More Than a Curriculum : Education for Peace and Development [1 ed.] 9781617355493, 9781617355479

Exploring the field of peace education, the bulk of the book analyzes and critically evaluates contemporary schools and

245 63 2MB

English Pages 194 Year 2013

Report DMCA / Copyright


Polecaj historie

More Than a Curriculum : Education for Peace and Development [1 ed.]
 9781617355493, 9781617355479

Citation preview

More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

A Volume in Peace Education Series Editors: Ian Harris, Edward J. Brantmeier, and Jing Lin

Peace Education Ian Harris, Edward J. Brantmeier, and Jing Lin Series Editors Building a Peaceful Society: Creative Integration of Peace Education (2011) By Laura FInley Think, Care, Act: Teaching for a Peaceful Future (2011) By Susan Gelber Cannon Books, Not Bombs: Teaching Peace Since the Dawn of the Republic (2010) By Charles Howlett, & Ian Harris Spirituality, Religion, and Peace Education (2010) Edited by Edward J. Brantmeier, Jing Lin, & John P. Miller Encyclopedia of Peace Education (2008) Edited by Monisha Bajaj For the People: A Documentary History of the Struggle for Peace and Justice in the United States (2008) By Charles Howlett & Robbie Lieberman Peace Education: Exploring Ethical and Philosophical Foundations (2008) By James Page Transforming Education for Peace (2008) Edited by Jing Lin, Edward J. Brantmeier, & Christa Bruhn Educating Toward a Culture of Peace (2006) By Yaacov Iram

More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Johan Galtung and S. P. Udayakumar


Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Galtung, Johan, author. More than a curriculum : education for peace and development / Johan Galtung and S.P. Udayakumar. pages cm. -- (Peace education) ISBN 978-1-61735-547-9 (pbk.) -- ISBN 978-1-61735-548-6 (hardcover) -ISBN (invalid) 978-1-61735-549-3 (ebook) 1. International education. 2. Education--Aims and objectives. 3. Peace--Study and teaching. 4. Economic development--Effect of education on. I. Udayakumar, S. P. II. Title. LC1090.G35 2013 370.116--dc23 2012042630

Copyright © 2013 Information Age Publishing Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America

CONTENTS Preface .................................................................................................. vii Introduction ........................................................................................... ix More than a Curriculum ........................................................................ ix 1.

Education for and with Peace: Is it Possible? ................................. 1


Schools and Universities: Obstacles or Facilities?.........................21


Schools and Universities: Some Experiments ...............................67


Education Through and Throughout Life ................................... 117


Education for Peace and Development ........................................143



We met at the University of Hawai’i-Manoa in 1991–92 as Professor and Research Assistant. The association grew into dissertation guidance, family friendship, travels, Transcend network and deep admiration and respect. This book idea came out of our common interest in peace education and peace research when we both were at the UH. Since we both were busy and preoccupied with various projects after our UH days, the book got postponed repeatedly despite our signing a contract with the publisher. When the final manuscript was ready, we kept revising and updating and adding more thoughts to it. We have been researching and teaching in various places around the world and have benefitted from all those friends and experiences. Put tersely, what we have here is the amalgamation of several years of education, research, action and life experiences. The first chapter explores peace education, form and content. The second chapter looks at schools and universities as we know them today, and the basic problem explored is whether they are parts of the problem or parts of the solution, obstacles or facilities. The third chapter looks at concrete cases of schools and universities that have taken up the challenge of peace and development education, how they More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages vii–viii Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

did or do it, what were some positive and negative experiences. The section on the World Peace Academy in Basel, Switzerland, is written by its Academic Director, Professor Dietrich Fischer, and the section on Sabona, for schools, by the initiator, Synöve Faldalen. The fourth chapter explores development education as a life process, and in particular education and pedagogy for the poor. And the final chapter starts with a non-school, non-university approach: the theater as pedagogical tool, reflects on curricula for peace and for development (for schools and universities ready to take it) and ends with an overview written as a dialogue among a Reader and the two authors, Galtung and Udayakumar. This book explores some of the conditions for not only teaching, but being, peace and development, based on our shared and separate experiences. So, as the title indicates the book is not only about what to teach and how to teach it, but just as much about the stage, the arena, the schools and the universities. The search for answers to all these questions is on. Dear Reader, please join us in the search. S. P. Udayakumar Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu Johan Galtung Versonnex, France & Alfaz, Spain

INTRODUCTION More than a Curriculum1

Yes, peace education is more than a curriculum. Peace education starts at home, and the home of education is the school. And the school is today a stage for major violence. All over the world pupils and students in primary and secondary schools harass each other. The bully and the “bullee” can be individuals or groups, boys or girls. The methods differ. Bullying is genuine violence, to the spirit, the mind and the body. The extreme form, killing with guns, fellow students and teachers is mainly found in the USA, less so elsewhere, like in Germany. Absenteeism for fear of being bullied is found all over, in its ultimate form as suicide, particularly in Japan. The after-effects in the life of bully and bullee as adults must be deep and destructive, but little is known. There are five different levels of analysis: bully-bullee, the class, the school, the school system and the society. The leaders at each level prefer to see the cause of bullying located one, two, three or four levels below their own. The class teacher prefers bullybullee analysis, the school principal class-teacher analysis, the superintenMore Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages ix–xiv Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

dent or minister of education may focus on a particular school or principal, the government might have some ideas about the whole school system. And the children? Maybe they focus on adult society. All of them might also like to kick the ball upstairs, not only downstairs, bullying being a hot potato. Bully-bullee analysis, focusing on both, their relation and their families, is convenient for the system, and may lead to “no tolerance” remedies like immediate bully expulsion from the school. And, there are classes, schools and systems more problematic than the others. Some times change of top personnel might help. All levels of analysis have something to contribute. But the hypothesis here is that the core cause is in the school system itself. To treat small, but growing, human beings as raw material to be processed on an assembly line called a curriculum is in itself violence of the structural kind, legitimized by the idea of making them fit for society. Pupils and students alike sense this, and become alienated, frustrated and aggressive. Most of them are, however, too coward to attack the school itself, so they take it out on weaker pupils-students. Hypothesis 1: The bully-bullee relation is the relation between school misfits and school conformists; the misfit hitting the school by hitting the suspected school-lover. Hypothesis 2: The more individual freedom a school system allows, the less bullying. Thus, in Norway bullying in Steiner schools and in the Experimental Gymnasium was very rare. If there is some truth to this bullying will also come to universities the more, like now, they are organized like primary and secondary schools, with decreasing freedom of choice both in form and content. If some pressure is taken off primary schools the prognosis might work the other way, with less bullying. Harassment might be moving up the schooling ladder, and like most forms of violence escalate—as it has done so far. The general line of therapy is clear: relax the curricula, trust pupils/students more, offer them more choices in content, form, time (when to come and go) and space (where to go). Let the pupils-students compete with themselves rather than others, and praise any progress, avoid standardized national-regional tests and exams. Of course they eventually have to qualify for some job, but leave that testing to the future employer. SOW LESS STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE— AND REAP LESS DIRECT VIOLENCE Any talk about the teaching of peace and development by the schools must also address peace and development in and of the schools. The health of


• xi

the doctor and the whole health delivery system is of key significance to the patient. We place very much hope in education in this so-called modern world. Today’s pupils and students will be the leaders of tomorrow’s world. That is the challenge, to them, to us. Is it also a real hope? That depends on the pupils and students, not only on the systems. Many years as university teacher makes one sensitive to two types of two students. One type goes in for schooling, and sees the university as a school. The other type goes in for education, and sees the university as a great opportunity to enrich oneself, the society, the world. The two types do not exclude each other. A good student will proceed on both tracks. The schooling type sits through four years, passively, soaking in what is said, looking dull. In the end there is a diploma. He or she watches the professor carefully, takes note of phrases the professor evidently likes. When exam comes those phrases will be reproduced. He may understand close to nothing. But human beings being what we are he may score some points. Professors are weak, they like having their own ideas repeated. He or she gets the diploma, possibly also a job; but that is also all he gets. He will fill an empty slot, a hole in a company or a ministry waiting. But there is very little to fill the hole inside him or her. He did not take on the challenge offered by any university in the world, even the poorest: to expand, to grow, and to spill over with creativity in the society, in the world. He did not seize the opportunity for any type of spiritual growth. And this in the most sensitive years when the spirit is most open, a fresh field for seeds to grow. The education type does not just sit, but is intensely alive. Eyes are shiny. That student has some question tearing at his heart and his brain. He simply has to have an answer, and may not accept the answer he is told. Or, if he does, he may just come up with a new question. He has understood what science, research and education is about. There is no final answer. The only thing that is final is that there will always be more questions, just like the child going on and on: But why? Why is that so? And schooling, unfortunately, is often a way of killing that child in us, creating an illusion of final answers, as if the creation of the world was completed once and for ever. But the world is a scene of perennial creation, of flow, anicca, not a final state of affairs. Education should reflect this, not handing down answers, but subjecting them to dialogue. What the student really needs is some partner for dialogues. He may get 50% of what he learns from books and self-study. The schooling type will underline; the education type will paint the page, with exclamation signs and question marks, expressing his own excitement, having a virtual dialogue with the author, maybe even a real dialogue through mail, e-mail.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

He will spend at least 30% of his study as co-study, having dialogue with other students, trying out answers on each other, discovering together. And maybe as much as 20% he will get from the teacher, and then to a large extent through questions and comments. He knows that the more he participates, the more he will get in return. Who will be most enriched? The education student, of course. The schooling student may just get rich. Little doubt who will move society and the whole world ahead: the education, dialogue, type. The schooling type will maintain and decorate. But, beware: both professors and the administrators may prefer the type who slides through the university like a piece of soap, well greased. For the university to become a mutual learning community both sides have to cooperate. Why does it matter? Why not just get a good position, put some diploma on the wall, raise a family, build a house? Join the 4-4-4 club around the world in the honor of 4 members in the family, 4 rooms in the apartment and 4 wheels on the car? The most successful ideology in human history, the bourgeois way of life, BWL, today found all over, North and South, East and West? The answer is simple: because he is cheating himself, and others in addition. Think of the privilege of being a student, permitted to dedicate four years to his/her own inner enrichment, expanding and growing. If all you want is a diploma, you are a cheat, of yourself to start with. You could have used the time to build meaning into your own life, studying what the great minds of humanity have had to say, challenging them. Instead you just passively accept what you hear. Why demand so little? But you are also cheating the professors. Of course there are professors who simply turn their piles of lecture notes and play the same cassette over again. Isn’t it your responsibility to help them grow? To ask them challenging questions? Every challenge is an invitation to grow, and a good student will of course permit the professor to say, look, I do not know the answer, but I’ll try to come up with something for next week. Ask yourself: Have I lived up to my responsibility to the professors? You may not believe it, but professors are human, too. The university as a learning community has to have two-way traffic. To repeat: do not put all the blame on the “system”. You are also cheating your own society. The world is in a crisis right now. On the surface an economic crisis, and a violence crisis. But underneath is a much more important crisis. Call it a spiritual void. A lack of soul. A lack of identity, of meaning. If you as a student do not build your own meaning through hard work, through questioning and answering, dialogue, then how can you expect society to find that meaning? People in general do not


• xiii

enjoy your privilege, of having time, of having easy access to resources that grow the more you use them, not the more money you throw at them. And you are cheating the world. There is suffering out there. What is the purpose of you becoming more international, learning languages, traveling and all that, if you do not relate to the real world? In Buddhist studies the Sanskrit word for suffering: dukkha plays a major role. A brilliant AmericanChinese, Dr Ralph Siu, has constructed a scale of suffering from 1 to 9: 9 means “I cannot take it, I want to leave this life”, 1 means the concern you have when there is a dentist appointment tomorrow, a slight uneasiness. One dukkha is the unit, meaning one person suffering at level 1 for 24 hours. There is an enormous amount of suffering, very high levels of dukkha, many places in the world; for instance when the bereaved are bemoaning those who did not survive a war, an earthquake, a tsunami. So Siu suggests that we may not always agree on what is the good society. But we can agree on what is the bad society: people deprived of their lives, of their well-being, of their freedom, of their identity or meaning with life. The problem of the world, of humankind, now as yesterday or tomorrow, forever. The problem of all of us. And what has been said so far is that more than the “system” may stand in the way. Maybe we could all join to reduce suffering in the world, whether caused by direct or structural violence, by promoting their opposites, peace, and development. For this we have to change schools and universities into learning communities, to improve ourselves, the schools and universities, the societies, the world. Buddhists call that a sangha, a small community. A far cry from the giant universities of today, with 10,000, 100,000 students, like dinosaurs, huge, with little brain and even less heart. Rather 1,000 learning communities, in each municipality, ward, town, city, with 100 co-learners in each, than one mega-university with 100,000 students in the nation’s capital. Rather many small rooms where students can co-study than giant auditoriums for the delivery of lectures. The German word for lecture, Vorlesung, actually means to read in front of the students. What is the purpose if students can read themselves, why not go straight to the dialogue with the professor and among the students—after each student has exposed the material to an inner dialogue, with him/ herself? Another word for “inner dialogue” is meditation; another word for outer dialogue, with others, is meditation together. Meditation can be mind-emptying, to prepare the clean slot for maximum sensitivity. But it can also be mind-filling. The best form of meditation is perhaps to oscillate between the two, being co-creative, meditative, active, aiming at reducing dukkha and increasing sukha, fulfillment. As so often pointed out, we need a culture of peace, and no doubt part of that can be taught. We also need a structure of peace and part of that has


• More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

to be lived, enacted. Schools should do both, a place for teaching, a place for living and above all a place for being and becoming both. NOTES 1.

Based on Today’s University Student: Hope and Challenge, Keynote, Wakayama International Forum, 17 October 1998—a very concrete occasion for a dialogue about the doubleness of institutional and individual responsibility for the promotion of peace and development. Thanks to Professor Robert Kowalczyk for organizing the event.





When the peace research movement started at the end of the 1950s the universities did, in general, not welcome it. Rather, the idea was picked up by research institutes, often with no attachment to teaching institutions at all. Today we still face the result of this: a movement strong on research, but weak on action, and also weak on education, bringing the findings into schools and universities. There is nothing strange in this: the general imperative of peace was also taken up by peace action groups, and they have been correspondingly weak on research—and also on education. In short, despite the many efforts to the contrary, peace education has probably not developed significantly during the last decades—as a contrast to the significant advances made both in peace research and peace action. One reason is definitely the stronghold several types of establishments in most countries have over all levels of education. What is being taught is a reflection of the past handed over into the present so as to secure a continuity More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages 1–20 Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

into the future, and usually also in conformity with national ideology and upper class thinking. And sincere peace research or peace action will often stand out as a contrast to this type of perspective. One might think that in this situation more peace research and peace action groups would have added peace education programs to their activities, but in general this has not happened, largely due to lack of funds, under-staffing and over-concern with research and action. Peace education in schools, and for the general public, is lagging behind. It is high time that this sad tradition is broken, and that peace education and its sister or cousin development education are taken seriously. This would in fact only be part of a larger perspective in which peace research, peace action, and peace education would find each other integrated into a natural whole. If they are kept apart this is more a reflection of division of labor tendencies in the surrounding societies than of any inner necessity. They could hardly be more intimately related. Like using research on peace action for education: how were slave trade and slavery abolished, how did socialist policies improve the material conditions of the masses, how did the anti-colonization movements come into being and succeed, how did emancipist and feminist movements improved the lot of women? There could also be research programs on peace education, not only research on images people have, but on how and why they change, with or without peace action. Particularly significant in this connection is research on unconventional communication—like over the Internet—that not only have a communicative aspect, but also can be seen as pure education at a global level, and their impact as vehicles of social change. And there are other linkages. Both peace research and peace education will ultimately lead to peace action, if they are of any value, and any peace action will have its obvious research and education spin-offs and benefits. Nonetheless, in our division of labor societies, it would not be strange if outside institutions like ministries would be stronger in shaping the need for peace education, and ultimately also the content; particularly if peace researchers and peace activists are caught unaware and have not done their home work. All over the world today there is talk about peace research and education.2 Chairs are appearing in many universities.3 There is a demand for peace curricula at all levels of education, and so on. Those who demand have only vague notions of what they ask for, and that is not necessarily their fault. It is our fault that we have not been able to present a sufficiently rich supply to participate active in this process. But it is still not too late: we are as yet only at the beginning. It is in order to stimulate active participation in that process that this chapter has been written.





