plorat i on of a B ud­ d h i .., t ph i l o ..,oph i ca l co u n te r po i n t to t h e Occ i d e n t i.., c o n s t ra i ned s t i l l by a des,cri p t i ve frame o f retcrence and t h e concom i ta n t advocacy o f p h i l o ­ sophical a n d epi'-it emological e c l e c t i c i -., m , a p o i n t I -;. hal l ret u rn to l ater. A second significant flaw in Galtung 's foundational model of peace re..,earch wa.., the ab..,ence o f any -.,u .., t a i n e d c o n s i derat ion o f c o l l e c t i ve or i n d i v idual agency. Hedley B u l l \ ..,piration'> to real i ze "co-.,mopo l i tan" j u '-itice comes to mi nd here . I n The

226

A QUESTION OF VALUES

Anarchical Socictv B u l l noted that there was "no l ac k of s e l f-appo i nted spokesmen of the common good" and that "the views of these pri v ate indi­ v iduals, whatever merit they may have, are not the outcome of any pol i t i c a l process of the asse rt ion a n d reconc i l i at ion of i n te re sts. " 3 L i k e E . H . Carr before h i m , B u l l argued that a new world orde r can only ari se out of t h e hi storical conduct of po l i t i c s characteri zed above al l , i n h i s v i ew. by the constrai n i ng interaction of sovereign states. For many rea l i s t s . debate about g lobal change terminates at this po int. as reflected i n Wight \ famous apho­ rism that international relat ions was a realm of "recurrence and repet i t i o n . " I n i t i al ly, Galt ung saw the role of t h e peace researcher as apol i t ic a l , the researcher providing expert ise i n the serv ice of hu manity i n contrast to the "crude . ide a l istic but often naive perspec t i v e of the peace movement man. "-I I t was the peace researcher armed w i t h a technical u nderstanding of the g l obal soc i a l system who would iden t i fy the processes of transfor­ mation and also promote the v i s ion to be rea l i zed. t hereby h e l p i n g the peace acti v ist move from "slog an to the proposi ti onal level." For Galtung. the function of the e x pert was not l i m i ted to the su ggestion of courses of act i on once val ues had been handed down to h i m : the e x pert was a l so to " infl uence these values . . . [ and ] i f he i s worth the t i t l e at all. will be able to point to new options never in the mind of the politicians." 5 B u t in w hat did this expertise of the peace researcher consist? In order to real ize fu l l y the ambition encapsu lated in the dra w i n g of an a n a l og y w i t h medical science. a m u l t id i sc i p l i nary a n d i n t e rsubj e c t i n: I y agreed anal y s i s of the phy siology of the g l obal soc i a l order was requi red. Gal tung did provide some soc iological expl orat ions of the fe udal g lobal system and the rel at ionship between soc i a l rank and the interac t ion pattern s of state s . but he rare l y extended these beyond t h e rea l m o f the i l l ustrat i v e . The a t ­ tempt to w e d soc i o l ogy to the study of i n ternational re lat ions re l i ed pri­ mari l y on a taxonomic approach to concept form ation and the u se of analogi es. the l atter often presented as i somorph i s m s . Howe\ e r. the e x ­ pl anatory value ( and hence i t s value as a bas i s for po l i t ical action ) o f such an approach i s contestable w ithout substantiation of the c l aimed analogies ( and isomorph i sms ) and a precise ident ificatio n of fundamental i n teraction patterns. 6 In any case. as B urton observed at the time. what \\ as occ u rrin g under t he rubric o f peace research w a s a l so to b e found i n t h e work of the "front iersmen" of in ternat ional re l a t i ons in t he U n i ted K i ngdom and the U n i ted States. 1 Th i s did not i n i t se l f underm ine tlw object i v e s of Galtung 's peace research hut did re inforce the point that its nov elty lay more i n the exploration of its institutional i zation and organization. Most noticeable was the absL'llCL' of ana l y s i s of the state or the power of the d i scourse of sovereignty as a barri er. or contributor. to peace. The combi nation of funct ional i s m . sysll'ms theory. the pri nciple of i somorphism . and a high level of abstraction fac i l i tated a sl ide past the is sue of the state in a system of states. On occasions G a l t u ng obl i q uely acknowl edged the

CONCLUSION

227

s i g n i fi cance of the , ta l l' in i t s v ar i o u s man i k ,tat i o n s . h u t t h e pro b l e m o f world onkr wa, deemed to b e L'S\L' n t i a l l y s i m i lar to t h a t o f organ i z i ng do­ m e , t i c -.;oc i a l lHlkr. "The rl' l a t i o n , lK'IWL'L'n gro u ps w i t h i n nat i o n s . " G a l ­ t un g :l \ e ITL'd. "\\ l 'rL' 1wt t o o d i ffnL'nl from rL' la t i on s between nat i on s i n the i ntnnat i o n a l ") s t e m . " s Th i s as,um ption was re i n forced i n t h e appl ication of t h e C l) (1CL' P I o f ran k -d e t e rm i ned be hav ior t o t h e states s y st e m a n d the \ i e w t h a t the stud) of " m u n i c i pal i n tegration" offe red a u sefu l path to the an a l ) ,i, p f i n ternat ional processes of i ntegrat i o n . The con t i n u u m between dl)(11L' \ l i c and in t e rn a t i on a l p o l i t ic s was presented a s smooth and u n i n ter­ ru pted-or at I e a,t potent i a l l y ,o. s i nce the l i ne between e m p i rical and nll rmat i \ e statements i t s e l f \\ as i n v a r i a b l y b l u rred . I n sum. Gal t ung s e t peaL·e re-,earc h o n a p a t h t hat opposed t he state centrism a n d skept i c i sm o f t he rea l i ....r in ter p re t a t i on o f i n ternational re l at i on s o n primaril y normat i v e g ro u n d , b u t t h at ne\ er c o n fronted i t head-on. A n overemphasis o n t h e d i s ­ t i nL'l i \ e n e -,, of t h e i nt e rn a t i o n a l rea l m h a d b e e n repl aced b y a n u n c ri t i c a l adopt i on o f ") , t e m , - t h eore t i c h o l i \111 w rapped aro u nd a d i sc u rs i ve l y e x ­ c luded moral cosmopolitanism.

AFTER THE RUPTURE W h a t then of t h e l at e r work p roduced afte r the i mpact of t h e radi ca l c r i t i 4 u e-the ,econd pha-,e of G a l t u ng i an peace research? Were t h e t w o c e n t ra l problem, of an i n adeq u at e l y art i c u l ated and hard l y defended n or­ m a t i \ e per-,pec t i \ e or t h e l ac k of a t heory of gl obal soc i a l and p o l i t ic a l c h ange re , o h ed '! On t h e s u rface . i t certai n l y appeared as i f G a l t u ng had a L·ceptcd t h e c ri t i c i -, m , o f h i -, , c i e n t i s m . U t i l i z i ng a m i x t u re of Gand h i an et h i c , and , t r u c t u ra l i ,t t e rm i n o l ogy. he w e n t on t o develop a d i s t i nc t l y m or e c r i t i c a l account o f t h e e x i -,t i n g world order t h a t was first s i gnaled i n t h e r e \ 1 -.. 1 011 o t t h e concept'> o f v io l e nce and peace. The i n t roduction of the c once pt of -.. t r u c t u ra l v i o l ence wa'> de-,tru c t i v e of t h e ear l i e r apo l i t i c a l em­ p h a -.. i -.. on t h e ") mme t ry o f c o n fl i c t and dec i -, i v e l y recast t h e peace re ­ -..earcher in t h e ro le o f defender of the oppressed. no matter who they were . H i -.. l a n g u age re v e a l e d a -, h i ft i n foc u , away from t h e pro bl e m o f d i re c t c o n f l 1 c t and i h -, t a r k e -, t m an i fe -, t a t i o n t h e nn on u c l e ar wa r-t o ward t h e general pro b lem of s, oc i a l i nj u -, t i ce on a g l ohal -,ca l e . T h e pro h lc m s o f peace and development became inseparably intertwined. In -.. p i le ot the m crt d i -..c u r -, i ve -, h i t t and tht: t: x pan,ion of t he lex icon o f (i a lt u n g i an pt:ace re ,earc h . a rt: -, i d u a l po-, i t i v i -, 11 1 and ,c ient i s m re­ m a i n e d . T h i -.. \\ a-.. i l l u -..t rated i n a n u 1 n hn of way,. h r-, t , the concept of -.. t r u c t u ral v i o l ence \\ a -, pre-,entL·d a-, a q u a -, i - -, c i ent i fi c category t ha t s u p ­ po-,ed l y re pre-..ented a 4 u ant i fi a h l c d i -, t i n c t i on hl'l ween the ac t u a l a n d po­ t e n t i a l of h u m a n fu l fi l l m e n t . It -,poke to the opt i ma l a l l oc a t i o n of re­ -..mir c e -, . B u t be neath the apo l i t ical g l o-,-.. of the an a l y t ical langu age wa-, a

