Imperfect peace from neutral peace
Introduction
This essay is a work done for the subject of Civilizations Dialogue for the Master of Culture of Peace, Education, Conflict Resolution and Human Rights of the University of Granada. In this essay I will try to expose a small constructive critical assessment on the concept of ‘imperfect peace’ from the concept of ‘neutral peace’, based mainly on the readings of Francisco Jiménez Bautista and Tiziano Telleschi.
The concept of ‘Paz Imperfecta’ was developed by Francisco Muñoz, a historian, university professor and peace researcher. This term recognizes peace as a procedural, unfinished and dynamic reality. This peace proposal does not advocate the total disappearance of conflicts, but to learn to live with them in the best possible way, trying to achieve the maximum possible pacifism given the social and personal circumstances of the conflict. The human being is recognized as altruistic and supportive, but in turn as conflicting and even violent on certain occasions. It is called imperfect precisely because although it peacefully manages the clashes, at the same time it coexists with them.
On the other hand, the concept of ‘Paz Neutra’ was originally developed as an alternative to cultural violence by Francisco Jiménez Bautista, founding member of the Institute of Peace and Conflicts of the University of Granada. The main concept of this idea is that peace is a gradual concept defined by elements such as education or language. The ‘neutral’ action strategies start from empathy with the other and language attention, and are addressed through sincere and constructive dialogue between human beings.
Francisco Jiménez Bautista raises three main criticisms of the concept of imperfect peace, these being: being:
- The denial of Johan Galtung’s legacy.
- The conceptual imprecision of imperfect peace.
- The perpetuation of the status quo.
Analysis
The main theme of the criticism of this little essay will be ‘the perpetuation of the status quo’, because this implies that the human being will never be able to perform ‘from’ and ‘for’ La Paz, and this is something whatI differ especially since I consider that it contains a somewhat negative vision of the human being.
As mentioned above, the concept of ‘imperfect peace’ part of the idea that peace is a dynamic, unfinished and procedural process, and that it is precisely imperfect because it tries to achieve the maximum possible level of pacifism as possible according to social conditions according to social conditionsand personal in which the conflict is framed. Imperfect peace, therefore, manages controversies while living with them and with certain forms of violence. These statements perpetuate the status quo, since they hide a negative vision of the human being, as if it were not able, as if they were eternally linked to defeatism and destruction. This theory overlooks the multiple occasions in which human beings have agreed in situations of conflict and violence and have reached permanent and beneficial peace agreements for both parts of the conflict. As Franciso Jiménez Bautista indicates, “the idea of imperfect peace seems to go in line with promoting non -rebellion against injustice and accepting reality, forgetting aspects of the social sphere such as injustice, abuse of power, corruption, corruption,etc."Accepting imperfect peace is to give up the idea that the human being will never be able to resolve conflicts, violence, crimes, and that therefore every problem must coexist with the idea of peace, but there will continue.
I agree with what Francisco Jiménez Bautista says, when he points out, in the theory of imperfect peace, the lack of talking about the need to address peace from the effort to attack and resolve what really causes violence, this being thisdirect violence, cultural or symbolic violence and structural violence. That is, make a change in society and in the system in general to address the violence we face, go to the roots of that violence and from there work to reduce it and eventually eliminate it, from the understanding and recognition of the baseof conflicts and the effort to address them from less to more.
On the other hand, Tiziano Telleschi, in his article about the "philosophical and sociological scope of imperfect peace" questions the starting point of imperfect peace, that is, the fact that the theory of imperfect peace does not part of La PazTo build peace. “It neglects to answer essential questions: since harmony (peace) is not a point of origin or irrevocable arrival and that there are several different visions of it: how to maintain a balance between the different visions of good?
This means that it considers that the idea of imperfect peace recognizes from the beginning that peace as such is not possible, not even as an end, and therefore we have to settle for the fact that conflicts, violence and disagreements ingeneral will continue to exist and little can be done about it.