It may seem strange to start with the form rather than with content, but there is a simple reason: the form may open for some new possibilities that should also be reflected in the content. We hope to show below that there is a very open range of opportunities available to all who want to go into peace education one way or another. And, even if this range definitely can be expanded, it is already today much wider than what is made use of: lectures, pamphlets and small and big books, seminars and conferences, newspaper articles and magazine essays. More vehicles of communication exist. First, some general remarks about what would be the form of peace education. It has to be compatible with the idea of peace.4 It has in itself to exclude not only direct violence, but also structural violence. This is important because schools and universities are still important means of education, or at least schooling, and: In the structure is the message. Only rarely is education nowadays packaged with direct violence; the days of colonialism and corporal punishment are more or less gone. But the structural violence is there, and it takes the usual forms: a highly vertical division of labor which in this case expresses itself in one-way communication; fragmentation of the receivers of that communication so that they cannot develop horizontal interaction, organize and eventually turn the communication flow the other way; absence of true multilaterality in the education endeavor. All of this relates to form, and if in addition the content of the peace education is very biased, then the structural violence has a name, and the name is indoctrination. Peace education should be an attempt to do away with this. Any educational form suggested should be evaluated in terms of the structure it engenders; and the questions should always be asked: Does it permit feedback? Does it bring people together in a joint endeavor rather than keeping them apart? Does it permit general participation, and is the total form of education capable of self-generated change? In short, is there dialogue, not only one-way message, in the education? A second basic problem has to do with the relationship between peace education and the traditional media or education; primary, secondary and tertiary schooling. The question is usually asked: why not get peace education into the curricula at all three levels? But it is not so obvious that the answer is yes. The case may well be that at all three levels the form of education is such that it would counteract, effectively, the very idea of peace education, and hence be harmful. It is naive to believe that content will survive the form; the form may often be even more important than the content. Many people have had the common experience that when they went to school what they read themselves, in their leisure time, was often most interesting, most appetizing, and provoked the deepest insights and most gratifying experiences. The moment something was put on the curriculum list it


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

tended to accumulate dust, and became gray and flat like everything else. What is left is only the alibi: society has done something about “peace” and “development,” it is on the school curriculum. Bravo. In addition comes another factor: in many countries the school system is centralized under a Ministry of Education with almost dictatorial powers over the curricula. The power is exercised through bureaucrats or committees unable to reflect new ideas and to incorporate quickly the demands of younger generations. The average age for the committee members will be so high, and the capacity for self-generated change after their studies were concluded so low, that the committee at best will reflect dominant thinking when they were young, at worst dominant thinking when their teachers or professors were young. In a quickly changing society—and particularly in a society where conceptions of development, conflict, and peace are changing so quickly as today5— this is unacceptable. Something may be squeezed through a machinery of that kind, but at the risk of its becoming so flattened out in the process that, even if the form of education were perfect, there would be no content left. The validity of this type of analysis varies from country to country—and may be particularly low in federal countries, or countries that for any reason rank high on decentralization with one state, province, district, city, or municipality more ready to experiment with new things. Even if it is done only in one school, or only in one class, it can be valuable because of the demonstration effect. Still another difficulty is the strong tie existing between traditional schooling institutions at any level, and the social institution of sorting people into social categories, even social classes. This tie is, of course, the examination. To use education as a sorting device is problematic from the point of view of peace education, since peace itself is antithetical to vertical social relations and hierarchies. And grading means pitting students, classes, school. universities even countries (the PISA tests) against and above each other. Peace is closely related to equity, so peace education would be a way of achieving consciousness of social reality and of solidarity in a joint learning community. A mechanism for sorting and social classification is something else. There should be no exams in connection with peace education, no basis for an emerging class of peace specialists. Such devices may fit in military academies and business schools, not in institutions to promote shared peace insight for the whole society. For that reason we are mostly thinking of other settings than the traditional institutions for primary, secondary, and tertiary schooling. Hence, let us turn to the various forms of peace education that could be imagined, and start with the simplest, which are not necessarily the cheapest.



1. Programmed Teaching These are excellent tools for self-instruction6 based on the idea of presenting material, asking questions on the basis of the material, and instructing the reader not to turn the page where he will find the answer before he has made up his mind as to the answer. If right, he continues; if wrong, he goes back to the preceding page. Many variations of this simple tool can be imagined. One idea would be to use the teaching machines for training in thinking, and implicitly speaking and writing, about development, conflict, and peace; on-line, or some other way. Concepts are indispensable tools here, and they can be taught only if, in addition to concise presentations, there are lots of examples and much empirical material from today’s world and the world of history. A spiraling pedagogy, between the general and the specific—the cases, examples—is recommended. In the first part of a manual there could be an emphasis on concepts and materials, and in the next part an emphasis on the application to concrete cases. The concrete cases could be real or imagined, but in either case the idea would be to train the reader in diagnosis of concrete situations, and in constructive, concrete proposals for action. By the time he comes to that part he should be equipped with a repertory of diagnostic tools, a repertory of proposals, and some theory as to what action to propose in what type of situation. He should see links from education to action. The basic point about the concrete exercises would then be to stimulate awareness of indicators that can be used for a diagnostic conclusion, and to practice the theory. The concrete situations could range from family conflicts to the great problems of the contemporary world.7 What, then, happened to the idea of peace education without structural violence? Would this not be the most authoritarian form conceivable, imparting the mutually fragmented readers the idea that there is a unique way of defining the problematics of development, conflict and peace, and a unique way of approaching unique situations, the way written by the author(s)? Yes, unless we add more elements to this picture. First, the reader should at all points be encouraged to criticize the content of any programmed teaching, hopefully with a view to improving it, and one improvement might be to discard it, if all or most readers are basically dissatisfied. For this purpose, even typographical provisions might be made, like empty pages, sections to be torn out and returned to the author with comments, etc. In short, some type of branched programming.8 Second, this could be used as a tool in connection with a summer camp, a class course, etc., where individual work and group work would alternate, and there would be ample opportunity for horizontal learning as well as for collective feedback and general participation. The teaching machine could


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

even have a built-in dialogue. Questions are asked on one page; on the next page follows a discussion of various answer alternatives rather than “correct” answers. But there are also lots of facts for which the more authoritarian approach might be appropriate. Third, the book could be organized in such a way that the reader could benefit from parts of it without having to take in all. The reader could decide the extent of “indoctrination.” Fourth, there could be pages for beginners, for trainers and for trainers of trainers; all accessible to all.9 This being said, it is felt that teaching machines could be prepared at three levels; for participants in primary, secondary and tertiary education, without necessarily trying to squeeze programmed teaching into the curriculum anywhere. Key words above are concrete and constructive. Peace and development education should get out of the focus on criticism only and train people to accept the responsibility to answer the question, and what would you propose? The answer does not have to be the final answer in any way. The point is more the general attitude: I am not just an observer learning what happens and commenting on it. I myself am a part of it, a participant, and as such I am obliged not only to search and research and educate myself, but to be prepared to act.10 But can we demand that of pupils? Yes, for their schools. And of students? Yes, for their universities. Both have arenas. 2. Peace Games We are thinking of peace games as a counter to the war games used in military organizations or Ministries of War and Defense, and the highly competitive games taught in Colleges of Business Administration. The word “game” is here conceived of in a very general way. A peace game could be so constructed that it had in it elements of games of skill, games of strategy, and even games of chance. More basic, however, is that games would appeal to people who learn better when exposed to such tactile and visual stimuli as dice, pawns, any kind of small things to be moved, exchanged, handed out, etc. that have the additional advantage that they may gain a momentum of their own and develop a dynamic that could be highly instructive. Moreover, although one-person games would be useful, games should be constructed in such a way that they could also be played by two or more persons. A typical game could consist of a number of development and conflict elements described in various ways, and handed out to the players. Not all permutations of such elements would be equally meaningful, and the task of the player would be to see a meaning in the particular deal he has gotten.



He would then have as his task to find some kind of solution, on the basis of the definition of the situation in his deal, and on the basis of what he knows or gets to know about the situation as it looks from the point of view of the deals obtained by other players. The game would be highly open-ended, the player should be instructed to add to it and subtract from it himself, and the basic point would be to develop his analytical skills as well as his skills for proposal-making. Moreover, the games could be tied to the teaching machines and be constructed in such a way that the winner of the game at the same time is the person who has best understood the profundity of the concepts developed. In that sense, these would basically be games of skill, and there should be some clear termination points making it possible to declare that the game has been “solved” and the “winner” found. If capitalistic society has been able to develop a challenging game like Monopoly, a game that has fascinated generations of children and adults, then a more peace-oriented society should be able to develop at least one equally fascinating game. But there is the basic difficulty that games usually are zero sum, in the sense that he who does not win loses; and this is in itself isomorphic with the type of activity engaged in by capitalists, as well as by military—no minor reason why so many games are about profit and violence one way or the other. Peace games would be based on the idea of everybody winning, by creating a new reality accommodating them all, with a bonus. 3. Audio-Visual Means Clearly, concepts, empirical data, situation descriptions, etc. as indicated above can all be given a visual form, as a very minimum in the form of lists and the types of drawings a lecturer will make on his blackboard. These could, in turn, be made available as sets of slides, as filmstrips, as movies, as video cassettes, as web-sites, as peace channels.11 Like the peace game they might be linked to teaching machines. Some time ago the slide and overhead projectors were probably the most widely disseminated of all of the instruments, a good reason why slides/foils might be given top priority. Then came the video recorders, a good reason to give the cassettes top priority. Today of course, it is the computer, also used (PowerPoint™) as an overhead projector, giving CDs, DVDs and web-sites the top priority. Tomorrow what? Not quite incidentally, they are all used at schools and universities and conferences, and gives power for those with access to effective use of such tools. But they can also be used for self-study and as an accessory for study groups, for instance by Googling themselves through some problem, quickly projecting new pages on a wall used as a screen. A good reason for making electricity


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

available and affordable all over the world, closing some of the gap between haves and have-nots by using the correlated gap between overcast and sunny to run photo-voltaic cells. Another goal would be never to make a teaching instrument accessible without some feedback possibility, and then see to it that the feedback is really taken seriously, and not filed away as the contents of complaint books and boxes often are. An interesting tool are the structural models chemists use when they explore chemical compounds by means of balls and rods. This model combines (2) and (3) above, partly as a “peace game,” and partly as audiovisual means or rather tactile-visual means. The balls would stand for “actors,” individual and collective, and the rods for interaction relations of different types. The task would be to construct models of social structures12 with a high level of equity, participation and other peace values. This could be made as a game with a “solution,” or completely open-ended, as a tool to facilitate creative imagination in the field. The instructions would show how traditional, authoritarian structures can be represented, and give hints about how to proceed with new social structures—organizational, domestic, and global. 4. Open Air University This type of university, the TV university, is a highly viable form for the future,13 although it raises the same problem as TV does in general because of the feudal structure of that medium of communication. In a sense, MacLuhan’s idea about the global village is more valid than he himself makes it: TV etc. not only makes for proximity, it also makes for a reinforcement of centralization and vertical structure in general; in short, a village, not a commune. In TV, modern governments and business have found what medieval princes must have dreamt of: one-way communication with virtually no feedback, impinging on fragmented viewers, and with no possibility for general participation. The telephone/computer feedback is of some help in this connection, but not as long as it is mainly used for asking questions. The same applies to newspaper reaction the day after an important program; for such reactions to be meaningful, feedback has to be immediate, not delayed by one night’s newspaper printing. On the other hand, the possibilities available for disseminating critical and criticizable material are also great. They only have to be supplemented with a number of devices, such as two-way TV circuits linking resource persons and audiences also across borders. And, opportunities for viewers to meet, and above all, opportunities for viewers to meet with the lecturers, if such persons are still to be made use of. This should not only be as communication, but in person to person encounters.



Obviously, the condition for this to happen is a country with relatively dense population and both good and cheap means of transportation as well as communication. Such conditions are more frequently met in developed than in developing countries, one more example of how structural violence often is more easily counteracted in the countries that have benefitted most from it. Needless to say, this form does not in any sense contradict any of the preceding forms, but can be used to absorb all of them. 5. Individual Research However well intended, all these methods carry a clear basic structure: an educational message that passes from a sender to a receiver. Feedback, counter-currents, may be created, but asymmetry persists. The most basic way of correcting for that is not only by students talking back in a dialogue, but by having everybody create his own insights. That process is called research. The task of peace education, hence, is not just to disseminate peace research, but also to stimulate it. Peace research should be a part of peace education, and in practice this is not too difficult. Almost all politics around us has some peace implications. Any student can assemble data on arms and trade policies, and make his evaluation of them; or he can try to develop his own image of the peaceful world; or he can develop his own proposals for concrete, peace-oriented strategies and compare them with accounts of present and past actions. This would contribute to demystifying research. What researchers do is not so different from what everybody does trying to come to grips with a phenomenon, only more explicit and systematic. There is no borderline protected by the mystique of diplomas and membership in professional associations. Research is a relation to the surrounding world more than a profession; in fact, that critical, searching, and creative relation is often lost through scientific professionalization. This is particularly important in connection with conflict and peace, for only with a conscious and creative approach can a sufficiently broad repertory of conflict resolution methods be developed inside the individual and make him less manipulable in concrete conflict situations, and less prone to direct violence. 6. Group Research What is said above also applies to research teams, but when organized in teams, some additional scope for peace education is added. A team has to have some form of organization, and the question arises: how to organize peace research so as itself to be an example of a peace structure? The easy way out is to organize it as a group of students; it becomes more difficult when people who vary considerably in quantity and quality of experience in such matters are involved. If one wants an equitable structure with no bossing, no dictates as to what should be done and how, but a genuine dialogue,


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

then there are problems; and efforts to solve these problems can give a direct insight in what peace is about. However, it is also important that such efforts do not inspire an atmosphere of self-seeking and mutual distrust. The group will have to find a balance between efforts devoted to producing research and efforts devoted to achieving a peace structure in the group—either takes time. 7. Drama Some form should be found to capture in the age-old medium of a play the drama unveiled in development-conflict- -peace research. A drama has dynamism, hence it could be used to depict dynamic phenomena within these three fields. One way which might be attractive would be to have a rotating stage and divide it into four quarters. Each quadrant would represent a social form— for instance, a feudal, a capitalist, a socialist, or a communist society; or a conservative, liberal, communal or pluralist society.14 Each of these social forms is portrayed by certain roles that relate to each other in the way typical of these societies. To get at the structural message, the same actors might play corresponding roles in the four societies to show how extremely differently they behave, how different the meaning of everything they do would be, all according to which society they are enacting. Introduce, then, into these four societies what is basically the same type of conflict, and let the societies act on them. One thing that might be stimulating would be to show that the society able to handle one type of conflict may be unable to handle another. Development problems, conflict dynamism, peace problematics and images of the future could all be problematized in a format of this kind. More significant, however, would be to find some form whereby the public would be encouraged to participate. For that purpose another form should be used by taking a conflict known to everybody, a current issue, a marital conflict, and present it as open-ended theater. We would interpret that as a theater where the drama is introduced by professional actors, but with no ending. The public is invited into the drama, trying to act out various continuations. For this to happen, some members of the public may have to join at a half-structured, intermediate phase in order to get “warmed up.” It may also be that till the very end there have to be some professional actors present to keep things going, highly capable of improvising, of presenting as fully fledged action dialogue whatever the amateur actors might indicate. In principle, this should not be too different from a jam session for musicians, with some amateurs and professionals, only that the content—being verbal— is more immediately interpretable.