228

A QUESTION OF VALUES

normative l ayer that remained une x p l i cated st i l l . Soc i al j u st i c e and human fu l fi l lment were the v i c t i m s o f struct ural v io l ence. and the erad i c a t i o n of direct and -;tru c t u ral vio lence was a t the '.-.ame m o m e n t the rea l i zation of pos i t i v e peace . B u t prec i s e l y what thi'.-. consi sted i n and how i t was to be rea l i zed remained unclear. Structural vio lence wa'.-. not a concept that came out o f a cl ose read ing of hu man hi story. a l though a si lent read i ng u n ­ doubtedly l a y beneath i t . Rather i t w a s a blend of a n ab'.-.tract ana l y t ic a l category-a hypot hesis o f i n tended heuri s t i c benefi t a n d an unexpl icated moral standpo i n t . Without h i storical and phi l o sophical underp i nn i ngs. it had no substa n t i v e mean ing outside of the norma t i v e perspec t i v e o f i t s user. O f course. Galtung 's readers were l i kely to have a reasonable idea o f h i s norma t i v e l eanings bec ause i n descri p t i v e and taxonomic term s . at least. they were abundantly cl ear i n a l l of his wri t i n g after the publication of "Violence, Peace and Peace Research. " B u t i f readers cou l d bring a nor­ mat i v e t heory to the concept of stru ct u ral violence. they could not der i v e o n e from it. Second. the analysis of i mperialism a l so revealed the remnants of sci­ ent i sm. "A S tructural Theory of Imperial i sm." t he most c i ted of Galtung \ wri tings. endeavored to render explicit the content of structural v i o lence in dep icting a g l obal structure whose operating pri nciple was exploi tation in various modal i t i e s . I t i nvoked the spirit. if not the letter. of critique. M ore so than the earl ier work. i t was an intervention. a pol iti cal act as much as a piece of schol arship. Yet . the g lobal struct ure u nder i nvestigat ion was i he l f of uncertain stat u s . pre sented a s an abstract analytical concept of wide ap­ plication and proposition a l value only but appearing at the same t ime to lean heav i l y upon a normat i v e l y driven reading of g lobal h i story. Galtung " s t heory of i m perial i sm was i n tended to ex pre s s a negat i v e con d i t i on d i s ­ cernible i n v arious societal format ions and a l l spheres o f human social ac­ t i v i t y from economic exchange to science itself. As such. it had a teleolog­ ical core that was presupposed in the critical -descrip t i v e sketch of an imperial world order. But. i n the overt refu sal to tie the anal y s i s to concrete hi story and the fai l ure to provide substantive ev idence of ih central c l a i m s o r ade4uate defense of i t s normat i v e assumptions. t h e account o f i mperi a l ­ i sm was barren as scient i fic t heory a n d i n s u ffi cient as normat ive theory. Third, the subsequent resort to the concept of h uman needs as a means of giving substance to the v a l ue idea of pos i t i v e peace confirmed the con­ t i n u i ng effort to remain removed from overt l y normat i v e d i scourse. A s I noted i n Chapter ('i , needs offered themselves as emrirical phenomena the very ident i ficat ion of which ( i tself a contro v ersial i s s ue ) pre sumed the obl igation to satisfy them. B ut on w h at basis can we establish who is obliged to sat i s fy whose needs and i n what order'? For G a l t u n g . it was the most needy who had the strongest case. but wi thout a po l i tical p h ilosophy lo conlext u a l i 1 e the understan d i n g of needs . obl i g a t i o n s . and priori t i e s . this remained a maxim o f l imited potency.

CONCLUSION

229

Finally, the scientific attitude was most starkly retained in the recon­ struction of science itself. G altung's model of constructivist science ope n l y i ncorporated \ a l ue sentences i n t o i t s procedure , but in co n t i n u i ng to force the di stinction between fact, theory, and v alue it could not im­ prove on trad i t i on a l soc i a l s c i e n t i fi c treatment of val ues a s obj e c t s of i n ­ q u i ry. I t c o u l d o n l y s u ggest t h e u t i l i t y of preg i v e n v a l u e s in the assessment of the n . i s t i ng \\Orld and bl uepri nts of a pre fe rred world. It cou ld not pass j udgment o n t he v al ue s t h emse l v e s or t e l l u s w hether t hey c o u l d be real­ i u d . Sc ience \\ as re duced to the act o f v a l i d a t i n g one c lass o f sentences with another. Are we then to conclu de that the first two stages of Galtungian peace researL· h are de\ o i d of s ubstan t i v e normative t heore t i c a l content, the moral i m p u he t h at g u i de s i t rem a i n i ng by and l arge e xtern al t o the di scourse of peace re-.;earc h '.1 Thi-. would be too hasty a read ing, for the l ac u n ae in Gal­ t u ng · , earl i e r w ork are i n s t ru c t i ve in t h emse l v e s . If we peel away the skin of scienti sm, a normative l ayer i s revealed, the central theme of which i s cen t ra l t o contemporar::, debate i n soci a l a n d poli t ical theory. I n h i s equa­ t ion o f ,ci ence \\ i t h pol i ti c s ( an d sci e n t i fic practice with pol i t ical act i v is m ) under t h e g u i s e o f constructiv i sm, w e can begin t o grasp t h e ess ence of G a l t u n g · -. n o rm a t i n o u t l ook, and t hrough a reconstruct ion of h i s writ ings \\ e c a n u n de r -.t an d w hat sci ence a lw a y s seems to have meant for G a l t u ng throughout his intellectual odyssey. Galtung 's interpretation of science was born out of an overriding hos­ t i l i t ::, to dom i n ance and i nt e l l ec t u al arroganc e . In h i s words, "emp i r i c i sm was relied upon as a rejection . . . of dogmati sm." 9 It offered itself as an i n t e r-,, u bject i v e l y commu n i c ab l e for m of knowledge that was u ntainted by the relativism of i deology or geopolitics. The power of science l ay, for G a l t u n g . i n i h apparen t capac i t y to t ranscend soc i a l , i n t e l lectua l , and ide­ o l o g i c a l h o u n d a r i e '> . the same seduct i v e appeal that e n t iced the c l a s s i c a l po , i t i v i -.t s to proc laim t he end of t h eo l ogy a n d metaph y s i c s . I f peace re­ , e arch c o u l d conduct i h e l f w i t h i n the ethos of sc ience, it m ight e scape the con t am i n a t io n o f ( an y ) i deology and re'> i st t h e prope n s i t y of nonsc i e n t i fi c d i -.cour-,e to legi t i mate t h e dom i nation of o n e part o f h uman i t y by another. Sc ience h e l d out t h e prom i se of publ ic acco untab i l i ty. Of course, G a l t ung c ame to accept t h e view t h a t the ort h odox model o f science was incapable of w c h a l a u dable goal . if he e ver i n fact profo u n d l y held t o t h i s v i e w. I n i h e m l a vement t o t h e world of data, i t c o u l d on l y l e g i t i m at e t h e e x i st ing ¼ o rl d and c o n t ri bute t o a prac t i cal d i sco ur-,,e of soc i a l contro l . B u t even i f h e abandoned h i -. earl i er advocacy o f the u t i l i t y o f pe ace researc h a s a so­ c i al '>cience i n the orthodox -.eme of the term, he re tai ned a comm itment to the not ion of developing peace re -.earch a -. a di -.co urse t h at cou l d transcend ( or at l ea s t c o n t a i n w i t h i n i he l fJ d i fferences of o r i n i on , be l ie f, and prac ­ t ic e . I f the h i story of modern -.oc i a l science i -. that of a rh i l osorhy reduced t o a methodol ogy ( from po-.i t i v i-.m to e rn r i r i c i -. rn ) , then Gal t u n g 's thought