On the other hand, neutral peace does have as an initial criteria peace, while establishing that the end is also. For Francisco Jiménez, ‘Neutral peace intends to neutralize in our spaces of coexistence any sign of cultural and/or symbolic violence that does not mean being neutral with such violence, but quite the opposite: it means taking sides, being partial, having a very concrete interestfor working frontally and radically against them (cultural and/or symbolic violence).’
Neutral peace, therefore, tries to transform reality neutralizing cultural and symbolic violence, which are those that end up leading to direct violence, while imperfect peace is formed with the peace we have, thus maintaining a system that perpetuates injustice, inequalities, conflicts and violence.
That said, we can establish main differences between the concept of imperfect peace and that of neutral peace. While imperfect peace works directly on an imperfect future, so that it contributes to the perpetuation of situations of violence and injustice that occur in the world, neutral peace has a clear goal that consists of gradually transforming reality for eventuallysignificantly reduce symbolic, cultural and direct violence, through the application of values such as tolerance, empathy, freedom, justice, neutralization of violent symbols, and the construction of an educational model where it emphasizes dialogue and, in dialogue and, ingeneral, it seeks to neutralize the violence as much as possible to achieve peace.
Conclusions
As final conclusions I have to say that I do not consider that Francisco Muñoz’s imperfect peace has a practical application to address violence and conflicts, and I think it lacks the initial criteria that peace should be in itself. On the other hand, neutral peace does have a few steps and a defined guide to transform reality. First from education, where it will be instructed in such a way that it is taught that peace is the appropriate environment and method to manage conflicts and achieve peace, and then through language, dialogue between human beings.
As mentioned above during work, imperfect peace maintains that ‘status quo’ and urges us to settle for an imperfect future, where the conflict always continues to exist, but slightly accompanied by a camouflaged peace. I think that the human being is able to agree, respect and look for a common goal that is well -being for everyone, and for this it is necessary to work and put everything on our part and how much is in our hand, giving the arm to twist whenis necessary and opting for a more collective world vision instead of individualistic.
Finally, I would like to make my personal considerations. I have never understood evil, and I have always refused to conceive it as part of the world. Since I have reason, I have trusted humanity despite being bad and violent, and I have even granted bad people, virtues. I am sure they have them, or otherwise they would be empty minds and souls, and that, as I come to say, do not exist. I think love is something inherent to beings, which is given to us by the simple fact of existing since creation. Living a life as part of this planet is simply a path during which to give ourselves to that love and remember our true essence, in order to learn to live with everything that surrounds us. Maybe this is a very holistic perspective, but mysticism and spirituality is something that has accompanied me very closely since I am a child and has dyed everything that surrounds me with a wonderful, magical sense even.
Meeting greater virtues in the procedures of neutral peace because it establishes its foundations in some mechanisms of action based on the values of tolerance, respect, freedom, empathy, in short, in love values, and it is in these concepts whereI find the applicable tools to achieve that common well -being.
Bibliographic references
- Muñoz, Francisco A. (2001). "Imperfect peace before a conflict universe". La Paz Imperfecta (Granada: University of Granada).
- Muñoz, Francisco A.;UBRIC, purification;Jiménez, Juan Manuel [et al] (2013). "Imperfect peace of a diverse and plural world". Peace philosophies and praxis (Barcelona: Icaria Editorial).
- Jiménez Bautista, Francisco (2018) Paz Imperfecta: New friendly complaints, Journal of Culture of Peace, Vol. January 2, December, pp. 25-43
- Jiménez Bautista, Francisco (2014) «Paz Neutra: An illustration of the concept», in: Peace and Conflicts Magazine. University of Granada.
- Jiménez Bautista, Francisco (2011) Pacific Rationality. An introduction to Peace Studies, Madrid, Dykinson.
- Telleschi, Tiziano, (2018) The philosophical and sociological reached of the imperfect peace. A Critical Re-Employment, Journal of Culture of Peace, Vol. January 2, December, pp. 45-67.
- Paz Imperfecta: Wilkypedia: https: // es.Wikipedia.org/wiki/peace_imperfect
Leave feedback