Clearly, for anything like this to be developed, extremely close cooperation between researchers and playwrights would be necessary so that content and form will be organically related. And we repeat: the purpose is to develop social awareness, not to develop conflict technology. And above all to stimulate creativity, like a jazz musicians growing musically with the freedom to improvise. 8. Summer Schools in Peace Studies The summer school idea is not very original. It has been practiced with considerable success in a variety of fields, and in the problems of peace by such institutions as the International Peace Academy Committee as early as in Vienna summer 1970 and in Helsinki summer 1971 and 1972, and by the Italian Pugwash Group. The former became too one-sided politically, leaning toward a conflict-management oriented western conception of development, conflict and peace15, and the latter, like Pugwash in general, has been somewhat narrow in its perspective (arms control and disarmament, mainly). But important experiences were gained, and the whole idea is definitely one to be continued. Here are three points to focus on, given that the summer school is extraordinary, not run-of-the-mill schooling, and hence in principle open to extraordinary approaches, like: a. The Significance of Mixing Theoreticians and Practitioners, and if Possible Also of Theory and Practice A summer school of this kind should be a place where those who work theoretically and those who work practically can meet and exchange insights. The difficulties in connection with dialogues of this kind are universal and well known—and a polarization along the theoretician/practitioner axis very easily develops. If this can be overcome, if the theoreticians can stop judging the practitioners in terms of theoretical insight and the practitioners stop judging the theoreticians in terms of practical experience, something very important can ensue. For they are often both unfortunate badly deformed victims of our division of labor society. One possibility is that the summer school in Year 1 could serve to establish a vocabulary and a set of problems that each participant would bring to his work in the coming year, and the summer school in Year 2 would then be the place where these experiences could be drawn together and interpreted. Year 2 for one group could at the same time be Year 1 for the next group, and the two groups could then mix together.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

b. The Significance of Combining the General and the Specific By this we mean scope for general theory and general practical guidelines, as well as for highly concrete analyses of specific situations. When it comes to these specific situations no effort should be spared to bring them as close to reality as possible, for instance by having representatives of the conflict parties participate, even to the point of coming close to enacting the conflict before the eyes of the participants. Another possibility is simulation games, perhaps also by means of role playing16 (but never asking a person to play a role which he abhors, that would be an infraction of the integrity of his personality). Like kindergarten “now you’ll play him and he’ll play you.” Don’t play with people. c. The Significance of Combining Empirical, Critical and Constructive Approaches This is not by itself very difficult. It only means that specific attention is given both to the facts of a case, and, equally explicitly, to what one wants to obtain. Facts may be criticized in the light of these values; approaches taken may be evaluated in terms of adequacy and viability; and, when they fall short of the goal, alternative proposals should be worked out. Brainstorming sessions17 can be geared to a concrete topic like an ongoing conflict, or be openended, inviting each participant to present his proposals for world change. The important aspect of this is to provide a setting in which participants have a chance to develop creative faculties constrained by empirical and critical considerations.18 9. World Universities and Peace Studies We see the world university as an effort to escape from the traditional straitjacket universities “of excellence” are put into when explicitly or implicitly assuming that they will serve the interests of the (elites of the) nation state that pays for them.19 The world university is an effort to create something transnational, where the loyalties of staff and students would be global rather than national. Thus, as a structure, it should be of particular interest for peace research which—however one would prefer to define it—is at least not seen as a means to further specific national interests incompatible with peace. The world university can be conceived of in at least three very different ways that do not exclude each other: as a concrete structure, a campus located somewhere in the world drawing its faculty and students from all corners and layers; as a network of interconnected universities, institutes, and other institutions for higher learning and research; or a university online, like the TRANSCEND Peace University. Obviously, the former can be some kind of headquarters for the latter, which would need some element of coordinating administration anyhow.



This is not to say that faculties of law are not perfectly capable of cooperating themselves by means of the appropriate professional association. But it is doubtful whether faculties of law and faculties of social science from different universities would be able to cooperate without some minimum central locus. The traditional loci of cooperation have been the university, for different disciplines in institutes located at the same place, or the association for people working within the same discipline at different places. The world university connecting different disciplines and places is something new and more difficult; as witnessed by its absence. Thus, the United Nations University in Tokyo is more a productive research network than a locus combining research with teaching. To design a curriculum for a world university of type I above is challenging and yet not particularly difficult. This would have to be done on a team basis, and one of the first to do so was the Inter-University Centre located in Dubrovnik, organized as an inter-university organization (as opposed to intergovernmental), and administered by the University of Zagreb in Croatia, where Dubrovnik is also located).20 That this could be meaningful for staff and students coming together from many places, across conflict barriers was hardly to be doubted; but not in itself terribly innovative. More challenging would be to work out something based on a world university of the second type. There is the already well-known formula of staff and students rotating clockwise and counter-clockwise within a set of cooperating institutes, usually on a bilateral, but sometimes also on a multilateral, basis. The difficulty with this formula is that only few persons get that opportunity to benefit from the diversity of approaches. But in the age of global and relatively inexpensive transportation another idea would be to provide mobile transportation between the institutes and let the mobility itself be a part of the educational message. This is not the same as the idea frequently found in US universities of having a “European campus” (or some other combination of “mother country” and “daughter continent”). The idea would rather be to build on a set of cooperating institutions for education and research, acquire some good means of transportation like a bus, a charter plane or an ocean-going ship, and provide for a stay of, say, one or two months at each place. Students and staff would at each place be part of the local teaching venture, but the latter would obviously also be geared to that particular visit. The important point is that the group is not kept apart, isolated from the local educational population—but as well as possible integrated with them. If the bus solution is made use of, the possibilities of using it for excursions in addition to transportation from place to place, excursions with an educational content, would be numerous.21 Obviously, this type of plan can easily be combined with what was already mentioned under (7) above. It could start with a summer school, and end


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

with a summer school, as a more integrative venture. It is generally assumed that very few places would have material to offer for more than two months, anyhow, and that, most institutions of higher learning only take this content and drag it out for two semesters, two years or even more. This telescoped type of education would probably be a pedagogically highly effective one. At the same time the local institutions should benefit a lot through the feedback they would get from staff and students increasingly many-sided in their outlook as they traverse the world range of basic perspectives, following their itinerary. Finally, the type III world university, on-line, like the TRANSCEND Peace University, is similar to the open air university but with more potential for being global rather than nation, given the range of the Internet as opposed to TV (with the exception of the Anglo-America world channels and their challengers).22 1.3.


With this arsenal of possibilities at one’s disposal, what then, can be communicated? The answer is very closely related to a conception of what peace research is about; only by keeping peace research, peace education, and peace action together that a strong formula for the content can be developed. One way of looking at it would be as follows, based on the distinction between five phases in any peace research project. Of course, there are divided opinions about this; many might agree with most, but probably very few would agree with all. The five phases of a research project are seen as follows:23 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Analysis; Goal-formulation; Critique; Proposal-making; and Action.

Analysis is what everybody would consider part of a peace education program: analysis of our present, real world, describing its basic facts to the extent they are relevant for peace problems, and at the same time pointing to major trends. The analysis would be dynamic in the sense of presenting a time perspective, as well as static in the sense of giving an image of such major factors as the war system and the preparation for war, and of everything related to problems of equity and freedom—both antonyms of dominance, but for different arenas and from different ideological traditions. Thus, this is the place where relevant facts will be presented and theoretically explained, having in mind that there is ways more than one theory for the same set of data.



If this were all peace studies would not differ from other social sciences and peace education would not be any different from education in, say, physics or geography. Hence, the next four points that add the special flavor to both of them. Goal formulation is an indispensable part of peace education. There has to be some concreteness, some explicitness in the idea of peace, the world we would like to see. It is not enough to say that peace is absence of something or the other; much more concrete images must be given. Peace research, being born inside the traditional empiricist tradition, whether of the conservative or progressive varieties, has not been good at this point. Rather, analysis has prevailed at the expense of goal-formulation, the latter being rejected rather summarily as “utopianism.” And yet it is exactly these kinds of images that throughout history have pulled people into great action, like the types of movements mentioned in the introduction.24 As a part of this aspect of peace research and peace education comes the general question of whether the goal is just any type of utopia, or a viable utopia? For instance, is it possible to have both absence of direct violence, equity in social interaction, and freedom for a considerable degree of human self-expression or self-realization? Or is it true, as some might assert, that of these three values we can only have two and we shall have to choose which two; or even, as the pessimists might assert, we can only have one, or possibly even none at all? This type of discussion is rarely found in any educational curriculum at any level, probably causing a tremendous crippling of individual and collective human imagination in search for a better future combining the uncombinable. Third, the critique. For any type of critique to be of any interest, both data and values have to be present, and they are made available in the first and second phases, respectively. The values then become like a net thrown over our poor world, leading to very concrete conclusions in terms of highly valueoriented language, where nobody would turn away from terms like “good” and “bad,” or terms considerably more explicit than that. This third phase is more than analysis; it is also diagnosis, based on the more static aspects of empirical analysis, and prognosis based on the more dynamic aspects. An effort should always be made to call the same dimensions by the same word, like freedom, misery, whether we describe the preferred world defined as a goal, or the criticized world of the present or, possibly even worse, futures—worse, that is, under the assumption that insufficiently active counterpressure is brought to bear on the present. After these three phases we would end up with images of three worlds, in terms of dimensions that can be used to define both the preferred world and the real world.25


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Examples of dimensions could be “degree of absence of direct violence” and “degree of absence of (various kinds of) structural violence”: exploitation, repression, alienation. That makes it possible to accommodate the real world, using data, the preferred world, the utopia, using values, and possibly also even more highly criticized world, a dystopia. To understand better the struggle from the real world toward utopia we need to understand what prevents the real world from becoming even worse, sliding even more into dystopia. There are such forces, like democracy at times, providing some stability. Fourth, proposal-making, about how to get from the real world to the preferred world. A question of finding a transition path, which, in turn, is a question of proposals about what to do, who should do it, when and where it should be done, how and why. Indeed, no part would be better for general participation than this one since there is so little tradition in the field that nobody is much more expert than anybody else. Any successful peace education program would make participants really feel the tension between the preferred and the real worlds, and the danger threatening from the rejected world—feel it so intensely that proposal-making becomes a necessity. This then leads into the fifth phase: peace action. One cannot suddenly interrupt, truncate a process because it can no longer be contained within articles and books, paper and pencil exercises and discussion phases, but is driven by its own inner necessity into something much more concrete: action. This does not imply that we would advocate actionism—like a major demonstration, service in peace keeping or peace building activity—as a part of all peace education programs. But we would advocate concrete discussions of concrete action, like a search for new forms of peace education, like the internship in a practiceoriented organization. In any other educational program it is usually taken for granted that something non-verbal belongs to the program: the laboratory exercises in chemistry, physics and biology; the visit to civic and social institutions as a part of any education in the institutions of one’s own society, or social work, and so on. Or, one could search other contexts, any social institution where conflict, violence and peace are relevant. This would be the point where peace education, peace action and peace research would really come together. For instance, pupils at a school might decide to recognize an incipient nation (like Bangladesh, East Timor, Montenegro, Palestine) before their own government does so. If thousands of schools did the same with clear peace criteria, this might be important nongovernmental foreign policy, and have a democratizing effect. In the concrete school situation, as already mentioned, there are many examples of structural violence, hence many areas in which problems of peace can be actualized, bullying being one. Traditional teaching of peace



studies has been studies of peaceful men (Lord Buddha, Jesus Christ, St. Francis of Assisi, Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Schweitzer, Martin Luther King Jr.), often with a heavy emphasis on their beliefs and attitudes rather than on their action and behavior. This approach focuses on actors rather than on structures, and hence be unacceptable from the point of view of peace studies which would argue both. Students may not only have demands concerning the content of school curricula (why do we not learn about our country’s military-industrial complex? about weapons export? about the true relations between rich and poor countries?) but also about school structure. A higher level of consciousness among the students will have the same effect at the secondary, high school, level of education as it already had at the tertiary, university, level in terms of strikes, boycotts, etc. to back up demands. And just as for the university level it will be referred to as “student unrest” and not as “teacher rest.” Like we have the unfortunate habit of talking about “activists” without also describing the (more numerous) “passivists.” 1.4.


Very often courses, seminars, discussions, etc. on peace bring up four very related topics: Development—which gives an opportunity to present basic values, basic trends, the state of affairs in the world and turn the discussion of peace towards positive peace, equity, harmony; Conflict—which gives an opportunity to discuss what happens when goals—values and interests—are in conflict, incompatible and discuss conflict creation, conflict dynamics, and conflict transformation and resolution; Peace—which gives an opportunity to discuss how development, and a creative approach to conflict, can come together in the fight against direct as well as structural violence; and Future—which makes us project all of this on the screen of the future, analyzing trends, making proposals for action. There is no set answer, that is contrary to autonomy in peace education. The role of peace education should not be exaggerated. Education may be a preparation for action. But it is a fundamental bias of intellectuals to believe that we human beings think first and then unleash our well-considered action. Very often we act first; and if it works, we may develop a theory about it; if it does not work, some rationalization. In either case we may make contributions to research. That does not mean that a much higher level or peace consciousness may not change this state of affairs. The fact is that we do not even know


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

what that would mean, what kind of world that would be. But it would certainly be a world where people would be less manipulable: and it is for that kind of world that peace education would be a contribution. NOTES 1.



4. 5.

6. 7.

A highly re-edited version of Johan Galtung (1975). Peace: Research, Education, Action. In Essays in Peace Research (Vol. I, pp. 317–333). Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers, originally delivered as lecture in 1971–72. See the impressive Burns, R. J., & Aspeslagh, R., Eds. (1996). Three Decades of Peace Education Around the World: An Anthology. New York and London: Garland for an excellent overview of the work done. Also see Werner Wintersteiner, Vedrana Spaji-Vrkas and Rüdiger Teutsch, eds., Peace Education in Europe: Visions and Experiences (Münster/New York/München/Berlin: Waxman, 2003); Francisco Gutiérrez, Educación como praxis política (México: Siglo veintiuno, 1984) and La Mediación Pedagógica para la Educación (San José: Popular, 1994); Magnus Haavelsrud, Education in Developments (Tromsö: Arena, 1996), to mention some. David L. Selsky made Integrative Peace Education: Training Peacemakers in Holistic Approaches to Self and World Transformation MA Thesis, Washington: American university, 2005. There is an important tradition in Israel, like Louis Oppenheimer, Daniel Bar-Tal and Amiram Raviv, Understanding Peace, Conflict and War: An Introduction. And then there is the towering background provided by Paulo Freire with his Education as a Practice of Freedom and The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. There are also journals in the field, like the Journal of Peace Education and PEACE EDUCATION: An *International Journal. A glaring exception is France, maybe still Napoleonic in its devotion to strategy rather than peace. Napoleon is seen as a strategic genius, yet he lost, not only at Waterloo, but in Egypt, Switzerland, Spain, Russia, and was a prisoner of war till his death. He is probably honored more for his Big Project, to bring the achievements of France as the French saw them, to the rest of Europe. And this is more compatible with strategic thinking than with peace since there is nothing equitable, symmetric, dialogical; about it. Another expression of this point is found in Johan Galtung, “Education for Peace,” Journal of World Education, September 1972. It might perhaps be pointed out that conceptions of development, perhaps also conflict, seem to be changing much more quickly than conceptions of peace—which still to many seem to be related to balance of power and disarmament ideas, without going much deeper into the origins of peacelessness.


8. 9.



12. 13. 14.




18. 19.


They are also sometimes known as “teaching machines”; but the old expression “manual” also enters here. The books Conflict Transformation By Peaceful Means, United Nations 1998 and 2000, mini-version 37 pp, maxi-version 189 pp are examples of books written that way. so is Transcend & Transform, London: PLUTO, Boulder CO: Paradigm Press; 2004. One difficulty with programmed teaching is that it is costly, and once much money has been invested, for instance, in a book that is very expensive in its production, the entire concept tends to become rigid. Hence there is much need for a search for cheap procedures. The manual written for the United Nations Development Programme, Conflict transformation By Peaceful Means combined exercises for beginners who were trained to become trainers with exercises one level higher, for the trainers of trainers in the same book (like on the left hand page, on the right hand page). The idea was to avoid one group sitting with something unavailable to the other group— make it more horizontal by combining it in one book. For an effort to do this as a media service, see Transcend Media Service, Peace channels may resemble regular TV channels but with peace focus. For a theory of this approach, see Johan Galtung, “Structural Analysis and Chemical Models,” in Methodology and Ideology, Copenhagen: Ejlers, 1977, chapter 6. An excellent proposal in this field was made by Vithal Rajan, a Canadian-Indian who later became very famous for his human rights work, for The Open-Air University, London, “War and Peace: A One Year Adult Education Course in Peace Theory”—but not accepted. England has problems with “peace”; for any country high on belligerence there is something subversive in the concept. For a discussion of these societies, see Galtung, “Pluralism and the Future of Human Society,” in Proceedings of the Second World future Studies conference, Tokyo: Kodansha, 1971. For a critique of the International Peace Academy, see editorials by Asbjörn Eide and Johan Galtung, Instant Research on Peace and Violence, 1971, pp. 79–83. The most promising approach here seems to be the International Games, in the tradition started by Harold Guetzkow. The idea was very simple: to ask all participants as a conclusion of four weeks with discussions of peace theory and peace practice to come up with some image of their ideal world and the steps needed to attain it. Since most people are asked to present their image of the present world and how to criticize and analyze it, it





23. 24.