230

A QUESTION OF VALUES

sugge sts a desi re to move from scientific methodology back to the p h i l o ­ soph ical sentiments that once g u i ded it. S cience becomes a metaphor for an enlightened attitude. It is in the second phase of his work that the fu ndamental hosti l ity of Galtung to a l l forms of domi nation moves dec i s i v e l y into the foreground. Con s i der fi rst the cont i n u ing refusal to align with an identi fiable pol i t i c a l phi l o sophy a n d t h e re l ated w i l l i ngness to extract -,ome v a l u e from t h e m a l l . None recei ved h i s i mprimatur; n o n e w a s unequ i vocal l y rejected. We shou ld rec a l l also Galtung 's con s i stent un w i l l ingness to appoi n t any spe­ c i fic soc i a l group as pri v i leged h i storical agents of social change or to i n ­ dicate a n y spec i fi c realm o f h u m a n acti v ity as the s i g n i ficant progenitor o f global transformation . For Galtung. e v e n i f hi story w a s cyc l ical. e x h i b i t i ng tendencies but reveal i ng no determining pattern of soc i a l evol ution. i t was not w ithout d i rection either. Though often coll e ct i v ist i n approach. he also constan t l y reiterated the sat i s faction of the d iverse needs of all i n d i v i d u ­ a l s as t h e u l t i m ate g o a l of peace researc h . I ndeed. i t was t h i s overri d i n g concern with d iversity and t h e eradication of dom i n ance i n a l l of its man­ i festations that underpinned the rev i sed mode l of scientific practice. I t a l so pro v i ded the normative core of the v i s ion of a preferred world s ketched out i n The True Wo rlds. I n spite of the absence of moral p h i l osophy. the power of the second phase of Galt ung 's work resides i n the ethical prob l e m that i t cont i n u a l l y h i g h l ights. I referred briefly i n Chapter 6 to t h e "dialectic o f t h e speci fic and uni versal" and the suggestion that i t was the central intel lectual ant in­ omy of our t i me . Todorov prov ides another eloquent e x p ression of t h i s an­ t i nomy i n h i s proposal that the ove rriding ideological question confronting Western c i v i l i zation today i s how we m i g ht rea l ize "eq u a l i t y w i thout i t s compe l ling u s t o accept identity; but also difference wi thout i t s degenerat­ ing into superiority/in feriority." We aspi re. he goes on to say. "to rediscover the meaning of the soc i a l without losing the quality of the indiv idual ." 1 0 If there i s a consistent theme i n Galtung 's work unti l the l ate 1 9 70s and early 1 980s then this is it, and its currency has since gained in strength. Galtu ng · s understand i ng of science and h i s model of the ide a l world community were c l early predicated upon the ethical pri n c i p l e that e x i st ­ i ng mora l . intellectual . and communal boundarie s were candidates for dis­ s olut ion in the search for a world free from dom i nation. a sovere i gnty -free wor l d. Whether it was the enthusiastic i n i t ial embrac ing of science as an ideol ogical ly neutral lang uage that c o u l d he put in the serv ice o f v al ue s . t h e e x tract ion of a mode l o f interconnected gl obal a n d local soc i a l struc­ t u re s from an amalgam of marx i sm . l i be ra l i s m . and Gand h i s m . or the positing of an all -encompassing set of human needs worthy of sat i s fact ion. the normative objective was consi stcn t . Every facet of G a l t u n g ' s i ntel l ec­ tual journey to The Tmc World, revealed a commi t ment to an e xtension of com m u n i t y that wou ld overcome the anti nom i e s ( nation -state or world

CONCLUSION

23 1

c o m m u n i ty. c i t i ll' ns or humans ) of mode rnity yet nurt Ll l" L' a pl ura l i t y of identities. The defense of sud1 \' i s i ons as contained in The T r ue Worlds requ i res. arguably. an ana l y s i s of ,, hat Habermas terms the .. devel opmental logics" .. of . . moral and practical reasoning i n order to comprehend the barriers to the g l obal e , te n s i on nf moral and soc i a l commu n i ty. 1 1 I t i s thi s that is m i s s i ng from G a l t u n g ' s ,, or!-. u p unti l Th e True Worlds . To paraphrase Co, . utopian t h i n l-. i n g needs to be constrained hy the comprehension of h i -.;torical p roce-.;se-.; if it \\ i shes t o guide practice. 1 2 The i n vest igation of po,, ib l e ,, orld orders requires an understanding of the mult iple logics that operate w i t h i n the i nternational system. simul taneously b i nding human i ty together and k.eeping i t apart . 1 ' That Gal tung has been concerned with the e , t e n , i o n of moral com m u n i t y is ev ident enough; but i n the absence of this kind of analysis-as opposed to episodic all u sions and brief ,k e td1 e, -Gal tung cou l d ad, ance l it t l e beyond earl ier reformist writ ings on \\ orld order. apart from the restatement of the project i n more contem­ porary terms . Let me ret urn at th i s po i n t to Hedley B u l l . In contrast to the skept i1..· i , m that marl-.ed Th e A n arch ical Society, h i s subsequent work was to re­ \ ea! an i ncre as i ng acknowledgment of the grow ing cosmopo l i tan moral obl iga t i on, i ncumbent upon states now conceived of as .. local agents of a world common good . " B u t t h i s cautious s h i ft was premised on the percep­ t i on that nn\ members of the European - founded .. soc iety of states" were pol i t i c al ! :, employing their membership to s h i ft the g lobal pol i tical agenda in the purs u i t of greater j u sti ce between states; there was a "revolt against the We ,t " · t h ro ugh the u se of i nstitut ions of We stern origin. In addition, the emergence of more c u l t ur a l l y att uned vari e t i e s of rights-talk t hat acknowl­ edged the ten s i on between rights of states and rights o f indiv iduals, cou­ pled \\ ith the grov, ing percept i on o f a variety of cri ses confront i ng the gl obal communit) that could not be -,ol ved wi thout cooperative act i on be­ t \\ een state, and other actor s . was now g i v i n g po l i t i cal and. therefore . eth­ ical s ubstance to notions of a common good. 1 4 For many contem porar 1 cr i t i c s , Bu l l 's re sponse was i n adeq uate , e spe­ c i a l I:, in ih s t a t i , m . B u l l took i n s u ffi c i e n t account of t h e i mpact o f proce,-.,e, o f econom i c and pol i t ical gl obal izat ion ( the logics of global cap­ i tal format i on . pro d u c t i on. and d i s t ri bution I or the dec l i n ing leg i t i macy and capac i t 1 of states author i t at i ve l y to represent the nat ional publ ic in ter­ est . 1 ' \:or d i d he a(kq uatcly consider the a l ternat i ve account o f the state as · · a mechanism for dom inating, reg u l a t i nt1 and reproducing a -.;. oc iety under g i \'cn soL· i al rc lat i on s . " 1 1• In , u m , hy m a i n t a i n i ng the d i s t i n ct i on bet w een the domest ic and the intnnat ional rL· a l m -, and hy !a i l ing to considn -.;t;1te­ c i v i l soc i e t y re l a t i o n s or 11..' n s i o ns bet w een -,tal c sovere i g n t y and popu lar sovere i g n t y. B u l l continu ed to reduce the 4ue s t i o n of at1ency to that ol in­ terstate ac t i on . l\onet h c l c " . t h e main point to hL' L' X t ractcd from B u l l ' .,

232

A QUESTION OF VALUES

approach i s simple enough-the need t o bring together n o rmat ive and po­ l i t ical i n q u i ry. A second and these days unfashionable point is t h at for a l l o f t heir evident defic iencies some state:-. can be a pos i t i ve force for change i n world po l i t i c s . The state p rovides a space, a l b e i t a h e a v i l y c o l o ni zed one, for the contestat ion o f ideas and the c o n s t i t u t i o n of novel form s of practice. B l i nd ant i statism risks simply producing a m i rror i m age o f u n ­ critical statism. I f the state or statist international institutions do not in fact exhaust the question of agency at the gl obal l e v e l , then who might be the plausible a l ­ tern a t i v e age n t s of soc i a l change'! Many recent criti cal e x pl orat i o n s o f change i n world pol it i c s emphas i ze the contribu tion o f s t i l l m arg i n a l i zed voices in the di scourse o f world order and the potential for no n sovere i g n actors-such as contemporary soc i a l movement:-. . n a t i o n a l and e t h n i c m i ­ norit ies, domest ic a n d i n ternational nongovernmental coal i t i on :-. a n d orga­ n i za t i o n s-to '"pose a s i g n i ficant chal l e nge to the p o l i tical economy of .. modernity of which the sovere i gn state is an i n tegral part. 17 Whether :-.uch alternative actors and their discourse:-. do offer a plausible counterpoint to orthodoxy i s . o f course, debatable. G i ve n the globa l i zed n e t work:-. o f power a n d t h e hegemony o f the i r tex tual representat iom i n b o t h t h e acad­ emic and popular l iterature , the grounds for pes s i m i sm are e \' i den t enough. Equal l y, the recog n i t i o n of c u l tu ral spec i fi c i ty o f v i s i o n :-. o f the l ocal or g lobal good l i fe i nduces a ret icence to del ineate authoritat i ve l y an all­ e ncompassing v i s i o n to which to aspire. In exerc i si n g such c a u t i o n . con­ temporary c ri t iques of international re lat i o n s orthodo xy, in t heory or prac­ tice, can no longer be simp l y dism i ssed as l atte r-day varieties of an already caricat u red cosmopo l i t a n ide a l i s m . Thei r voices are too am biguous and varied for that charge to stick.. N onet heless. L i n k. later ·s ob-.en'ation a few years ago that '"it i s not at a l l clear that any strand of soc i a l and p o l i t i cal thought provides a compe l l ing account of strategies of tran s i t i o n " cont i n ­ ues to ring true. 1 8 And Galtungian peace research is no exception. A cir­ c u l ar problem emerges in these postmodern t i m e -. : I f \\'e should esche\\ the des i g n i ng of grand. a l l -encompa s s i n g . and i n escapably i m p e r i a l v i s i o n s : i f we m u s t avoid attribut i n g a c u l t ure-smothering u n i \'ersa l i t y to our guid­ i n g values: i f we rcfu:-.e to pri v i lege a hi storical agent of emanc i pa t i on­ then what mcim i n g is left to attribute to notions of tra n s i t ion o n a gl obal scale'! From what to what : b y and fo r \\ 110111 °.1 We can pose the q u e s t i o n more bluntly : What then is the point of peace researc h? CULTURE, BUDDH I S M, AND PEACE RESEARCH

In the th ird , most recent phase of Galtung's peace research some of thesL' issuL' S arL' con fronted. The manner of its prc -.entation- i t s " in t e l l e c ­ t u a l .., t y l c " to u -.c o n e of G a l t u ng \ favored phrases-reveals cntain tel l i n g .

CONCLUSION

233

sometimL'S tedious comnwnalities \\ith the prl'n'ding: phasl's. but it also in­ troduL·es new significant L'kments. Indl'ed. it is arguabk that thl'y further contribute to the emsion of an: determinant disciplinary boundary be­ tween Galtungian peace resl'ard1 and various other contemporary critical anal: ses l)f \\ orld order. not\\ ithstanding his continuing and by now rather strange evocation of a model of the professional peace researcher. In rl' lkL'ting and -;onwtimes anticipating trends abroad in social and political thought more gt'11Crally. the recl'nt work o ilers further evidence of Gal tung · ._ urHh1ubted abilit) to " sense new directions of thought and con­ L'e rn in relation to peact' research and g:ivt' them analytical status. " I Y As I noted in tht' introductory chaptt'r. the label JJostn wdl'rnism is now applied to a bod: of litnature that. intt'r alia. emphasizes the cultural dimensions l)f global ,ocial lifr and prnblematizes the c ategories and practices upon \\ hich pP,t-Enlightt'nment reformist discourse has depended. Both of these tt'rlllencie, L' an bt' found throughout the most recent phase of Galtung· s \\ riting. and the con,t'quences for peace research are dramatic. Gone are the uni, er,ali1ing \ i-;ions of an ideal world orde r. The postul ation of a set of guiding , alut', takes on a more contingent. culturally sensitized qual­ it: . It \\ a, not a ca,e of sudden tectonic shift. for as I have a lready noted. ,uch mo\ t'ment , \\ t're prdigured in Tlzl' True Worlds. Emerging out of the third pha,t' i, a more open-ended but limited vision of greater intercourse bt't\\ t't'n ci\ ili1ation, and their cosmological or epistemological compo­ nenh. We can borrow from the distinctive language of this work to capture ii'- no , e l qualitie ,. If the earlier Galtung operated with a Hindu conception o f a c enterl e " - . al l -inclusive political space. then the contemporary Gal­ tung employ-, f rom Buddhism the s;patial imagery of a spiritually unified hum:.mit:-, in a multicentric -,ociopolitical order. At face value. the l atter doe, not ,ound very different from the e x tant global order composed of ,tate, . nation-, . and pt'ople">. But Galtung·-, Buddhistic vision is character­ i 1ed h:, tht' ab,ence o t hie rarchy and hegemony. the logic-. of power that mah.e the pre, ailing \\ orld orde r -,o fractious. Above all. what he takes from Buddhi-,t philo-,ophy i-, the moral premise that in spite of our differ­ ence, all of humanit:-, i-, bound together within a -. piritual and moral web from \\ hich it c annot ncape. There is, no need to rekr to an omnipotent creator to gra-,r the nece-,,it; of moral action. Though only intermittently vi-, 1 hle until the mo-,t recent pha'->e of hi-, wor1'. in the final analy-.is this thread can be traced back through all of Galtung 's writings. It \\ a, a ,turn hlin12 rath that ( ialtung took to hi-, current .s; tandpoint. The juxta po..,ition o l actually exi-,ting cmn10logie-, -;uffered from the now familiar p roblem o l categorical ;11J1 h 1 g uity. Did thc">L' civili1ation-, exi-,t as -,uch. o r were they ah'->tract idiomatic rqnL·-,entatilll involved in JnL'">ent­ ing the dialogue of civili1ation-, a"> e'-> ">cntially a dialogue hct WL'L'n Chri-.­ tianity ( albeit in -,oft and hard ver-,ion'-> J and Buddhi'->lll ran cou11tn to till'