More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

is not strange that there is an untapped reservoir in the direction indicated. For a concrete proposal combining the elements treated under this heading, see Johan Galtung, “Towards a World Peace Academy, A Proposal,” see Essays in Peace Research 1.14., p. 291. In Norway, for instance, an oath of loyalty to the King is required of university professors. Dopes that imply an oath of loyalty to an alliance of which the country is a member? Transcend Peace University (TPU) embodies this view. It is online, thus transborder and transcultural. It addresses beginners, trainers, and trainers for trainers. Everybody can apply so it is intergenerational. Its structure is nonviolent, there is no vertical division of labor, no exams and no grades but a very high level of horizontal interaction, where participants work together, developing consciousness about the surrounding world, and sharing their ideas about form and content. It stimulates transdisciplinary research by providing peace literature that can be used for diagnosis, prognosis and therapy in the name of creativity, concreteness and constructiveness. The Galtung-Institut for Peace Theory and Peace Practice in Grenzach, Germany, is the on-site carrier of TPU. It takes care of coordinating the administration. TPU students and others can meet there in person once a year for summer courses and tutorials. This initiative was headed by Professor Ivan Supek, and had a council of representatives from several universities. For an elaboration of this proposal, see Johan Galtung, “Training of Peace Specialists, A Proposal,” International Peace Research Newsletter, No. 2, 1968. See Johan Galtung, “Empiricism, Criticism, Constructivism: Three Approaches to Scientific Activity,” in Methodology and Ideology, chapter 2. However, a basic finding in the Images of the World in the Year 2000 published as a book with that title in 1976, coordinated at the European Social Science Center in Vienna, is exactly the very low level of future-oriented thinking, especially in the field of political affairs, according to the results of 9,000 interviews in 10 countries, 8 of them in Europe, with 200 questions. This is the basic idea of the social indicator movement: to present values as dimensions that also can be used for ordinary descriptive analysis.


SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES Obstacles or Facilities?

2.1. HOW TO SUCCEED IN PEACE EDUCATION WITHOUT REALLY TRYING Imagine this book was about health education. Of course it would deal with how to communicate insights in different types of diseases, pathologies, and the context, carriers, causes of the diseases, let us call them pathogens. And it would deal with different types of health, and the carriers, causes and contexts of health, let us call them sanogens. In short, with the dialectic between pathogens and sanogens. Sooner or later the book would then come to pathogens that are located in ourselves, in our ways of life, hopefully not only focusing on malnutrition and lack of exercise. And in our society, in our social context. And in our hospitals, and how they may themselves be pathogens (hospitalitis). And in our officially certified sanogens, the physicians, also at times pathogens (iatrogenic diseases). The basic idea would be that the pathogen/sanogen dialectic is manifold, and everywhere. We demand of physicians that they More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages 21–65 Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

do not smoke close to patients, or in public, or not at all, that they and their hospitals are impeccable in terms of hygiene, etc. And rightly so. So also with the dialectic between bellogens and paxogens, the carriers of violence and the carriers of peace. We can design and disseminate messages about them and their inter-relation. But, if the basic messages in the (deep) structure and (deep) culture of society, and of the very institutions used for peace education, schools and universities, are violent, which message gets the upper hand? The deeper, of course. Hence we have to learn how to read them. And that is the theme of this chapter, in general, then for schools, then for universities. According to clearly formulated resolutions from UNESCO, and from the First Special Session on Disarmament of the United Nations General Assembly (1978), Member States are supposed to take peace education and disarmament education seriously. That the United States takes it seriously is beyond doubt: This is one of the reasons why that particular country left UNESCO, not simply because of alleged maladministration, the feudal manners of the men on the top and “statism”—the supremacy of government over the private sector. They did not like what they saw. Of course, there is a paradox here: most schools in most countries belong to the public sector and are under governmental control, and governments very often pursue policies that are far from peaceful. And even if the intentions are peaceful, they pursue peace with means far from peaceful, like armament. So, how could any country go in for peace education, possibly contradicting the tune-calling master who pays them? A public school system in a nation-state is predominantly a mechanism for the transmission of the myth of the dominant nation: shared religion, language, history and geography; idiom, time and space. In this myth, the wars of the past will play a role. By the very fact that a nation-state exists and is capable of running a public school system, it follows that some of those wars, of liberation or not, were successful. Peace education with a generally supportive attitude to wars of liberation might be incorporated in a public school curriculum. But, one thing is our war of liberation, quite another are other people’s wars of liberation. Whereas ours was entirely legitimate, theirs are illegitimate, subversive, engineered from the outside. We hear this every day. Rather than the policies that gave rise to the birth of the nation state, the policies maintaining it in the system would be deemed proper for transmission to the next generation. After the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, the official formula in this connection has been “balance of power.” The balance of power thesis is neither quite true—a country may attack even if it is inferior, or it may abstain from attack even if it is superior, for the simple reason that there may be no motivation—nor quite false, of course superior power also deters, whether used for defense or for retaliation.



We are, however, not dealing here with peace research, rather with national myths and self-assertiveness. Hence, when governments are admonished to launch peace education in their schools, the most likely outcome will be some effort to justify balance of power policies engaged in by that very government. In practice, this means justification of armament and the whole military apparatus, as well as policies based on certain images of conflict formations in the global environment held by the top establishment of that nation-state. Peace, yes, but with security, based on strength = force = self-assertiveness. How could it be otherwise? How can a Ministry of Education come up with a curriculum to be taken seriously in primary and secondary schools that will contradict the major assumptions of such heavy institutions as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense, not to mention the Military itself? A private school might do this, possibly at the risk of losing public subventions on which it might heavily depend, meaning in practice that the school is not that private after all. You are “public” to the extent you have access to public funds. And this would be even more the case if the nation-state is a member of an alliance with a superpower at the top, built on the usual explicit or implicit agreement between governments of the “I protect you, but you will be loyal to me” variety. A military system depends for its efficacy on a high level of allegiance from the citizens, a military alliance system extends this allegiance transnationally (not only inter-governmentally). There will always be conflicts, dissent from within an alliance. But to bring countervailing theories and concept into the public schools system is a challenge too obvious even for democratic nation-states to contemplate. Conclusion: peace education is a beautiful vision, one of those lights shining from the 1970s and early 1980s, fading, and then disappearing when confronted with the harsh reality as indicated above. Government do not want their myths exploded; governments run schools—hence, there will be no such thing. And that dilemma leads to the obvious question: Is Peace Education Nevertheless Possible? On the one hand, there are the demands of the Establishments in our countries, built into their systems. On the other hand, there is the despair of the victims, past-present-future, of wars, the peoples all over the world. This reaches far into governmental circles, including the heavy institutions mentioned above, the policies on which peace is supposed to be based but simply do not work. People usually see this before researchers do, and researchers before the politicians: offensive weaponry in a country with even the most “peaceful” intention of securing peace through a guaranteed capability of retaliation tends to stimulate equally offensive weaponry in the other country. And that other country may have exactly the same motivation.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

The result is an arms race; then fear sets in and there is an effort to control the arms race, even to undertake some steps in the direction of disarmament. These efforts fail because the total destruction potential is not at all reduced. Only some weapons systems are given up, with others more than substituting for them. And then tensions, even confrontations, come into the picture along the edges of systems in conflict, and finally the result is there: a war, even a major one. Much evidence points in exactly this direction, and much theory. The realists are the people who see this. The idealists of this world are the people who deny it and continue pursuing age-old policies from a period before ideologies pitted systems against each other, in a much sharper way than ever before. With the exception, a notable one, of the religious wars in Europe that led precisely to the dubious Peace of Westphalia buying peace among religions at the expense of wars in the state system). People want to be informed, and have a right to be informed. Governments want to indoctrinate, and so do the more aggressive peace movements. The latter may be as convinced by such one-factor theories as total disarmament, one-world government, as the governments by their balance of power, with “balance”—as mentioned—sometimes meaning “parity” like in mechanics, quite often “superiority,” like in shopkeeping—“being in the black.” And both parties may be equally convinced that peace depends on how successful they are in indoctrinating the young. At this point, a distinction implicitly made use of above should be brought out more explicitly: isn’t there a difference, when discussing all of this, between a dictatorship and a democracy? There is, and it is crucial in the whole debate, although the difference is more important in the rhetoric of democracy than in our sad reality. This is where experience from many ministries of education about peace education enters. In a dictatorship like the former Soviet Union, we would assume “peace education” to be governed by the following five principles: • A government would evaluate the curriculum, and decide; • Only “official” peace movements would be invited to participate in this process—not “dissidents”; • The answers to the basic question: “how to achieve peace” would be given in advance and be in line with governmental policies; • The basic assumptions would not be considered debatable, learning, not discussion, is encouraged; and • The whole exercise would be surrounded by an atmosphere of nervousness, anxiety, fear of being challenged.



The main consideration of the Establishment would be how to guarantee, through “peace education” that the younger generation will not only come to the same conclusions as the Establishment, but will arrive at them on the basis of the same premises, such as “our experiences in the Second World War.” If both premises and conclusions are the same, the indoctrination is much more complete than if only the conclusions coincide. There will always be the risk that new premises might disturb the thought process and lead to different conclusions. What, then, would we expect of peace education in a democracy? Before we discuss the answer, which in a true democracy obviously is the negation of the five points just given, some reflections on the nature of democracy might be in order. Of course, democracy is much more than a system of elections and a way of selecting leaders of the country, making them responsible to the people indirectly, through the mechanisms of parliaments. This is only parliamentocracy. A deeper democracy has much in common with the scientific process. Good research presupposes that final conclusions are not given in advance, only as hypotheses, and that any assumption can be questioned. So does good democracy. But the difference is also basic: research is and remains elitist since special skills are needed, whereas democracy is based on the assumption that everybody can participate in this community of people engaged in search and re-search, always anxious to improve the condition of the majority of the members, potentially of all. It is this particular capacity of democracy which makes it possible to adjust the course, to change not only the speed but also the direction in which a society travels through history. A change may be for the better or for the worse. There is no built-in guarantee that the course chosen by the majority, after extensive debate, is necessarily better for the people as a whole that the course charted by governing elites. But to this another argument can be added: people grow in the process of participating in community/society/world affairs. The challenges work on them, also as the right to learn from mistakes. Voltaire once proposed an argument in favor of monarchy: in order to arrive at wise decisions, all that was needed was to educate one person, the monarch, whereas in a democracy one had to educate quite a lot of people, the whole demos. And peace education is precisely education for the participation of the society in the world system, and indispensable training for a system that wants to refer to itself as a democracy. Of course, Voltaire is right: education of the monarch (by Voltaire himself?) is low cost, and education of the functionaries in the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense—a couple of hundred, at most a couple of thousand people-—only a little more. Peace education involves educating


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

of not only thousands, but millions of people. But democracy cannot function without it unless one accepts what so many people seem to accept: democracy is for domestic affairs not for foreign policy, not to mention world affairs—the latter is for the selected few, for the elites, for the specialists, the initiated. And this is not only because the issues are so “difficult” but because there are basic “national interests” at stake, some of them even secret, presumably because they do not survive exposure to daylight. Look at the five points again, experienced very often with the former Soviet Union and its Soviet Peace Committee. They also apply to Big democratic Powers like the USA, UK and France. The negation of the points would be a process for elaboration of a curriculum where all kinds of organizations within a country would participate together, including the ministries mentioned and the more aggressive, single-minded peace movements. The debate would go “public,” become accessible. The result would be a curriculum with no conclusions given in advance, and with an invitation to the students to question all assumptions. They will then come up with a new and better curriculum, and so on and so forth. In other words, using democracy as a research process. And rather than being surrounded by nervousness, the whole process should be one of delight, of exploring together the processes of world politics, in general, with peace and development as the goals of those processes, in particular. Of course, this is easily said, but not so easily done as so much of what might enter the curriculum will be seen as “controversial.” That word comes up very often in this context, and seems to stand for anything with which the Establishment does not agree. A “controversy” differs from the more plebeian “disagreement”—which ordinary people might run into—by having the Establishment as party to the disagreement. Disagreements can be handled by the Establishment pronouncing who is right. A controversy is more problematic since there is even an element of subversiveness present, and no super-Establishment that can pass the final judgment. Hence, the obvious way out: the Establishment imposes its view, puts its stamp on “peace education” as “national security education.” The result, even in the best of democracies, is remarkably similar to that of a dictatorship; the only difference might be that the level of nervousness is even higher. After all, there are some soft strings in democracy establishments, some democratic inclinations, even some elements of bad consciousness about the dictatorial way in which foreign and security affairs are run. However, there is another way out that should be acceptable precisely in a democracy. After surveying the whole area the parties engaged in the process may even agree as to what is controversial and what is not. In the latter there might be data about the history and geography of warfare since the Second World War, the history and geography of arms trade and arms races, the results or non-results of disarmament conferences, information



about international organizations, guides to important theories of peace, of development, of human right. It might not even be so difficult to commission books in these areas if they just give facts. Theories of contemporary peace research may be surrounded by controversy, but how about, say, Immanuel Kant, or Buddha, or Jesus Christ? And equally important is a list of controversial topics on which the parties might agree. Do balance of power policies lead to peace or war? Do disarmament conferences lead to disarmament or armament? How about the policies of our own government on terrorism, are they peace policies or mainly war policies? Where are the roots of peace and war to be located? Are they inside persons, in their genetic make up or personality; between persons in their relations in institutions like family, school and work; inside societies, in their class structure or policy-making structure; between societies the way international relation are run; within regions, particularly regions having the same civilizational codes; between regions more based on political and economic interests like the former East-West or North-South relations; or within the world system itself, e.g. in the way international organizations tending towards world government are constructed? The reader will sense that these categories do not exclude each other, and will probably have some ideas about where sources of war and sources of peace might be located, or have their point of gravity (hint to the reader as peace researcher: this may not necessarily be at the same place, or places). The way out, then, becomes quite simple: teach the non-controversial in the more classical school manner; leave the controversial topics to debate. What could be more democratic, what could be more in line with Western, rational, democratic rules of rational discourse and search for solutions than teachers who enter the classroom with some material, much of it cut from newspapers, even from the same day, presenting different views for the students and then have the students debate, with the teacher participating, playing the difficult role of presenting honestly his or her own views and at the same time animating the debate? The latter is probably best done precisely when the teacher is honest and comes out with his/her own position. The students might then make a report, come to a conclusion, including that there is more than one conclusion. Of course, in this process many things will be said that are not necessarily pleasant to Establishment ears. The capacity to tolerate this, to let it happen even in public schools, is a rather important benchmark of democracy. And this is where the skepticism re-enters. Not that the government itself will necessarily intervene. But groups of parents may, because they disagree with something that someone has said, knowing that the disagreement is at