234

A QUESTION OF VALUES

s upposed c u l t ural se n s i t i v i t y of a foc u s on c i v i l i zations and their cosmolo­ gies. The fa l lacy of the occidental depiction of the world as composed o f a superior core and a l esser peri phery in need o f e n l i ghte nment was be i n g supplanted w i t h a hardly more nuanced d i v ision of t h e world m t o Occident and Orient. Ostensi b l y. G a l t u n g · s dual ism d i ffered i n its pre ference for East over West: yet Galtung 's preferred Orient skated uncertain l y between the real and the imaginary, sensitivity and s heer prej udice. In spite of the flaws in its execution, the thrust of the t hird phase of Galtungian peace rese arch remains. in my v iew. highly suggestive. The no­ t ion that the source of violence l ie s part ly in our cosmologies or c u l t ures i s d i fficult to gain say. Eq ual l y. t h e impl icat ion t h a t peace i n the ful lest sense req u i res critical re flection upon the foundational assumptions that pervade pol itical d i scourse offers a necessary corrective to the assumption that the problem of v i o lence can be re solved at the l e v e l o f social and po l i t i c a l struct u re a l o n e . Again. t h i s i s a t h e m e that re sonates w i t h contemporary critiques o f modern i t y. M ore sobering s t i l l is the B uddh i st - i n s p i red ac­ know l edgment that the search for peace is a d i ffi c u l t and perpe t u a l process. This i s n o t to s a y t h a t the t h i rd stage i s e n t i re l y d i s t i n c t i v e from the first two. The approach i s sti l l avowedl y hol i stic. o n l y now the tot a l i t y of h umank ind i s ex pre s sed more i n t h e spiri t ual l y s u ffu sed l a n g u age o f B uddh i s m than i n the mechanical atonality of system s-theoretic function­ alism or the crudities of a m arxian-style structuralism. The most significant contri bution of the t h i rd phase of Galtung \ peace researc h , then. is the pro v i sion-if not the complete e x p l icat ion-of a moral-p h i losophic d imension. From an i n i t ial rejection o f peace p h i l oso­ phy. Galtung he has arrived at a point where he needs to appea l for peace re search to open up to the i n fl uences of "the human i t i e s . h i story of ideas. p h il osophy and theology. " 20 There i s perhaps an dement of tragedy i n t he fact that Galtung has himse l f taken so long to ope n l y ac know ledge t h i s ob­ v i ous point. S ince serving t i me in a Norwegian gaol for refu s i n g conscrip­ tion. he has clearly been i n fl uenced p ro foundly hy Gandhian e t h i c s . l\1ore rece n t l y. M ahayana Bu ddh i sm has come to s u ffuse h i s \\T i l i n g and h i s prac t ical-oriented i m agination to a degree that suggests t h a t t h e q u a n t i ta­ t ive account of h i s personal phi losophy. ci ted at the be gi nning of t h i s chap­ ter. may be in need of some revi s i on. Ori ental philosophy does not pro v i de the complete picture . as l conc l u ded i n Chapter � : the e xtent of i t s i n fl u­ ence re mains somewhat mysterious . si nce G a ltung i s not averse t o i dent i ­ fy ing the l i m i tations o f 1 h c oriental or Bu ddhist ,, orl d view. H i s con t i n u i n g ad vocacy of eclecticism reminds us that occ i dental phi losophical c l e m e n t s continue t o be a t pl ay. Such eclec t i c i s m is further undnscored in the t h i rd phase hy the com­ binat ion strange at first s i ght-of an overt spiri t u a l i s m with a ret u rn to the more orthodox i ssues of de fense and sec uri ty. albeit i n the g u i se of de­ fe nsive de fense and transarmamcnt. On c l o ser i n spec tion the combination

CONCLUSION

235

is n o t -.o -.; t range. It i -. L' \ p l a i n L'd in part b'.I· t he hac k.gro u n d of Cold Wa r i n the e a r l y to m i d - 1 9 � (1-. a n d the i n sa n i t y o r i n nca s i n g l y grandi ose p ropos­ als fo r n a t i o n a l d e k n sL' pre m i sed u pon c o n t i n u i n g bl' i ie f i n technological re s poi1-.e, t o p o l i t i L· a l L· o n fl i c t . s u c h a-. the S t rateg i c Dc k n se I n i t i a t i v e ( S t a r War, ) . ..\ rp1 a b l y . t h i -.; ,, a -. a conte , t - i n d u c e d pragmat i sm i n w h i c h L· a l b for d 1 -.arm a m c n t are aL·k.no\\ kdgL'd to be a n i n adequ ate re spon-.e t o publ iL· fe ar of i n , L' C u r i t : ( al t h o u g h ( i a l t u n g has rare l y e n t h u sed a b o u t d i s ­ a rm a m e n t a, a pcaL' L' , t ratcg y ) . b u t i t a l so ref l e c t s a d i s t i n c t l y B u d d h i s t ,en-.e l1 f t h L· pragmat i L· . T h e g u i d i n g com m i t m e n t t o a h i m s a i s connected \\ ith a , e n , L' or t h e p o -. -. i b l c and the ,· i a b l c . The B u ddh i st wheel t u rn s , l o ,, I : . b u t i t does t u rn . N on o ffe n s i v e d efe n se a n d cognate i deas s u c h a s 1.' l) l i cct i , e ,e1.· ur i t : 'PL'ak. t o t h e prac t i c a l a n d t h e t ra n s format i o n a l a t t h e ,ame t i m e . T h e : c a n b e construed as h a v i n g a cosmo l og ic a l d i me n s ion1..'llntri b u t i l) n , to a ,u ,ta i n ed c h a l lenge t o orthodox m i nd-sets about secu r i t y a n d i t s provision . Tll read t h e fi r,t pha,e of G a l t u n g 's w r i t i ng i s to detect t h e v o i c e of the re fo rm i , t ,oc i a l d e mo nat-c u m - ra d i c a l l i bera l . The second phase o f h i s ,, ork. ,ecretL·J a con, iderabl e debt t o Marx . i f not to t h e soc i a l i sm act u al l y e , i , t i n g. B u t n o n e of t hese i n fl uences -.tands a l o n e . not l east bec a u se of the nmt i n u i ng back.gro u nd pre,ence o f Gandh i . A further c l ue t o the occ i ­ dental d i m e n , i o n , o f G a l t u n g ·.., 0,1., 11 worl d v i e w can be fou n d i n a brief dis­ c u ..,.., i on on di, e r-., i t y in i n t e l k c t u a l -.tyle-.. H a v i n g s l ated. som e w h at fl i p­ p an t ! :,- . , ;1ri o u , We -, tern i nt e l l e c t u a l s t y les-the Te u t o n i c . the G a l l ic , and the S a , u n i c -G a l t u n g refer-, t o the Nord i c i n t e l l e c t u a l approach . It h as none o f t h e c l e g;mce ch aract e ri -.; t i c of the G a l l i c i n t e l lect u a l prod u c t . e x ­ h i b i t i n g i n -., t e a d t h e c o m b i n e d i n fl u ence of " s a x o n i c data-gat h e r i n g and doc u me n t a t i on · · and ··tc uton i c -,pec u l at i on and theory-formation . " But. he ,a:, " · '.\or d i c -.,oc i a l -, c i e n t i s,h are a l -, o d i '> t i n g u i -.;hed by a desire to be read b:,- -.,(ic i e t :,- a t l a rge ;1nd a d i , i n tere '> t in i n t e l l e c t u a l commen tary : " W h at the :, re ad a h o u t -, u c h t h i n g s, w i l l genera l l y not be m e n t ioned i n v erbal cl i s ­ c o u r , c b u t k. c p t i n t h e h ac k g ru u n d . i n t h e mem ory. a -.; -.ome t h i ng aga i n s t w h i c h to c h e d -. o n e · .., o w n a p p roac h . "� 1 Part of t h e e x pl anati on for t h e open nl' " " a n d c c k c t i c i -,m o f '.\ or d i c -,chol ar�h i p m a y l i e i n t h e fact t hat t h e :\ or d i c , t a l c s, are -. ma l l , " l e " " hampered h y i m perial t rad i t i o n s and b y i n ­ t e rn a l c J a -.,, u m trad 1 c t i on -, " a n d a" a con'>equence l e " " re pre '> '> i v e a n d more nurturing of intellectual and methodological diversity. H e re G a l t ung j .., d o i n g 1 1 0 morL' than dncr i h i n g h i m -.e l f. B u t there i -. also the intimation o f a normative theory o f the state at play. His com­ mcnh on the '.\ or d i L '>oc i a l -, c i c n t i -.t a l l ulk to the comie c t i o n b1.: t wee11 the c u l t u ra ! l 1 determ i ned i n '> i dc and the e x ternal or i c 1 1 tation of the -.tale , To rL·­ t u rn to an L· arl i e r po i n t . onL· o t t h e notahk o m i -, -, i o n -, in ( i al t un g · .., work i -, a '> U '> t a i ned i n t e rrog ation o f t h L· -, t a l c a s, a -.oc i a l l"o nnation . o r t h e p l ace o r -,o\' e re i g n t y i n i h d i -,cou r-,c o l l e g i t i m a t i o n . 1 11 h i -, L' arl ier w o rk . t h e e m ­ phas i s on t h e i n terdependent g l o h a l -.oc i a l -, y -, t L' l l l p u -. hcd t he -,tall' asilk .

236

A QUESTION OF VALUES

I n the second phase. the adop tion of a structura l i s t perspec tive c u t across states. re nderi ng them second ary agen t s-v ia m e d i a-w i t h i n l arger net­ works of exploitation. The state appears as l i t t l e more than a site for the reprod uction of a gl obal center-peri phery structure . I n the t h i rd phase , the c ategories of c i v i l ization and cosmology perform a s i m i lar marg i n a l i z i n g func�ion. I t i s plausible, then. to i mpute to G a l t u n g n o t mere l y an i n d i ffer­ ence but an ac tive host i l ity to the state-that "catast roph ic idea"-and the system of state s, not least for the obv ious reason of their com p l i c i t y i n the perpetuation of horrendous vio lence. For Galtung, to focus on the state is to avert one 's eyes from humans and their needs. B ut, again, all is not q u i te as i t seems . On occ asions, espec i a l l y when Galt ung a l ludes t o h i s o w n Nordic origins, h e seems to concede that t h e state i s, not i n fact a n un­ changing u n iversal form or an entire l y negative category. He fou nded the I nternati onal Peace Research I nstit ute i n Olso, N orway. wit h grumbling as­ s i stance from the stat e . He has, pra i sed cert a i n European s,tates. notab l y S w i t zerland and S weden. for employing i nnovative i nterpretations of de­ fense policy that at least i n part give the lie to the hegemony of strategi c orthodoxy. 22 A t cert a i n points he comes c lose to ackno w l edging that cer­ tain states. l i ke any other social actors. are posses sed o f an i n nate moral power. Again, it is the Nordic states that provide the c ase in point. In a 1 9 89 review essay on Krippendorf 's savag ing of the state a s the e v i l t w i n of the m i l i tary, Galtung expresses sympathy b u t re s i sts t h e wholesale d i s ­ m i s sal of the armed, bounded s t a t e . B o t h the pac i fi s t ro ute ( abo l i sh the m i li tary ) or the anarchist road ( abol i sh the state ) are rejected as ahistorical . For Galtung. the c h a l lenge i s to "subvert the mora l . i nte l l ec t u a l and h i s­ torical l e g i t i m acy of the " h igher p urpose s · of those who h o l d po l i t i c a l power within the framework of state s . " 23 I t i s n o t the state t h a t i ::-. the fun­ damental problem but who "owns" it. More te l l i ng is hi" ob"er\'ation that had Krippendorf made his poi n t of depart ure Norway rather than Pru ssia. then a somewhat different conclusion m ight have ensued. To suggest that G a l t u n g · s p h i l osophy can be de scri be d a::-. a b l e n d of Nordic reasonableness and Bu ddhi s t e t h i c s is o n l y to haLard a g u e s s . a l ­ beit, I wou l d c l ai m , a n informed one. To that m i x , one coul d also a d d a close of Konrad ' s and Have l ' s ant i po l i t i cal pol i t ic s . Fundamental questions about the compat i b i l ity of these d i v e rse elements rem a i n unanswe red. S t i l l , the contem porary intel lectual m i l i eu i s arguably more tolerant of s uch esoteric phi losophical col l ages. a l though in p l ace o f Galt ung · s pre­ ferred te rm-eclecticism we mi ght now employ that of ··pastiche" to de ­ scribe h i s, oe uvre . c i t i ng the self-descri ption \\ ith which t h i s chapter com­ menced in anecdotal su pport . It i s up to the reader to determ ine whether t h i s i s a pos i t i v e or pej orat ive attri b u t i o n . I n the fi nal ana l y s i s . perhaps Buddhism. the N ordic style. and antipoli t i cs do not mal--e such strange bed­ fe l lows. The fi rst two contain w i t h i n t hem an emphas i s on a middle w ay, Mad/,_\'(1111a Pruri1>ad and Lago111 . respective ly. A l l fi t neat l y w i t h Galtung ·s

CONCLUSION

237

c u rrent foc u s : T,, o represent soft e r v ar i a n t s of the occi dental n orm and the o t h e r a n ideal i 1 a t i on of an o ri e n tal part ner- i n - d i al o g u e . In t h i s respect the c on t e m porary phasL' l)f G a l t u n g i a n peace re searc h can a l so he read a s the re n d n i n g p u h l i L· of a l o n g - s t a n d i n g p r i v at e d i a l o g u e i n t e rn a l t o G a l t u n g himself.

A FUTURE FOR PEACE RESEARCH? T,, o con c l u d i n g p o i n t s conce rn i ng peace researc h general l y c a n be dr,rn n fro m the p rL'ced i n g d i sc u s s i on . The fi rst i s t h a t . by and l arge , se l f­ L'O n -..L· i l) U -; l y l alx l ed peace researc h . and not o n l y G a l t u n g 's contri but i o n to i t . L' l) n t i n u e -.. to , u ffer from a p h i l osoph i c a l defi c i t . B u t the addre s s i n g of t h i :--. def i c i e n c : :seem s hard l y to be a task sol e l y for somet h i ng cal led peace re:--.earch u n l e :--. -; t h e l ab e l is stripped of mean i n g . It is w h e n the p h i l osoph­ i c a l and normat i , e c o n tent of . . peace" i n i t s fu l le s t sense is addres sed that d i -..c i p l i n a r: boundaries neces-..ar i l y di ssol ve. If the range of themes fou n d within G altung 's work c a n be contained within the rubric o f peace re­ -..eard1 . t h e n :.i l l L'O n t e m porary crit ical wri t i n g on the g lobal dimensions of -.,uc i al l i fe \\ arra n h i nc l u s i o n . A d i s t i n c t i v e pro v i nce of peace research beL·ome:- d i ffi c u l t . perhaps i mposs i b l e . to di scern . �-+ The l abel peace research n o ,, i n d icate-., l i t t l e more t h a n an i m prec i se normat i v e orientati o n the con­ tent of \\ h i c h i-., c o n t i n u a l l y contested. A l te rn at i v e l y. i t can be cast as a rather l arge n e rc i -., e i n col l a t i o n . I f we c o n s i de r the conceptu a l i c o n s of c u n t e m purar: peace re-.,earc h . most of them i n t roduced b y G a l t u n g , we m i g h t r i g h t l y w-., pect that m uc h o f their s u bstant i v e content comes from e h e ,, h e re . For e x a m p l e . t h e concept of s t ru ct ur a l v i ol e nce w o u ld be fa­ m i l i ar to an: one ,, o rk i ng v-. i t h i n t h e marx i st t rad i t ion of po l i t ical economy. The concept of po -.. i t i , e peace i-.. a m e n a h l e to a variety of read i n g s and i n ­ t erc h an g e , c o m lo r t a h l ) \\ i t h :-oc i a l j u st i ce . h u m an fu l fi l l me n t . or a j u s t ,, u r l d order. I n -., u m . th ere i -.. l i t t le e v idence t h at peace re search const i t utes in a n d o t i h e l f a d i -., t i n c t i v e p h i l o soph i c a l o r theore t i c a l v i e w po i n t . The u i n -., t a n t e \ pan -., i on o f ih p Li r v i C \\ may he i n terpreted as a sign of dy­ n am i -., m . the arr i t rari n e -. .-., ol the l abe l a v i rt ue : hut i t can al so be seL'n as ac4 u i ri n g t h e 4 u a l i t i e -., o f an i n tel l e c t u a l hl ad. hole where i n some t h i n g v i tal . a praxeological edge or p urpose, is lost. The '-L'L"< J lld po ! ll t 1 -.. th at to wri te an ohit uary for G a l t u n g i an peace fL' ­ -.,earch ,, mi ld . n o n L· t h e J c -., -., , Ix· premat ure . Peace re -..earch can he nrnc e i V L'd of still as a site or as s pace , be it an i nstitution or a mind-set, in which a c ri t i c a l cog 1 1 1 t 1 , L' 1 1 1 1L ' n t L·a 1 1 he b ro u g h t t o hear u po n a ra n g L' o l concrete pro h l e m -.. . I n th i -, rL· -.. pe c t an arg u m e n t can IK' l l l ade for a re s t o ra t i o n o f foc u s . a rL· n a rTo\\ i n g o f i h prnvi ncc h u t i n a context o f co1 1 t i n u i n g oJK' l l ne-; s t o a ran g e o f c r i t i cal v o i c e -.. . T h i -.. i s not to s u g g e -.. t that peace re '>L'arcli -., i m ­ p l y re , e rt hack t o thL' age n da o l c o n ll ict a n a l y -, i -, or t liL' k i n d of tradi t i o nal