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

the same time a controversy, and that they for that reason will be protected by, or at least not attacked by, the government. So they may safely come out in the open attacking the teachers, the schools, where the “incident” occurred, like questioning the nuclear policy of NATO, a NATO country, or the role of the Red Army in a WTO country during the Cold War; the interventionist policies of the New NATO etc. And that, of course, might make us turn to private schools again, presumably less vulnerable to governmental, explicit or implicit, pressure. One such school, perhaps one of the best secondary schools in Europe, the Ecole Internationale de Genéve, started some decades ago a program in world peace studies, well endowed with a grant from a transnational corporation. The program was of short duration and was eliminated, possibly due to some pressure, and fear that it could be controversial. The school is a special one catering to international civil servants—most of them in the UN system—and the functionaries of transnational corporations with headquarters in the Geneva area and elsewhere. Where the former might be in favor of a relatively open debate, the latter might not. But how is it possible in these days of controversial globalization to discuss anything of relevance to peace, war and development without looking into the role played by international capital? Another possibility might be the Rudolf Steiner schools found all over in the First World countries. The characteristic feature is encouragement of debate, of self-awareness, of social consciousness, of artistic expression. The graduates from such schools may be somewhat short on very concrete knowledge, but extremely long on three rather important aspects of learning: a sense and grasp of aesthetic dimensions, ability to formulate and verbalize, and a burning desire to learn more. A shortcoming, however, is that schools based on Rudolf Steiner’s ideas not only of pedagogy but also of cosmology and society, might be handicapped by one of the weaknesses of that particular genius. He had fascinating views on nature, human beings, societies, on culture—and not only of religion but certainly also of language and art—but very little insight, or interest, or interesting thoughts about the world system. In addition, the schools, brilliantly organized and also financed, may cater to the interests of a middle-class bourgeoisie with esoteric, spiritual inclinations overshadowing political consciousness and interest. Conclusion: Hopeless, So Let Us Nevertheless Try? Because, in spite of all these difficulties, peace education is destined to come in our age of globalization simply because peace will have to be globalized, not only nationalized by some aggressive nation-states. The school system cannot in the longer run close itself to matters of major importance for the populations at large, as witnessed by the extent and the depth of



the peace movements from the 1980s on, culminating so far with the world wide manifestation against the USA-UK aggression on Iraq on February 15 2003, involving maybe 12 million people, in 600 sites around the world. People simply do not take what they hear from governments and corporate media for granted. They want to know more about peace matters. If the school doesn’t offer any opportunity for more knowledge, questions and answers, debate, then the party to suffer most will be the school itself, and those running the schools. Leaving out what matters to people, like sex education for a very long time, only makes the school system less credible. In a democracy, people will find their knowledge elsewhere, in a process that has gone particularly far in the Federal Republic of Germany with its incredible production of books and magazines in this field, easily available, produced everywhere and consumed everywhere. The result is a very high level of insight in the population at large, often much above the level found in Establishment circles, even among governmental functionaries who should know better. This may even be the best way of learning: it is education rather than schooling, with no public authority, no officialdom having been permitted to spray its layer of dust over books that have passed the filters of the ministries of education and been authorized, proclaimed suitable even for innocent youth. And what did dictatorial East Germany do during the Cold War? Exactly the same, learning, for instance, about nonviolence from their fellow Germans in the West. Peace education became very similar to sex education: highly attractive, absorbed by young people eager for some safe practice— even more attractive when unauthorized. The trouble is also that the school will look anachronistic if this challenge is not taken seriously. And democracy will suffer from not legitimizing the concern with peace and the open debate that is the condition for this concern to be processed in the direction of practical, innovative, peace policies. It is not so much that in a school setting people will develop new or better ideas. Rather the point is that when the school withholds its stamp of approval from this subject of concern the public might draw the conclusion that the field is still off-limits, so better not engage in it. The same, of course, applies to the universities: the moment they have a chair of peace studies and master program, as many do today, that field becomes “recognized” and people react to it in a different way. And, may we not also hope that the teaching of peace education could contribute to something more than legitimacy, not only to education, but possibly even to more of that scarce commodity, peace? Certainly, and both at the level of the primary school and the secondary school, not only at the university level. Let us try to go into more detail.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

In primary school we would probably be less concerned with the details of post-Second World War history, or any longer historical perspective for that matter, and more concerned with what is close to the pupils in space and time. Maybe the focus should be more on micro-level conflicts and their resolution. And they are numerous: in family, at school if not yet at work, because of the way our societies try to keep children innocent by keeping them away from the workplace as long as possible. The teachers should be equipped with some insights in conflict theory at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and to some extent intrasocietal levels— leaving the intersocietal (inter-state and inter-nation), intraregional, interregional and intraglobal to secondary education (the reader will recognize the categories used above for the possible location of the sources of peace and the sources of war). Special emphasis could be on the roots of conflict and their expressions in attitude and behavior (prejudice and hatred, discrimination and violence; but also inner and outer apathy); and various processes of conflict transformation and resolution. Very quickly the teacher will recognize his/her own needs for conflict theory in order to engage in better conflict practice, and also discover the extent to which conflicts tend to be swept under the carpet, not only in the family and the school, but certainly also in the workplace, the school in the case of the teachers. The lower level members of the systems are shown a smooth surface, the higher levels rarely admitting major problems or conflicts before the solution is at hand. This is the classical way of non-learning, of not learning to be, of not tapping the capacity to learn. Much better would be for teachers and students to come up with examples of conflicts from some of their own personal situations, even conflicts that still hurt, put them on the table literally speaking, and discuss solutions. And maybe this should be done a number of times before the teacher carefully tries to draw conclusions, to systematize and organize. Conflict consciousness should lead to a much broader repertory of conflict resolution processes, and hence to much more mature human beings, precisely the material out of which better democracies can be made. In secondary schools we might go further, higher up in the hierarchies of social complexity, further away from the here and now, into social and world spaces. There will be sufficient material available from history and “civics”; enough to discuss. A particularly useful exercise might be counterfactual history: what might have been done to save the Roman Empire if you consider that effort worthwhile? What might have happened if Franz Ferdinand had not travelled to Sarajevo? What should the countries around Nazi Germany or militarist Japan have done in the 1930s?



A less dogmatic, less empirical view of history might lead to higher levels of social imagination, and social imagination is also the material out of which constructive peace policies can be made. At the highest level of the French/German Gymnasium/lycée, close to the Abitur/baccalaureat, quite complicated problems may be discussed: how would you conduct a disarmament conference where two powers each have three weapons systems with different profiles as to what they can destroy, as opposed to a conference where three powers have two different weapons systems with different profiles? Given that one of them wants superiority, one of them parity? They would immediately be ahead of disarmament negotiators who untrained approach the matter in an amateurish manner, with narrow views of the security interests of their own nation at the top of their minds. Some mental preparation during the school days might be helpful. Then, very importantly: how do these problems look from the point of view of different civilizations? Why are there more wars in Christianity and Islam than in Buddhism? Why are Inuits so peaceful? What would a world of Buddhist Inuits look like? Twelve years at school should have given the students more than enough material to reflect on such issues; peace education would cup this by demanding of them mature, goal-oriented reflections. Provided, that is, that peace education is not used for indoctrination, by the Establishment or by the peace movements, through over-eager teachers, we might in some years get a reservoir of people with increased awareness, and increased curiosity. And those are we the kind of people to draw upon when states and governments get stuck in their zero sum games. They will certainly not have the answers to all these problems, nor do we always have them in peace research. What we have in peace research is the knowledge that often conventional wisdom is more conventional than wise, and usually blatantly wrong and self-serving, that positive ideas about what to do are few and far between as witnessed by the scarcity of good peace proposals when important conflicts reach a violent phase. We need a reservoir of people with reservoirs of ideas to draw upon, a Gross National Idea Product, a GNIP. Of course, this alone makes many people feel that peace researchers are ideological: they reject what is conventionally held to be true. When conventions are backed by solid interests like in countries tied up in alliances with superpowers—not to mention by the superpowers themselves, and even more so when there is only one of them, undeterred by the other, or by heavily militarized countries—then there will be difficulties, not only for people’s education, but also for peace research. So, regardless of how intricate all these problems are: let us go ahead! We do not need the answer to all the problems indicated in this section, not to mention problems not touched upon, to start trying. The best way of get-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

ting insight into the problem is through practice. The ball is in the court of the Ministries of Education. It has been placed there not only by popular movements in general and peace movements in particular, but also by intergovernmental organizations of major significance. It is now for these ministries to take up the challenge beyond (important) banalities about democracy and human rights. And sooner rather than later, because many are now watching rather eagerly what does or does not happen.



Above the major focus in our discussion of what impedes and what facilitates peace education was society at large; in this section the focus will be on schools and schooling. The goal of education goes far beyond education in the narrow sense of schooling: as emphasized above it becomes a question of what kind of society we want to reproduce in the schools designed for educational purposes, and what kind of society we want to see reinforced by the schools. Imagine we want a society that is more gentle, less vertical, less atomized, less bent on processing people, less concerned with making people substitutable for each other. On purpose, we formulate the goal modestly, only in terms of less and more. We might also talk in terms of societal forms that are horizontal, based on solidarity, on autonomy and general participation. We might even say, more peaceful. But let us stick to the modest formulations and speculate about what kinds of changes in education might be conducive to that kind of society. In so doing, we are obviously operating on two levels: how to negate unfortunate reproduction aspects, and how to negate unfortunate reinforcement aspects of the current system. We could now proceed item by item, starting with the reproduction of verticality inside schools, speculating on the type of changes that might bring about the negation wanted. However, there is never any simple oneto-one correspondence in social affairs. A change will have impact on more items than one, some of the effects may be opposite to the direction intended, and so on. All we know for sure is that reduction and reinforcement are social realities, up to a point. Hence, we shall prefer to present a list of changes as such, and try to speculate on their effects, particularly since these changes have a certain inner logic that also has to be respected. Nevertheless, we shall start with a fundamental change that has particular bearing on verticality, processing, substitutability and sorting. The change suggested is not structural, it has to do with ideology, one might even say with deep ideology, cosmology, reflecting the way in which we conceive of human nature. In a liberal society, individuals have to be



ranked in our mind in order to produce compatibility with the vertical structure in society; and structural and ideological changes in this field have to go hand in hand. One of them cannot be carried out without the other, but follows as an automatic consequence. 1. A New Ideology of Human Differentiation—Taste Rather than Talent A basically new educational ideology would be needed for almost any change to be mentioned to be meaningful. Could we imagine emphasizing taste or interest more than talent? And a society where tastes are more horizontal, and talent is considered less basic, more like height, to a large extent innate, even inherited? Could we celebrate a person in such a way that the talent is deemphasized and taste emphasized? And instead of a ranking scale for talent celebrate a vast variety, deep diversity, in tastes? Mental-manual, artistic-technical? It cannot be denied that at any given point in time there are some people who do something better than others. However, • When doing something else the ranking order may change, and • Given more equal opportunities all rankings of individuals may become quite different. This is about as far as contemporary liberal society has come in critiquing talent ranking: make it multidimensional, and purify it through the condition of equal opportunity. But the equal opportunity is taken from the methodology of experiments: in order to compare the strength of materials expose them to the same test under the same conditions (pressure, temperature, etc.) The net result is not less but more concern with rank, and higher level of validity in the sorting than under present social conditions, leaving those who are sorted out without defenses. “You had equal opportunity” makes them defenseless. Instead of these two questions to talent ideology we might think in terms of two others that could be more productive if equality and equity are the goals, like in peace-building: • The idea that potential talent is about the same in all, but has to be developed; and • That the key to talent development lies in its use, through challenge, and opportunity to take on the challenge. According to this differences in talent would be seen as artificial, produced by social conditions that distribute challenge, and the opportunity to use talent, unevenly, e.g. through the patterns of a fundamentally vertical division of labor.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

But imagine that the conditions of development through challenge are realized for all, and that talent shows an overall increase accompanied by an increasing dispersion in talent, or at least not by a decrease. What could we then fall back upon? The UN Declaration of Human Rights. People are declared to equal in human rights regardless of characteristics, and that of course includes talent. That it includes taste is obvious, but talent is less obvious. This declaration has had profound impact on the social order, and still constitutes a basis for social change according to that fundamental value of equality; the extension of voting rights to all being only one example. Similarly, a corollary of the idea that all people are basically equal in talent would be equal salary to all, except on the basis of such external characteristics as seniority or position in the life-cycle. Since people probably need most money in early marriage, when starting a home and family, it may well be that the correlation with seniority should be negative—which it also partly is, retirement pay usually being lower than regular pay. Thus, a new ideology can probably be founded on the basis of one hypothesis, and one value assumption, or both: if one fails, the other might still serve as a basis. It should be emphasized that they are both compatible with the fundamental values of equality and optimism where human future is concerned. 2.

Abolition of Examinations and Abolition of Vertical Sorting

When something similar to schooling is made use of for people who are still defined as Children, or for people who have already entered Work or Retirement, examinations are usually not included in the program, neither in the kindergartens nor in the countless courses offered the adult and the retired populations. Or rather: if they are included it might be for pedagogical rather than for sorting purposes. They serve as points of concentration for teaching and learning activity, as a way in which the pupil-student can check his own progress and the teacher-professor his, rather than as a way in which the teacher-professor can check the pupil-student. If there is any competition then with oneself as self-improvement. This pedagogical use of examinations depends on how useful they actually are for the purposes of learning. And that is the old problem of means becoming an end: to be clever at examinations can become a goal in its own right. We may end up producing examination-competence rather than life-competence. The abolition of exit exams would make children-students-people more equal, or at least as equal when they leave as when they enter school. If there still is a need and desire for sorting it could take the form of entrance examinations instead. Such exams are potentially more relevant because they are geared to the particular needs of that organization or institution,



and further work towards more horizontality will have to take place within the organization itself. Schools should not be a machine producing social verticality, but should—like love, friendship, family life and leisure activities—be kept out of it as much as possible. And not only because of the agony of exams, but also because they transfigure pedagogical activity and because the gradient of forgetting after the exam is so steep, probably even steeper that the gradient of learning before it. To this it may be objected that all kinds of cram schools would emerge, like in Japan, training, even processing, people for entrance examinations. This is an evil because it tends to have the same distorting effect, but that should not serve as an excuse for keeping examinations and grading. Rather, it should serve as a good reason for exploring the conditions under which the sorting of applicants for a vacant job could take place after they had shown their worth on the job for some time, or by constantly redesigning work so that there is a better correspondence between demand for and supply of jobs. An example of the latter would be a return to more labor-intensive forms of production. But a more fundamental approach would be the general idea of learning-on-the-job, and of shaping the farm-factory-firm-institute according to the skills and interests of those who work in it rather than vice versa. 3.

Freedom of Educational Choice

A remarkable feature of the schooling system is that in spite of the individualism of Western societies there is so little opportunity for individual choice according to taste. Or more correctly: there is much freedom at the kindergarten and preschool levels, an unstructured activity with lots of initiatives left to the children themselves; and some freedom of choice at the college and university levels. It is at the levels of elementary, junior high, and senior high schools that the processing model is most pressing: the curriculum is pre-prepared for the pupils rather than chosen by them. Not only is there little freedom of choice, but the individualism idea expresses itself as fragmentation rather than as diversity. With standardized curricula and low level of choice the difference between the students emerging from a schooling process would be in terms of amount of knowledge acquired rather than kind of knowledge. But there are two empirical models of alternative schooling processes available: kindergarten and college-university. Would it be possible to combine the playfulness of a non-authoritarian kindergarten with the freedom of choice built into, for instance, a US college system, and make it a viable basis for primary and secondary school levels? We think so, and would like to make some suggestions in that direction.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