238

A QUESTION OF VALUES

peace thinking that Galtung railed against more than a quarter century ago or. for that matter, the scientism of his foundational model ( is the act of re­ finement necessarily an act of rcclosure?). But it is to suggest that peace research can serve best as a conduit between developments in the wider fields of social and political theory and the continuing problem of direct violence within and between states. 25 Aspects of that problem are already the subjects of numerous established areas of research that remain of prac­ tical value. It seems otiose to deny the continuing need for alternative sources of data on and analy sis of the problems of international direct vi­ olence. 2h Neither can the rather limited focus on arms control be dis­ counted, given the weapons at stake. Equally, the study of the institution of war and its developmental logic remains urgent and incomplete. To these we can add a range of newer areas of a more conceptual and open­ ended form. in particular the critical engagement with the discourses of de­ fense and strategic studies and the development of alternative security strategies at the national. regional. and global levels . In both cases there can already be detected the impact of iconoclastic postmodern and femi­ nist perspectives that serve to open up further the discourse of security to scrutiny and revision. 27 A renewed pointedness in peace research toward the problem of direct violence does not obviate the need to draw deeper from diverse fields of inquiry including moral philosophy. international relations. social and po­ litical theory. sociology. political economy. discourse analysis. historical sociology. and cultural studies. 2 X Peace research redefined would remain a tributary to a l arger quest, flowing both ways. It might better ensure. however. that insights gleaned from the interchange of ideas have practical consequence. Otherwise. to paraphrase Galtung. what would be the point'! NOTES I . Galtung, "Deductive Thinking and Political Practice," p. 207, note 23. 2. See Galtung, "Peace Research, Peace Studies and Peace as a Profession" wherein the analogy with medical science is reasserted as well as the value of a H i rrocrati c oath that com m i h the reace re \earc h graduate to adopt i n g t h e formu l a o f "peace b y peaceful mean s," a short form o f t h e Gandhian "ethical intuition about the unity of means and ends." See also Galtung, "Twenty-Five Years of Peace Research" and ''Scientists and the Peace Movement." 3. Bull, The Anarchical Society, p. 85. 4. Galtung's views on the peace movement of the early 1 960s can be found in his "International Programs of Behavioural Science," pp. 1 76- 1 80. 5. Galtung, "Peace Research: Science, or Politics i n Disguise?" p. 233. 6. On this point see the review of Galtung's work i n Holm, "On a Major Event in the Social Sciences." 7. Burton, "Peace Research and I nternational Relations." 8 . Galtung, "Peace Research: Science, or Politics in Disguise?" p. 227.

CONCLUSION

239

9 . Galtung, "Peace Research: Past Experiences and Future Perspectives," p . �50. 1 0. Todorov, The Conquest of America, p. 249. 1 1 . I take this point from Linklater, "Marxism and International Relations." 1 2 . Cox, "Social Forces, States and World Orders," p. 1 30. Note also Gidden's oh,en at ion that an ,11.kq u a tL' theory of international rdations t h at can conti nue the prujt'ct of anal) 1 1 11g thL' h uman pni , pcch for i nnca., ing autonomy and re al iz i ng in­ d ! \ idual and ._· ,1 l k d i , L' cm anL· i patllln m u , t not onl ) ap1wal for a renewal of utopi­ ani,m hut ah,1 m , , i t \\ i t h ""thL' firnlL',t form of I"l'ali,m." Sec G i ddens, The Nation State and Violence, p. 3 34. 13 On this theme se e Linklater, Beyond Realism and Marxism. 1 4. B ull. Justice in International Relations. 1 5 . An example of this now common line of argument can be found in chap­ ter 2 of Camilleri and Falk, The End of Sovereignty? 1 6. Halliday cited in Camilleri and Falk, The End of Sovereignty? p. 37. 17. Camilleri and Falk, The End of Sovereignty, p. 22 1 . See also Thompson. Justice and World Order, ch. 9; and Walker, One World. Many Worlds. 1 8 Linklater, Beyond Realism and Marxism, p. 1 72. 1 9 . This incisive comment i s taken from Richard Falk's comments on the original manifestation of this work as a Ph.D. thesis. 20. Galtung, "Cultural Violence," p. 302. 2 1 . Galtung, "Methodology, Epistemology, Cosmology," pp. 5 1-52 . 2 2 . On this point see Galtung, There Are Alternatives, c h . 4 . 23. Galtung, "The State, the Military a n d War," p . 1 03 . 2 4 . On this point, compare the assessments o f peace research offered b y Mack and Camilleri in H iggott and Richardson (eds.), International Relations, chs. 1 3 and 1 4 . 25. Note the current research output o f the Centre for Peace and Conflict Re­ ,carc h . Copen h;J.gen. \, h i 1.· h torn ,n on Nordic and European security very broadly J ef 1 n e d : n \1nutfr n,, 1 \·c d e t e n , e . m i l i tary con\·er,ion . the idea of " i nternational so1.· 1 e t ) . " ' ,m d the ,ucial ;J.nd 1.· u l t ural origim o f v i o lence. See ih "Re,earch Plan for the Years 1 993- 1 996." See also 0berg (ed.), Nordic Security in the 1 990s. The pro­ saic title belies its rich content. 26. Note here the seminal role of the Stockholm International Peace Research Jn,t i t utc I S I P R I J. lh fo undational commitment \\ a, to "a fac t u a l and balanced ac­ count of a controversial subject-the arms race and attempts to stop it." Twenty years after its e stablishment, the then director still saw the institution 's primary focus as "what is going on in the world military sector." See Blackaby, "Peace Re­ search and the Stockholm Institute of Peace Research ( SIPRI)." 27. See, for example, the various contributions in Der Derian and Shapiro (eds. ) , Jnternational!Intertextual Relations; and Peterson (ed. ), Gendered States. 28. An ill ustration of how peace research can remain both diverse and focused " prm 1ded Ill C c1 m 1 1 l er 1 . ··The L, oh l il t' Agenda of Pt:acc Re ,1.· arc h . " e ,pt:c ial l y pp. 35 X .� A X . Cam i l ler1 a l , 1 i mah· , rnuch ()f the t hemL· t ical and p h i lo,ophical defi c i e n ­ cies of peace research.