The basic idea is very simple: let each school present a number of units or building blocks from which the pupils can pick themselves, constructing their own curriculum. These building blocks could be conceptually organized along a horizontal axis according to subjects: languages, mathematics, physical and natural sciences, social studies, humanities, arts, various types of manual and vocational skills, physical education and so on; and along a vertical axis according to level (elementary, intermediate, advanced). With M fields of study and N levels this would yield M x N units, and it would be the task of a central schooling authority to see to it that each school is in a position to offer all or most of these units. As a matter of fact, it might even be best if all three or four school levels were combined and so-called adult education added to it, keeping different age groups together as much as possible. It goes without saying that more academic and more vocational subjects should be offered under the same roof. The pupil selects and constructs his own curriculum, with some constraints on the choice. It may have to satisfy a rule of diversity, for instance that vocational units, or academic units, should not constitute less that one third of the total choice. Thus, he who is heading for carpentry would add a sizeable amount of languages, social studies, physics and mathematics, and she who is headed for architecture would add carpentry and welding, together with practice in construction work. The underlying idea would be to contribute to bridge-building between mental and manual work, making both job rotation and job reconstruction possible as ways of building horizontal societies. The most radical suggestion in this connection would be to dispense with all three considerations and simply see a school as a resource available to all the citizens as a birthright, something they may attend and hopefully enjoy according to their inclinations. They pick the units they want, subject to the rule of diversity, may even skip some of the elementary levels after a certain maturity of study has been attained, and with the help of a little self-study combined with discussion groups with other students in the same situation. One might say that the birthright would entitle them to a certain number of units, given to them in the form of a non-transferable set of coupons that they might make use of any time during their life span. This would actually mean that most people would be in the process of education throughout their lives, never classifiable as having completed this or that. That would have some important implications for the sorting aspect of schooling. For even if examinations were abolished, people might still be ranked according to the school level attained, or the number of units completed. It would be very difficult to eliminate this factor completely. But



a society where people at any time could add to their educational record would make any classification less permanent than today. Less radical formulas would be flexibility where the idea of finishing school is concerned. Instead of a rule like completion after X years there could be an interval between, say, X – 2 and X + 2 years. This would permit pupils to adjust the speed at which they are flowing through the system to their own individual needs and capacities rather than to exams passed, and without being stigmatized for that reason. Thus, a university student in a tolerant university system would not be stigmatized if he uses only three or seven years rather than five, but if he exceeds ten years he might be labeled a semester-elephant” or “eternal student.” Similarly, there could be some flexibility with number of units like an interval rather than a point on a numerical scale. The important thing would be to keep the concept of completion vague, more like adult education institutions which people attend and leave, and nobody is very much concerned with how many courses the person completed. The focus is on participation and enrichment, and the field of study as expression of taste. And the same would apply to the idea of a major: it could also be an interval, not the number 1; no major at all, two majors, three majors... The person with no majors at all might become a key person in our confusing society, the famous “generalist,” as also the person with four majors. Why not? In the idea of freedom of choice there would not only be the element of freedom of composition, but also the freedom of time order. In other words, the units should be composed in such a way that there would be a minimum of constraints on the time sequence, of the type “in order to take course B3, one has to complete A1, B2, C1 and D1.” One might leave this to the pupils to decide: they might discover shortcuts, new combinations, the need for self-study, and discover that freedom of choice is also the freedom to make fundamental mistakes and to learn from these mistakes. When pupils compose their own individual curricula it is obvious, from a purely administrative point of view, that there will be holes in the agenda. The conventional model of schooling as something that takes place every weekday form 8:30 am to 3 pm, or something like that, can only be maintained under the condition of standardized processing. But there are few things one should fearless than these holes since they can be used for self-study, discussion groups among pupil—and a basic condition would be that all schools would have facilities for such purposes—not to mention for out of school activities, such as work. That this should be combined with more theoretical study is obvious.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

In other words, what we are arguing is a much more flexible attitude with regard to time: instead of the highly concentrated, densely packed educational experience we would argued in favor of a dilution of this along the time dimension, with plenty of holes every day, week, month, year. One way of adding to this flexibility would be for pupils to move more from one school to the other. Although all schools should offer the same minimum set of units (so as not to disadvantage pupils in more peripheral parts of the country) schools should also be encouraged to add according to local facilities. Schools should be similar enough to permit transfer of pupils as well as teachers, yet dissimilar enough to make this transfer a new educational experience. Thus, it is felt that changes in this direction would play up to individual taste and diversity, to a non-alienated educational experience, and play down any possibility of a lasting sorting of people through the systematic use of schooling processes for that purpose. But there are deeper aspects of such changes to be elaborated below. Deschooling through Deprofessionalization of Teaching Ivan Illich launched the slogan of “deschooling,” pointing to the ritualistic aspect of the schooling experience and the discriminatory use made of diplomas. We would like to carry the idea a little bit further, partly by pointing out a concrete process through which deschooling could take place, partly by transforming Illich’s point from a brilliant attack on present schooling to a more positive vision of alternative systems. Just as much as examinations have no parallels in real society and only are similar to themselves, schools also exist in some type of social vacuum, being dissimilar from the rest of society except in fundamental structure. We have argued in favor of the part-time pupil/student, so why not also argue also in favor of the part-time teacher/professor? This would be a person who is only partly engaged in teaching and in addition to that holds some other position in society, drawing from that experience in the activity as an educator. Maybe retired. Complementary to that notion would be the idea of society in general as a joint educational experience. Imagine a farm-factory-firm-institute—the names of organizations in various sectors of economic activity—visited by pupils-students wanting to supplement Education with Work. For this to be meaningful, those who work there on a more regular basis would be not only willing but also able to add a pedagogical dimension to their daily life. They would have to engage in some reflection on how their knowledge, insight and skills can be transferred to others, including not only the technical aspects of their job but also the whole culture that goes with it, the subtle web of ideas and relations spun around any type of work.



In other words: teachers should no longer have any monopoly on teaching, that should be a shared concern evenly distributed in society at large. No doubt this may be counterproductive from the point of view of some narrowly conceived norms of efficiency, but highly effective as a means of social integration. The most important way of deprofessionalizing the teacher, however, would be to make the learner a teacher through the combined operation of self-study and discussion groups. And this is where the structure of eating rather than the structure of education comes in as a helpful metaphor: eating typically takes place in a multiplicity of forms, from the autonomy of the person who helps him or herself, via the horizontality of a family or group preparing a meal together, to the verticality of a restaurant where one picks from prepared courses and the authoritarian structure of the canteen offering only one meal for all. To introduce this variety to everybody would imply such architectural changes in our underused homes as studies in addition to kitchens, with shelves as something built into new apartments like cupboards, and so on. It would also point in the direction of the educational cafeteria and restaurant where people would simply enter, singly or in groups, sit down by their table (which might even be a Stammtisch to which they would come day after day, week after week), ordering educational material from the local “teacher” whose task it would be to provide them with appetizing educational “courses” from the kitchen storage (is the double meaning of that word incidental?) In a sense that would be more of a reprofessionalization than deprofessionalization of the teacher: the teacher as a person who facilitates a discussion rather than as the sender of a message to be received by the pupils, as the cause of an effect that takes place inside them. Of course, there would always be room for classical teaching, particularly of knowledge and skill that are the answers to problems for which there seems to be only one solution—like how to conjugate German verbs. But there is little doubt that a completely new pedagogical role is in the process of formation, and that it can only be embedded in a new educational structure if it is to be meaningful—as pointed out by Danilo Dolci and Paulo Freire. It may be that the best course is to design the course—pupils and teachers together—like the chef who prefers cooking to eating. Society still segregates childhood from education from work and does the same to retired people. Time to desegregate. A More Flexible Time Cosmology To be more precise: we mentioned in the section on freedom of educational choice that much of the current education structure is based on the assumption that Education is an interval between Childhood and Work,


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

and that one of the rationales for this particular time order is the suggested analogy between physiological growth and talent manifestation. Education has to come late enough to serve the purpose of valid sorting, yet early enough to be a preparation for work. This preparation is not only in terms of knowledge acquired and skills imparted, but also in terms of structures to be internalized. Above we have mentioned the idea of interspersing Education and Work, which would only mean to carry further what has already taken place in many societies with the institution of adult education or re-education. However, there are also two other phases of the life cycle: Childhood and Retirement. How can they be combined with Education? We would then define Childhood as some type of irresponsible playfulness, as simple Being, and Retirement as the same but with a much higher element of responsibility. Retirement must then be distinguished from senility which would be rather similar to Childhood, an idea which may also be said to be indicated by the term life cycle. There are two ways of answering the question just asked: to bring Education into Childhood and Retirement, and to bring elements of what is typical of Childhood and Retirement into Education. Let us look at both. The first would bring us in the direction of lifelong education, starting in early childhood and stretching way into retirement. But there is a difference between what has been developed here and the standard concept of permanent education: education should not be seen as permanent, but rather as intermittent, something that comes in phases and intervals, and these phases and intervals are not contiguous, continuous. One of the most dramatic forms of structural violence built into the present educational system is the institutionalization of children and adolescents, for periods as long as 12, 16 years, marginalizing them by taking them out of general social circulation, isolating them in schools/universities. But the idea of filling the gaps in an education schedule with Work, indicated under Freedom of Educational Choice above, is insufficient and by far too puritan. Why not also reappearing intervals of Childhood, of playful activity, completely non-instrumental forms of being? And, more problematically, how could one build this into the educational experience itself, something very different from highly non-humorous, profoundly critical, discussion groups about such topics as “the social implications of teaching arithmetic rather than graph theory in elementary mathematics courses.” The implication might be that arithmetic gives good training as a producer and consumer in a capitalist society whereas knowledge of graph theory might serve as an excellent tool in understanding social structures better. Probably the answer to this lies precisely in spreading education throughout the life cycle in such a way that it no longer becomes a preparation for



a subsequent phase in life, nor some type of alternative way of living, but simply one aspect of social life in general. How about Retirement? There is one good model of anticipatory retirement: the sabbatical year enjoyed by university professors. This form of existence seems to function like the recharging of batteries, but if this is the case any other member of society should be entitled to the same. School teachers should have the same right, and so should school pupils: the right to be taken out of school, with no stigma attached, and engage in some form of highly creative self-realizing, joyful work—in other word in praxis. There is no good reason to assume that learning had to be uninterrupted. Thus, the general argument would be in favor of as much mixture of these four types of social existence as possible, all the time making the structure sufficiently flexible to leave the fundamental decision-making when in comes to not only composing education but one’s entire lifestyle, life cycle to the person himself and herself. If that were really practiced the age composition of a group of people studying together, using dialogue as a major vehicle for development, would be as diverse as the people sitting in a cafeteria: all ages, both sexes, people from all walks of life. It is in that setting that the teacher would be more of a helper and facilitator and less of a boss—and schooling less of a process for manufacturing underdogs, and more of a setting for cooperation and autonomy. Conclusion: Some Strategies These are far-reaching changes, and they would all work against a society that is vertical and highly individualized, and be particularly resisted by those at the top of that society: those in charge of production (private and state capitalism) and in charge of administration (the bureaucracy). Those at the top might choose some of the elements in this package but not enough to threaten the basic structure of verticality and substitutability. Hence, it is our contention that the momentum for fundamental change will have to come from the periphery rather than from the center of society; there is too much vested interest at the center (not meaning necessarily a Minister of Education, but the high seat of private and state capitalism and administration). There are two types of periphery that should be highly meaningful in this connection: the school districts in general and the more central districts in particular, and school pupil in general and the high school pupils in particular. School districts may demand more autonomy—decentralized decisionmaking. However, if the peripheral school districts are heavily subsidized from the Center than in the Periphery; so we would assume that the central


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

districts would be among the first to put action behind the general demand for decentralization. One model in this connection would be to leave most of the educational planning to the districts, and to several school systems within one district. They might then apply for support, and the state budget of education might be turned into a council dispersing funds upon application more like a University Grants Commission. Like individual scholars applying for research grants, the initiative would come from below, the grant-giving agency would operate within a wide band of ideas as to what constitutes a legitimate school system, and disperse funds accordingly. The assumption, then, would be that there is more latent diversity that can be released when districts are given more autonomy than can be built into the system by any kind of design devised at the top. School pupils can rebel, but most likely to do so are those in the higher grades. The free university model that we have been drawing upon above applies most immediately to them (or at least so people seem to think), and can be communicated to them not only through direct knowledge of the next step on the educational ladder, the university, but also through elder siblings, further ahead on the educational track. The most significant step high school students could take would probably be a strike against examinations. In many countries such examinations are ceremoniously prepared with standardized problems (or rather fictitious non-problems) prepared by the Ministry and circulated confidentially well ahead of time. The organized absence from sorting ceremonies of that type would shake the educational establishment considerably and stamp out vertical sorting of pupils/students as illegitimate, even immoral. No doubt the motivation for such action would vary over time and it is quite possible that it is lower today than it was at the end of the 1960s— for instance because liberal society proved itself quite capable of absorbing much of the impact of the student revolt of those days. But such ups and downs are normal in any movement, and it is almost inconceivable that pupils, even students will continue acquiescing in humiliating examinations for ever and ever. In conclusion, the type of persons who would emerge from educational processes of the kind depicted above are considerably less likely to tolerate the verticalist and irrationality of contemporary, modern societies. They would demand a different job structure, more compatible with the structure built into the education system. And at this point it should be remembered that even with the time flexibility extolled above many people would spend a considerable portion of their total life span in some type of education, which means that the educational structure would make an indelible imprint on them and constitute a model, even a paradigm of what the social structure should be like.



For that reason changes in education structure might have both a direct and an indirect effect: directly by forcing other sectors of society to be compatible, and indirectly through the internalization in the members of society as basic patterns of social life. To take an example: jobs have to be built much more around individuals with their peculiarities when education is made in such a way that individuals are less substitutable for each other (so that individuals could no longer be easily fitted into pre-defined jobs). At the same time, persons used to composing their own educational experience instead of being processed according to schemes made by others will demand something similar of the job structure in society and in doing so they would already have taken a great step towards a higher level of autonomy. Finally, one little note on the future studies aspect of this essay. Looking at these strategies, how do they fit into future studies? No doubt in many countries today, certainly in most, the two factors pointed to are both weak and vague. So, does this not simply mean that one picks out the trends, tendencies or factors one likes and elevates them into a prominent position, referring to the result as futurology? No, for future studies as here conceive of have little or nothing to do with predictive futurology. Rather, the assumption is that social futures cannot be predicted because it is in our capacity to transcend any social “law.” The purpose of such studies is to try to locate the forces that could be unleashed, the waves on which to ride, and then use future studies consciously and conscientiously as a tool in the service of the values made explicit in this chapter.



The history of universities in Europe is not a very long one: Paris 1170, Cambridge 1209—Bologna, the universities for the Lombards, the Tuscans, the Romans, the people from Ultra-Montana, for students from all parts of Europe. They date from the late Middle Ages and were colored by the social structure in which they emerged, and the power structure, which may serve as a point of departure. A basic point in the structural transformation of western society is from a decentralized, fragmented society of relatively autonomous parts within the feudal order—often with a figure head on top—to a centralized, segmented order, certainly not with a figurehead on top, but an increasingly powerful state organization. Fragmentation in relatively independent provinces and towns gradually yielded to segmentation of the entire domain under the purview of the state into relatively autonomous ministries, departments, agencies. Gradually, the significance of landed gentry exercising power over their piece


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

of territory yielded to the overwhelming importance of cabinet ministers exercising more and more power over a piece of administrative territory. In sociological terms this was at the same time the transition from particularism-diffuseness to universalism-specificity, from highly personal relations of a very encompassing nature, but not necessarily very standardized, to more abstract relation between people of a more specified nature—the type of relationship also associated with bureaucratization. Grosso modo these sweeping sociological generalizations, the first one at the lateral level, the second at the micro level of interpersonal relations (and expressed in parsonian terms through essentially taken from Max Weber and Sorokin) seem to be valid. Of course, there is still decentralization-fragmentation and particularism-diffuseness around, but perhaps more among families, both within and between families, than relative to territorial units inside countries. Global space, considered as a set of nation states, still retains many of the characteristics of the Middle Ages: there is fragmentation rather than segmentation, given the weakness of the United Nations’ machinery, and so on. Let this be the first point made about structural transformation. We then turn to the second aspect, transformation in the power structure. Let us say that out of the Middle Ages came a social order with clergy on top, then aristocracy, then the merchants/burghers (le tiers état), then the peasants/artisans/workers, and at the bottom of the system the marginalized groups, gypsies, jews/moros, women. Of course, the three on the top exercised power of various kinds over the overwhelming majority of the population, the two at the bottom. The power of the clergy was essentially normative; the power of the aristocracy essentially punitive and the power of the merchants essentially based on exchange, “utilitarian,” “remunerative.” Their institutions were built around those types of power: Church, Military and Commerce (Corporations, etc.). Politics is as usual a mixture of the three, the proportions depending on the power relations, and other circumstances. However, the theme to be developed here is what kind of disciplines these three layers of the social system needed as an underpinning of their exercise of power. For the case of the clergy, the answer is obvious: theology. For the case of the aristocracy, the answer is also relatively obvious: military science, and in addition to that law, to regulate the exercise of punitive power inside the country, and international law to regulate its exercise outside the country. Military science could then give rise to a number of empirical disciplines connected with geometry and mechanics (for instance, ballistics); law could serve as an exercise in deductive reasoning. At any rate, some basic components of the early universities would have to be shaped by the needs of the upper classes, giving rise to the two classical faculties of theology and law, also known as relatively conservative pillars of



any university construction. It should also be noted that theology and law are universalizing and specific, seeing people as God’s children and the King’s subjects according to universal/specific principles. However, even a society based on normative disciplines—such as theology backed up by the ultimate power of God and law backed up by the more mundane power of the authorities to inflict suffering and pain, even death—might be in the interest of the burghers. They want a stable setting in order to run expanding economic cycles of production, distribution and consumption, but they also wanted considerably more than that. In those cycles production factors and products were supposed to flow, to be traded against each other, to be substituted for each other. Consequently sciences were needed to establish the classification systems for raw materials, no doubt a basic stimulus for the natural sciences, perhaps particularly chemistry. They also needed some system for classifying human beings, establishing their equivalence: this is probably where education and psychology can be said to enter. And we would definitely need a system establishing the equivalence of various forms of capital, not only money—for instance capital now as against capital in the future, or capital here as against capital in the other country; problems that carry in their wake the whole theory of interest and exchange. In other words, economics would be to the burghers the same as theology to the clergy and law to the aristocrats. Of course, they could do and indeed did engage in trade long before the science of economics emerged; just as people had been worshipping God before theologians started—in their manner to explain to people what they were doing, and particularly how they should go about it. Scientific disciplines emerged slowly, long after the emergence of the corresponding group in the limelight of the social theme, but once they have settled they seem to be lingering on long after the group particularly responsible for their function in society has waned into significance. It looks like we can assume as a general principle that university change is lagging behind change in general. But once a discipline has been established, it will serve as the multiplier for the importance of that particular group. This leads to an important question: how about the other two social groups, those over whom power was exercised? What kind of disciplines can they be seen as carrying in their social baggage, on the way up? Maybe one could say that the peasants/artisans/workers gave rise to the emergence of social economics as a science, perhaps as opposed to business economics and national economics. Perhaps it can also be said that sociology has some relation to socialism, socialist parties, as a way of making not