Select Bibliography

WORKS BY G ALTUNG Only cited works are l isted. The:y include coauthored or coedited items. Works ha, e geneL.i l l : been L' J ted D: ,l1llrt t 1 t k , . Works fre4uently c ited have been iJenti­ f1eJ D: Jbbrn 1 ,llinn,. a , ha, e the t i t l e , of collection� of worb. The date of essays t a k.en fn1m the L·u l kctilln, i , that of the original presentat ion or publ ication of the spec ific e ssay and not that of the overall collection unless they were clearly writ­ t e n t o r t h a t , o l u m e . Fur a complete bibliography o f G a l t u ng 's work until 1 990 see .!, ,h < 111 Gu /11111 :: R ih/1 , 1 '.! ru11hr I 9 9 0 . O , l o . I nternational Peace Research Institute. 1 990. EEC EH 1 -3 £PR , 1 -6 STI

nw VPRR

"Empiricism Criticism and Constructivism: Three Aspects of Scien­ tific Activity' ( 1 977) E ays 'n Methodo/01;y, Volumes 1 -3 E ·a, zn Peace Research, Volumes 1-6 A Structural Theory of lmperalism" ( 1 97 1 ) The True Worlds · A Transnational Perspectii e "Violence. Peace and Peace Research"

"After Camelot " EM, 2, 1 967, pp. 1 6 1 - 1 80. H 11,f,lh i 1 111 \ (!11, 11 / u 1 I_ 111/\ allll Pn1< c. Honol u l u , Dae Won Sa B uddh ist Te mple. 1 988. "Can We Learn from the Chinese People?" World Development, 4( 1 0/ 1 1 ), 1 976. pp. 883-888 ( with F N1sh1mura). "Conflict Resol ution as Confl ict Transformation: The First Law of Thern1odynam­ c Revisited,'' Estudws lnternacwnales Reiista de/ /RfPAZ, 3(6), 1 992, pp. 1 1 1 1 1 9. Cooperation in Europe, Oslo, Norwegian Universities Press, 1 970 (with S . Lodgaard, eds ) . "Cuba Anti- Imperialism and Soci ali-;t Development," Papers, 7, 1 980, pp. 206-2 1 8 . f "Cul tural Violence " Journal o Peace Resear ch, 27(3) 1 990. pp. 29 1 -305. " Deductive Thinking and Political Practice: An E�say on Teutonic Intellectual Style," EM, 2, 1 972, pp. 1 94 209.

24 1

242

A QUESTION OF VALUES

"Development from A bove and the Blue Revolution: The In do- Norwegian Project in Kerala," EPR, 5, 1 974, pp. 343-360. "Dialogues as Development," EM, 3, 1 988, pp. 68-89. "Disarmament and Environment: The Dual Purpose Agent," Papers, 6, 1 972, pp. 1 4-20. "The Dynamics of R ank Conflict: An Essay on Single Versus Multiple Social Sys­ tems." £PR, 3. I 97 7 . pp. 1 8 2- 1 96. "An Editorial," Journal of Peace Research, I ( I ), 1 964, pp. 1 --4. "Empiricism, Criticism and Constructivism: Three Aspects of Scientific Activity" (revised), EM, l , 1 977, pp. 4 1 -7 1 . "Empiricism, Criticism, Constructivism: Three Approaches to Scientific Activ ity," Synthese, 24, 1 972, pp. 343-372. "Entropy and the General Theory of Peace," EPR, I , 1 967, pp. 47-75. "Eschatology, Cosmology and the Formation of Visions," Papers, 6, 1 979, pp. 205-234. Essays in Methodology (EM, 1-3) Methodology and ideology (Essays i n Methodology Volume I ), Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 977. Papers on Methodology (Essays in Methodology Volume 2), Copenhagen, Chris­ tian Ejlers, 1 979. Methodology and Development (Essays i n Methodology Volume 3), Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 98 8 . Essays i n Peace Research (EPR, 1 -6) Peace, Research, Education , Action (Essays i n Peace Research Volume 1 ), Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 97 5 . Peace, War a n d Defence (Essays in Peace Research Volume 2), Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 976. Peace and Social Structure ( Essays in Peace Research Volume 3), Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 97 8 . Peace a n d World Structure (Essays i n Peace Research Volume 4 ) , Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 980. Peace Problems: Some Case Studies (Essays i n Peace Research Vol ume 5 ) , Copenhagen, Christian Ej lers, 1 980. Transarmament and the Cold War: Peace Research and the Peace Movement (Es­ says in Peace Research Volume 6), Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers, 1 988. The European Community: A Superpower in the Making, Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, 1 97 3 . "Expectations and Interaction Processes," inquiry, 2. 1 959, pp. 2 1 3-234. "Feudal Systems, Structural Violence and the S tructural Theory of Revolutions,'' EPR, 3, 1 970, pp. 1 97-267. "Foreign Policy Opinion as a Function of Social Pos ition," EPR, 3, 1 964, pp. 43-7 3. "A Framework for the Analysis of Social Conflict," Papers, 2 , 1 958, pp. 3 1-80. "Functionali sm in a New Key," EM, I , 1 969, pp. 1 3 1 - 1 59. "Gandh i and Conflictology," Papers, 5, 1 97 1 , pp. 1 07-1 5 8 . Gandhi's Politiske Etikk, Oslo, Tanum, 1 95 5 (w ith A. Naess). "Generalized Methodology for Social Research," EM, I, 1 977, pp. 230-246.

SELECT RIRLIOGRAPHY

243

.. G lobal (ioa l , . (i lobal PwL· e, ,L·� and the PrmpL'L' h for I l u111an and S oc i a l Dev elop­ ment: A Prolegomenon to a GPID World Model," Papers, 7, 1 979, pp. 33-96. "Human Needs and Human Rights," Bulletin of Peace Proposals, 8(3), 1 977, pp. 25 1-258 (with A. Wirak). "Human Values." Bulletin of Peace Proposals, 6, 1 974, pp. 1 5 6- 1 59 (with M. Cifuentes, A. Guha, A. Loevbraek, S . Sjolie, A. Wirak). .. -- 1 r11enut 1llna l .\1r C11111111u111cat1011 . !:PR. -L l 1 >SO, pp. l .'i2 20..i ( w i th N . P. Cikdihc h J . .. " lntern.1 t 1 P n a l PrPgranh of 1-f r h a , ioural SL· ienL·L· : Re�ea rc h i n H uma n S u rv i va l , EPR, 1 , 1 967 pp. 1 67- 1 87. '·Introduction," EPR, 3 , 1 978, pp. 2 1-27. "Introduction," EPR. 5 , 1 980. pp. 1 9-28 . .. h PtaL·efu l RL''L' ,1rch Po" 1 b k '.' On the l\.kthodo lo!!v , . of Peace Research." EPR. 2. 1 974, pp. 263-279. "Is There a Chmese Strategy of Development?" Papers, 6, 1 979, pp. 295-3 1 1 . "The Limits to Growth and Class Politics," EPR, 5 , 1 972, pp. 325-34 1 . Mankind 2000, Oslo, Norwegian lJnivers1t1es Press, 1 969 (with R . Jungk). "The Meaning of Peace," Papers, 5 , 1 969, pp. 3 3-50. Members of Two Worlds · A Development Study of Three Villages in Western Sicily, Oslo, Norwegian Universities Press, 1 97 1 . "Methodology, Epistemology Cosmology," EM, 3 , 1 988, pp. 1 5-67. "The New Economic Order in World Politics" in A.W. S ingham (ed.), The Non­ aligned Mm·ement in World Politics, Westport, Conn., Lawrence Hill & Co., 1 977, pp. 1 5 8- 1 74. '·The Next Twenty Five Years of Peace Research: Tasks and Prospects," EPR, 6, 1 988, pp. 244-259. "Notes on Technical Assistance : The Inda-Norwegian Project in Kerala," EPR, 4, 1 96 1 , pp. 536-599. "Notes on the Difference Between Physical and Social Science," Inquiry, 1 (1 ) , 1 958, pp. 7-34. "OL·c 1 de n t ;.il Co,molug:-, and the Theorie, of Peace and Development." unpubl i�hed manuscript 1 984, Berlin, Berghoff Stiftung. · · on A l ph,1 ..111Li Beta ..1nd Their \fan:, Combination.,," Paper.1 . 6. 1 97 9 , pp. 69- 1 1 2 . "On the Causes of Terrorism and Their Removal," /FDA Dossier, 66, 1 988, pp. 29-42. "On the Future of the International System," EPR, 4, 1 967, pp. 6 1 5-644. "On the Future of the World System: Territorial and Non-Territorial," EPR, 4, 1 967, pp. 645-672. --on the L..1,t 2 . 50( 1 Ye,1r, 1 11 Wc.,tern H i,tor:, and So111e Remark\ on the Coming .'iOO," in P. Burke (ed.), The New Cambridge Modern History, Volume 13, Cambridge, Cambridge Umv. Press, 1 979, pp. 3 1 8-362 (with T. He1estad and E. Rudeng). "On the Meaning of 1'!on-V10lence," EPR, 2, 1 965, pp. 34 1 -377. "On the Structure of Creativity," EM, 2, 1 970, pp. 2 1 0-226. "On the Theory of Theory Con