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

only the top layers but all of society visible, even transparent. And in the same vein, maybe it can also be said that the successors of gypsies/jews/ moros, all the foreign workers that can be found in so many countries, and the women, are not the carriers of any particular discipline, but of transnationalism because the perspectives of other countries are being brought much closer to the heart of national knowledge production and a transdisciplinary, even holistic approach, perhaps particularly carried by women. But all this remains to be seen, these are only some perspectives that may or may not have a bearing on the reality of future university development. Let us now combine these two perspectives, let us move forward in time from the Middle Ages: Aristocracy challenges the Church, Church and State are separated, the State emerges as the pillar of society carried by aristocrats who skillfully transform themselves from landowners to cabinet ministers. And in their midst the King, decreasingly divine, increasingly secular, even vulgarized. Louis XIV is usually the prototype of a regime dying when at its most splendid. Both are challenged in the grande revolution française by a bourgeoisie contesting their power, fighting for the free flow of individuals: individual human rights, geographical mobility, social mobility. This construction is then, in turn, challenged by the working classes but not in a very basic way: individuals are detached form these classes and given access to the construction made by the other three. All of this, then, essentially a man’s society, at the end of the 20th century, effectively challenged by women in an ongoing revolution that will still last for a long time. In this process we are today at a certain stage: a society run by aristocrats turned bureaucrats, merchants turned capitalists and clergy turned intellectuals; the BCI complex. Universities become national universities serving the interests of this construction, they become tools in the building of centralized, segmented, universalist and specific structures. In so doing, they themselves, in an obvious dialectic process, gradually take on the characteristics of that which they are supposed to serve. Thus, they become centralized, both in the sense of the single university being dominated by the central authority (rector, the academic senate) and in the sense of the university system of a given country being dominated by a single or a limited number of universities. Second, they become segmented in the sense that the reality to be studied is divided into segments, each segment being the concern of one discipline, disciplines often mirroring the structure of the cabinet system with faculties and institutes corresponding to ministries and sections. Third, they become universalistic, in the sense of aiming at the development of knowledge that is valid for the whole country, from one end to the other; possibly even for the whole region, the whole world. And they be-



come increasingly specific, increasingly able to say something very detailed and precise. An almost perfect fit of the nation-state with the national university emerges, with the only exception that the universities might tend to be more conservative in the proportion of the disciplines, theology and law overstaying, the social sciences and holistic perspectives having to fight their way through a morass of hindrances long after the labor movement has made an indelible imprint on the social formation, and the feminist movement has entered the social stage. Some Problems, Some Challenges Let us now make use of this little exercise in macro-history as applied to universities in order to explore some of the problems of contemporary universities. From what has been said above, the first problem is rather obvious: segmentation. In order to serve with its knowledge production a segmented system, and increasing division into disciplines and specializations has to take place and will take place. Linkages may be built: not only geology, physics and chemistry but also physical chemistry, geophysics, and geochemistry. We may try to weave together what has been subdivided and held apart bilaterally, even trilaterally—but this is not the same as a holistic approach associated with the mother discipline not mentioned explicitly above: philosophy, that rich delight in knowledge, just knowledge as such, from which specializations may derive. It is probably more correct to say that today all over the world, in all universities, there is a conscious but perhaps mainly subconscious yearning for more holistic views and approaches. In fact, the demand is so high that the supply will easily become amateurish, cheap, that of a dilettante. As a matter of fact, one does not have to go that far back in time to encounter the period in academic life when at a faculty of natural sciences there would be that old, wise person who would in fact be a natural philosopher even if that were not his title. It is difficult to find that person among the technocrats, the young broilers engaged in all kinds of engineering today, which is not the same as saying the demand is not there. However, part of the picture is that segmentation has also led to fragmentation. People engaged in different disciplines are not sitting next to each other, not working next door. They work in different institutes, different floors, different buildings, even different parts of the city for universities with no campus, scattered around in the urban architecture (Freie Universität in Berlin may serve as one example). However, this latter point is not that important. Even if they are almost sitting on top of each other disciplinary borders are much more important than geographical separation: there is almost no real working contact.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

It is the theory of the cafeteria/restaurant, the place where different people carrying different disciplines in their mental luggage could meet. But, as is well-known: they tend to sit next to their colleagues, separated in space by different tables, in time by different hours, enjoying their cup of tea or whatever. This of course does not mean that academic men or women never meet people outside their own institute: they can even weave strong international mafias based on the same segment of knowledge they themselves are engaged in, meeting colleagues around the globe in comparative and cooperative projects or at least in conferences. For most of them it would be easier mentally to associate with a colleague in the same field on the other side of the earth than with a colleague in a different field on the other side of the corridor. Third, a major problem of contemporary universities is their size. They are so big that the bureaucratic aspects become only too visible, on the outside of the structure so to speak, not something organically deep inside the structure helping things flow effectively. Of course, one can still find people who run their academic activity like Wittgenstein did at Cambridge, a little room, a set of folding chairs by the door, each student picks up a char and when there are no chairs left, there is no more room. Smallness can be found inside bigness for those who understand how to build a niche and cling to it. But by and large bigness comes together with universalism/ specificity and creates and atmosphere of impersonal, even unpersonal and anti-personal behavior that is not at all conducive to scientific discourse. Such relationships may be tolerated in a railway station or in an enormous church where everybody is relating, presumably, to God and not to each other—but not at universities. Dialogue is essential. We think it is difficult to describe what bigness of an organization does to people, and how excessive size may be harmful to academic work. On the one hand, there are also positive aspects. Bigness may be a source of fame and hence a source of pride for a member of the university, professors and students alike. Bigness may also be a key to diversity and hence to more symbiotic relations: there is simply more to pick form. Bigness may attract funds and the one indicator in the race for supremacy among universities. On the other hand, however, with increasing size bureaucratic rigidity sets in. Creative activity presupposes a certain flexibility. Creativity is not like a predictable link in a production chain; inspiration is difficult to plan. More concretely, most or many researchers probably have the experience that in some periods they have to contract into themselves, almost meditate in an unmeditated manner in order to arrive at new insights. In other periods, they have to expand and touch others, orally or in writing, in order to get feedback, dialogue. There is a contraction-expansion rhythm, and the wavelengths are far from regular and far from predictable. In a small organization it may be possible to rearrange schedules so that they fit individual



creativity rhythms better. In larger organizations, this is almost impossible: “if we do this we might have to do it for everybody else and the result is anarchy, chaos.” The big university extends administrative routines to its members and they have somehow to lock in with them, like cogwheels. As a result, even the most creative researcher tends to end up at the tail end of an enormous machine, feeling run by the machine which he is supposed to make use of, for the avowed purpose of the whole organization: the production and dissemination of knowledge. In short, as so many people complain: he becomes an administrator, teacher rather than researcher (and usually a bad administrator, in addition). We would not take that complaint too seriously. A good academic should be perfectly able to do all three. But they should be meaningfully and well done, and my own experience is that this is much easier in smaller than in bigger organizations. A problem can be solved immediately through a little conversation or a meeting that can be convened on the spur of the moment; the problem is not transformed, even perverted, fragmented and segmented or appropriated by the center for endless deliberation with delayed decision making or none at all. As a result, time is passed in faculty meetings discussing problems of other institutes of which one has no knowledge, no insight; problems that be been kicked upstairs with the hope that a third party might be able to come up with a formula the parties in conflict can live with. The likelihood is that a third party cannot, in which case the problem continues bouncing up and down like a rubber ball, watched rather than solved by faculty members looking at their watches. Fourth, universities tend to become too vertical, and more so, the bigger the university although size is only a sufficient, certainly not a necessary condition for excessive distance between high and low. In a smaller group, in the classical university where the studium generale was a basic form, open without restriction to student from many parts of Europe, tying them together with scholars in small units, interaction could be very tight. The obvious symbiosis between teacher and learner, with the teacher conveying his insights and growing in the process, to the extent that he is challenged by the learner. In mass production universities, this is absolutely impossible for the simple reason that there are too many learners per teacher; there is no time budget that would make it possible. Professors tend to escape as quickly as possible, running away from the universities after the minimum of teaching and administrative duties have been performed—thereby increasing verticality even further. The students are not only at the bottom, but marginalized. The bigger the size, the administrators will tend to come out on top of everything because more and more specialized skills are needed to run a


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

complex or at least complicated machinery. It is only in the smallest institutions that more artisan-like, amateurish administration can operate, all but eliminating highly specialized administrators, leaving the tasks to professors, assistants and students, even together. This is what clever units of can do, even inside a big university, finding a niche in the mega-machine, calling it an institute, maybe with geographical separateness, running it as if it had only a minimum umbilical cord to the machine. Often such institutes can become very productive, but they may have to pay for their productivity with less leverage on the machine, and particularly on the budget-making process. But then, their productivity may attract international attention, help them build international networks, secure them under international umbrellas (for instance UN organizations), even with funding possibilities. Transnationalization, not nationalization. Universities are segmented and fragmented according to what has been said above, in addition they tend to become big and vertical—a combination otherwise referred to as an “alpha structure.” Why? Presumably because they are important building blocks in the nation state construction. They are national, at least the more important ones—even if they may be run basically with private rather than public funds. Their knowledge production has four recipients: other intellectuals in the same field; the public at large; corporations; and bureaucracies, with the last two paying (private versus public) on the basis of money received from the public at large, as corporation customers paying for goods and services or state citizens paying their taxes. In return for permitting intellectuals to engage in their intellectual pursuits, very often at their own discretion, they expect something in return. Something useful for production and profit by the corporation, and for administration and control by the bureaucracies. They expect loyalty in times of crisis, and not too much outspoken criticism. And may be they also expect no interference when the administration adds to it power and its salaries. To hope that he who pays the piper will not also to some extent call the tune or at least tell the piper which tunes not to play is somewhat naive. On the other hand, wise corporations and wise bureaucracies know that they get the best results by having a hundred flowers bloom, leaving intellectuals more or less at their own games, watching them in the sand-box, occasionally picking out one or a few who seem promising and amenable. That approach may not yield the same quality as can be obtained by forcing all intellectuals to move in the same direction according to a plan, but may yield considerably better quality. Bargains can be struck, often under the banner of “academic freedom,” a freedom usually more easily obtained for research than for teaching (an example being the relative freedom of the



academies of sciences in the socialist countries, as opposed to the control exercised over universities, predominantly teaching institutions). Ultimately what this means is that the universities are at the disposal of the nation-state. The national team in any sport is not supposed to compete for other countries but for their own; ultimately the national team in any discipline is supposed to work for its own country, not for any other country. They should be mobilizable for the national cause in any field of international competition, not to mention international conflict. What this means is that the universities are not universal in the sense of global; they are national universities as they are often referred to, however universal they may be in the sense of covering many disciplines. Actually, since they do not bring these disciplines together (“uni”), but rather keep them apart (“multi”), the term “national multiversity” might perhaps be more adequate than university. The transnational and transdisciplinary university, global and holistic to use even more pretentious terms, is still to be made. There are efforts in that direction such as the Inter-university Centre in Dubrovnik, the United Nations University in Tokyo, the Université Nouvelle Transnationale in Paris. But these are only efforts, and the more transnational and transdisciplinary they become, the less funds they receive.... The contradiction inherent in the expression “national university” will continue hampering human knowledge production for years, generations to come, and resist the ‘academic guerrillas’ or incorporate them. Strangely enough, and this is point number six, in spite of having such a central position in society, universities are rather isolated, marginalized. Here they are, producing knowledge for corporations and bureaucracies, constituting together with them the three main officially recognized pillars of modern, western society (the military and the police being less applauded as pillars). And yet, there are clear signs of marginalization. Physically, it may take the shape of the campus, literally speaking an enclosure for the cultivation of the mind rather than the soil—on the latter lawns and buildings are supposed to grow. Of course, the campus may be a good setting for academic freedom and for withdrawal from the hustle and bustle of city life (although withdrawal for creativity presupposes much more isolation than that, also from colleagues). But the price paid is a detachment from society that is only too compatible with the idea of feeling above society or the society feeling above academia—the twin sides of the town-gown relation. On campus, tribal, even sectarian, rites are performed. Students are initiated into rituals, they learn how to talk esoteric languages, and they develop endogamous habits, associating, dating, marrying among intellectuals, even intellectuals in the same disciplinary sub-tribe. Obviously, this contributes to the isolation.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

In a family of academics, non-academic experiences do not easily enter. And this, in turn, is only too compatible with the focus on verbal activity, written and oral, as opposed to practice. Historically, the roots of this isolation are probably easily seen: monasteries, medieval monks as the carriers of the Word, in oral as well as written forms; ultimately also the producers of new knowledge. What is new are two important aspects: whereas clergy, including the monastic orders, in a certain sense she were on top of society, intellectuals are more often the servants of the two pillars mentioned. They have suffered a decline in status over the centuries, due to the successful fight for a position at the top of the second and third estates of the classical order. Secondly, and very much related to the first point, celibacy is no longer practiced among holders of the Word. Women are not only permitted to reproduce together with intellectuals, but also to produce knowledge, although the latter has been and still is a slow process indeed. And yet the universities are strange places not only in the sense that often very strange problems are explored. They have more in common with all kinds of service institutions today in general than with the churches of yesteryear. In the churches, the sender of the Word, the pries, and the receivers of the Word, the congregation, could live together for a long time, one generation, even two for that matter. They might be tired of each other in the process, but they might also grow together. Universities are like shops or railway stations. There is a service staff of administrators and professors staying on and on, there are customers (students) coming for a short while only to be serviced, pick up their diploma and leave—possibly leaving behind some fees in return. To whom do these institutions belong? Those who pay will say: to us! The permanent staff will say: to us! The overwhelming majority of the members of the institution, the students, will say: to us! There may even be some revolt and muted voices from the public at large, those who ultimately support the institution through their labor: to us! So, there is the setting for the tremendous tension universities have gone through in the last decades, tensions that by no means have been resolved. They all derive from a common denominator: the universities are not clearly integrated anywhere, they are detectable and detached, to a large extent isolated and marginalized. All six points above have something to do with structure: segmentation and fragmentation, size and locality, the national character of the university, and yet its marginalization. Let us now turn to the content of the product, which we all the time assume to be knowledge, its production and distribution to end users high and low in society (for production of profit or control, or simply for consumption, even enjoyment), and to users (students) who presumably them-



selves will produce more knowledge, or distribute it to other users. What kind of knowledge? Can one say something about the epistemology, the nature of the knowledge as a consequence of the structural characteristics just mentioned? We think one can, and in a relatively precise manner but making use of these six structural characteristics, one by one. 1.




Segmentation would counteract more holistic approaches. Specialists would emerge in their disciplines, possibly universalizing in the sense of having even world-encompassing networks, but nevertheless within the discipline. This would guarantee that the specialist will remain on tap, not on top. On top, decisions have to be made from a more holistic perspective, at least not as narrow as a monochromatic university discipline. Whether taken by the elite or by the public at large, through more or less direct democracy, the basis for a decision will definitely be broader. The expert who is a generalist rather than a specialist, holistic rather than fragmented, would threaten this division of labor. The pattern of segmentation is solidified through fragmentation. There will often be multi-disciplinary committees, seminars, even research groups of campus, but they will be marginal, subsisting on shoestring budgets if on any budget at all, and not integrated with teaching activity except in very particular institutions. Given this, universities can be trusted: the knowledge production will have been sorted in advance in predictable boxes already built into the organigram of the university, with its faculties, institutes, etc. Surprise-free. Given the size, administration and administrators will be on top of the researchers/teachers; professors would rarely be on top of the administration. This means that the structure can be maintained, the professors forced to compete within their own fields as laid out by the administration, and the sheer weight of institutional problems will tilt the activity in the same direction. This will also apply to such classical holistic disciplines as philosophy, theology and law: they will be subdivided into sub-fields and sub-sub-fields until the point that a love for Knowledge, God and Justice wanes and disappears into insignificance. The verticality of the structure will make for division of labor: those higher up in the pyramid producing theories, those lower down collecting data. However, if in general people have a tendency to stick to the paradigm, the intellectual frameworks they develop in their twenties, then there is a contradiction here. Those entitled to develop theories have their paradigms already set; those with new paradigms are not quite entitled to launch themselves with new



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

theories, yet. Of course, the exceptions to the rule are numerous indeed. Totally new insights may come at a later age, young people may be imitators with nothing original in them at all, regardless of what opportunities they are afforded, and there are young people capable of making theoretical breakthroughs and after that breaking through the social wall surrounding them. But regardless of the truth of all of this, two observations remain: an unnecessarily combative, conflictual relationship between holders of different paradigms seeing themselves as carriers of nothing but truth and the others as carriers of no truth at all. And, then, a general tendency towards conservatism because of the vested interest in the survival of one’s own paradigms, among other reasons because of the knowledge and the techniques that are inextricably tied to them. In part, this explains why certain modes and forms of knowledge production linger on long beyond their usefulness for any solid power group in society, and why the arrival of a new type of thinking on the academic scene is so dramatic. The whole pattern would tend to foster, and is indeed reinforced by a general tendency towards either/or rather than both/and thinking. Theories in plural, and insights in plural, making reality transparent but in different directions, supplementing rather than substituting for each other, seems a much more valid approach, but hard to arrive at in this type of climate. The national character of the knowledge production has as its consequence that the national idiom is reflected in the product. By that I do not only mean the impact the national language has— which is considerable—but “deep language,” or cosmology as I have referred to it elsewhere in an essay on saxonic, teutonic, gallic and nipponic intellectual styles, to mention but four of them. The differences are so penetrating, the national idiom so strong, that any talk of a general, universal, scientific methodology becomes merely rhetorical faces with such discrepancies. Of course, that one national idiom may superimpose itself on others simply because that nation superimposes itself (or group of nations). so that the net result looks homogeneous, “inter-subjective” from one end of the world to the other because they have all been trained in the same idiom, is quite another matter. We are not saying that this is good or bad, although we would probably say it is good: diversity is retained. But that diversity should be made use of symbiotically in a dialogue between intellectual styles, rather than concealed under a cloak of hypocrisy which essentially is there to hide the heavy dose of cultural imperialism the world has been and is exposed to—from the West. This process, incidentally, is probably




much stronger after than before colonialism because it is carried by much stronger people: transnational operations and international bureaucracies and organizations rather than colonization by the bureaucracy (with military and police) of one particular nation state alone. The isolation has as a consequence a peculiar, somewhat castrated character often found in the knowledge product. Above segmentation in discipline and fragmentation in institutes and nations have been lamented. In this connection two other points can be made: the separation between teaching, research and practice, and the closely related separation between empirical, critical and constructive research. Obviously we are dealing here with two triangles crying for integration. That teaching and research belong together is recognized by most universities and this is already a positive sign (note, however, the separation of the two in the socialist counties, with some benefits but by and large tremendous costs both for teaching and for research). But the integration of the two with practice is mainly done in schools of engineering and schools of medicine. Even in faculties essentially training future teachers, there is almost no practice of pedagogy. Only few universities have attached schools. The same applies to schools of law, even schools of theology, schools of social sciences, or humanities and for most of the natural sciences—except for adventurous students who manage as “extra-curricular activity.” A terrible expression, from the more holistic point of view there is no such activity) to smuggle some practice into the system. But practice is always goal-directed, and there is always some kind of value one wants to maximize or optimize. Practice is good or bad, not only a question of what is true or false. Under the doctrines of “neutral,” “objective,” “value-free” science, only those values are accepted that are not seen as value because they are protected by a heavy consensus. Hence, for medicine, health; technical efficiency for engineering. This means that universities harbor in their midst strange virginity relative to values. Instead of making them explicit, exploring them, lining them up as legitimate objects of enquiry and as parts of a scientific construction without necessarily adhering to all of them, some of them or any one of them; they are somehow brushed under the carpet. Empiricism reigns, connecting data and theory inductively and/ or deductively; criticism (evaluating a state of affairs from the point of view of values) and constructivism (speculating on how certain values can be realized in the light of certain theories) recede into the background, and have to struggle to come up in front. Ob-



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

viously the three are interconnected as they are in a full-fledged discipline like architecture (integrating from the very beginning research, teaching and practice; empirical approaches, critical approaches and constructive approaches); characteristically enough only accorded a relatively marginal position in universities and technical high schools, among other reasons because it borders on “arts.” Summing up these six structural influences on university epistemology, for most people identical with epistemology, tout court, one is left with a feeling of something unreleased, something tied up by partly self-imposed constraints, often unreflected, very often philosophically rather untenable although much energy has gone into efforts to show that they can be derived from high principles and not merely the partly unreflected results of the whims of history. It is like a human being wounded by humiliating experiences, from infancy via childhood, school, work and family, whipped into shape as some kind of unreleased personality, having to defend all of this as an expression of “maturity,” convincing nobody except, possibly, him/herself. What matters is not to fall into the trap of regarding the means of production, the mode of production and the products in university knowledge industry today as in any sense the final word in that matter. A century hence, perhaps only a generation, it will all look quaint and outmoded. Then people will ask themselves how it was ever possible not to see the constraints under which one was operating—and they will certainly not necessarily agree with the present author as to which these constraints are. Finally, we think the point should be made that the universities have much too much money. It is a point hardly appreciated by vice-chancellors in particular and university staff and students in general; it may nevertheless be true. We are thinking then above all of the knowledge production, using a simple production function for knowledge as for any other product with inputs from nature, labor, capital, researchers and administrators. The inputs from nature are the sense impressions and specimens brought into the laboratories, as fresh inputs or as processed inputs in the form of books, articles and so forth on which researchers are also known to feed. The input of labor is the work of those who collect data and process them, perhaps up to the first steps in data analysis: the assistants. The input of capital is the whole enormous input of research equipment for collection, processing and analysis, recently making a quantum jump upwards because of the arrival on the scene of computers in general and data processing in particular.



The input of researchers is, presumably, the input of the creative mind “making the data sing,” getting the message or imposing it upon the data And the input of administration is what the administrators do in organizing this, tying it together. Keeping the first factor constant for the sake of the argument, the general hypothesis would be that there is a transition from labor and research intensive methods of knowledge production to capital and administrator intensive research; a transition from the artisanal not only to the industrial but even to the automated mode of production. In the beginning there was the researcher contemplating impressions, may be having some disciples putting them in front of him. Within this mode one might perhaps distinguish between the labor intensive and the creativity-intensive forms, the latter coming closer to philosophy. There is the period of manufacturing knowledge where these creative brains are put in the same house, next to each other, only that it is cerebral-facture rather than manu-facture. Then, more capital is put into the mode of production, assistants can be hired, more data can be brought in. The researcher is sitting on top of social pyramids producing theoretical insights for the top of knowledge pyramids. Knowledge production has long been like this, but if even more capital is injected, and in the form of capital goods, then the researchers will gradually wane into the background and there will be a decline in creativity-intensive activity. Thus, there will be enormous amounts of data and readymade programs for their interpretation, all of this administered in a highly predictable way by professional administrators. The conclusions will increasingly become predictable from knowledge of the organization producing the knowledge rather than by knowing the inputs, the data, simply because the conclusions are already built into the programs of analysis. Since only Big Money can pay for Big Knowledge, the net result is an even higher dependence than before on the two pillars of modern, western society: bureaucracy and corporations. Much capital and little creativity, much data and little brain will be the result, substituting enormous quantities in the production for quality, much like what is done in other fields, like food production. The work that is accorded Nobel prizes, is produced according to plan rather than inspiration. In short, a system approaching the end of its viability.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Some Conclusions According to this line of thinking, what would be possible reactions, even alternatives? We shall not try to approach that in a normative manner with efforts to project the good alternative university, but rather, trying, once more, to see it in the light of likely historical processes. These processes are actually of two kinds: macro-processes at the big, societal level in increasingly ungovernable societies, and micro-processes inside the universities themselves, more or less synchronized with the former. Segmentation was the price paid for centralization just as fragmentation was the obvious concomitant of decentralization—the former an empirical fact, the latter rather a tautology. The general hypothesis: both centralization and segmentation have reached their upper limits, processes of decentralization and integration will have to set in. In the historical mini-perspective expounded above, the fifth layer of marginalized groups in the nation state have been seen as the carriers of that type of process, to some extent, with the gradual devolution of power back to regional and local levels—ultimately also in foreign affairs. That this process goes more quickly in some countries and more slowly in others, that other countries are still on the road towards centralization, the process may be reversed—all that goes without saying. That belongs to history, history is like that—yet there are trends. But what would be the corresponding processes in universities? In a sense it is rather obvious, using the list of structural factors in the order given above: a move towards trans disciplinary, holistic approaches with a renaissance for such fields as philosophy and theology (the latter not necessarily understood in the western sense); a corresponding integration at the inter-institute and inter-personal level, bringing researchers of various inclinations and specializations closer together; as an obvious concomitant of this a drastic reduction of size by subdividing two big universities and facilitating emergence of many small ones. As a concomitant of that again a reduction of the vertical distance, making universities more collegial, more like academies, in the classical Greek sense, making them local level, national, regional levels and global at the same time. Down to the municipality and the subdivisions of big cities like it has happened in recent generations for secondary education, the Gymnasium, lycée (and was always the case for primary education). Up to the global, by IT. As a consequence of all of that, forging stronger ties between academic and non-academic life, building on the traditions of popular universities where people can come and go, possibly staying for four years but over a period of 25 years, not only in their youth. As a consequence of all of this, new modes of production or knowledge, more able to integrate theory, teaching and practice.



And here there is much to build on. The people’s high schools, for instance in the Nordic countries are usually quite good at combining practice and teaching (but missing in research). The universities are good at combining teaching and research (but missing in practice). And then a link has existed for a long time, both in corporations and in bureaucracies, between practice and research. In short, we do not only have schools (teaching only, no practice, no research), institutes (research only, no practice, no teaching), and work (practice only in the form of production, no teaching, no research. But what we are still bad at is integrating all three, with the exception of such examples (alluded to above) as medicine and engineering. And finally, a transition to more artisanal modes of production, or regression as some people, intoxicated with the allure of calculators, might say. It should be emphasized that nothing of this presupposes provincialism. Universities were probably more international in the Middle Ages than many of the national universities are today. Transnationalization was more of a reality, to a large extent carried by Latin as a common tongue. Today IT not only conveys language but is a language, the new Latin. Thus, new universities—even at the most municipal level—might easily become transnational universities at the same time, spreading their networks around the world, connecting with similar institutions with the same capability of integrating teaching, research and practice (and empiricism, criticism and constructivism). And this, of course, is where the computers nevertheless enter and in a most fruitful way, facilitating transnational communication, rather than transdisciplinary interpretation, which we think still, not to say forever, is reserved for the human brains with all their tremendous strength and weaknesses. In conclusion: a transition back again to creativity—intensity, saving capital. Less money will be needed. Among the objective conditions referred to above, the most certain one is that there will be less money, there is already much less money in all the countries that increase the budget to the ministries of “defense” and “justice” and decrease all other budgets including education, culture, welfare. But people’s thirst for knowledge, as producers, disseminators and consumers will not be quenched that easily. Maybe this is even a basic human need, something that makes us human, some need for interpretation, perhaps in order to know whether to identify or not to identify with what is. The satisfaction of that need can certainly be facilitated with some money, but also be killed with too much money. The advent of the pocket book, the universities of the air, the fantastic possibilities of mass media when not used to produce garbage, IT, they all point to democratization of knowledge, at least of knowledge consumption.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

And all of that also points to new modes of knowledge production, more participatory, hence more decentralized, better distributed, smaller in size, more local, more accessible. Some generations ago, one thought in terms of one university per nation. Recently the slogan has been one university per million. It is high time we think in terms of one university per 100,000, maybe per 10,000. If universities do not come up with new models themselves be sure that somebody else will do it for them, and not necessarily the way they would most appreciate—but in the form of strong competition where the old wave will gradually have to yield to the new. This will happen in any case, so why not facilitate rather than impede, in a real dialogue?

2.4. UNIVERSITIES IN THE AGE OF GLOBALIZATION AND POSTMODERNITY “God is dead” somebody said more than a century ago. The thesis of this section is that “The university—as we know it—is dead.” Maybe Nietzsche should also have inserted that little proviso, “as we know Him.” God, like the University, may out-trick even Nietzsche and leap into other incarnations. There is a very simple theory underlying this hypothesis. The university—and particularly the major universities of a country, usually located in the capital or in some exclusive place outside (like Cambridge UK or MA, like Coimbra)—was an important tool in the building of the nation-state. Top functionaries, including the professors, were top civil servants, tied by oath of loyalties to the government; of course totally incompatible with academic freedom. Thus, in geopolitics, war and peace they could study many things but not their own country. In the case of Nazi-Germany very few Gentile professors resigned because of that oath: Erwin Schrödinger1; the rest were “servants.” In the USA today the task of studying US foreign policy is essentially left to a courageous top class linguist at the MIT. The rest engage in global studies the same way they would have engaged in porcelain studies trying to neglect the somewhat big elephant in the middle of the shop. The assumption was, and still is, that central academics can be drawn upon for patriotic duty; although, if there are serious signs of unrest, the government will know how to channel crucial activity into think tanks etc, protected by oaths of loyalty and silence, and by veils of secrecy as well.2 Of course intellectuals have for a long time defied such constraints. The reference group has been the discipline, and that concept is already a part of globalization. Globalization has also been stimulated by the search for data. Only a very few disciplines would be essentially tied to the nationstate: literature in the national vernacular, national history, domestic law



and some that constitute a reservoir for reproduction of national myths and other idiosyncracies.3 One consequence of this is known to most academics: in spite of efforts by university architects to minimize spatial distance, disciplinary borders serve effectively to cut down encounters across those borders. E-mail fills the daily timetable with intra-disciplinary, global encounters more than the cafeteria produces the inter-disciplinary, local variety. The idea of universal knowledge, pan episteme, is beautiful, but probably only approximated by some college students whose search for credits and exam athletics, jumping barriers, do not overshadow the pleasure of watching big complexes of knowledge relate synergistically in one’s own mind. The three classical top castes of any society, the carriers of culture/ knowledge (brahmins), the carriers of force (kshatriyahs) and the carriers of goods and services (vaishyas) with their footfolk—disciples, soldiers, workers of all kinds—were always crossing national borders; but the assumption (in science, war, trade) was “at the service of the nation-state.” This is much less clear today. The alternative is not some vague “at the service of the world” even if that is the case for an increasing number of people, but “at the service of myself.” This is where the second defining aspect of our age enters: post-modernity. It is the price for modernity: an individuated, borderless society where everybody does what economics taught for two centuries: acting in their own self-interest, according to their own egocentric cost-benefit analysis (anomie). Social tissues dissolve, atomize (atomie). The best known consequences are direct and economic violence, the latter also known as corruption. But sect-formation, including nation-formation, seeking new meanings and new togetherness, are also parts of the new social landscape. Of course this has implications for the university, like for any other work organization. Labor flexibility in general means short-term contract work, also as students—like their teachers they are also willing to jump to any other university should the possibility—and the incentives—arise. The university becomes a place nobody wants to stay. The professors minimize office time searching for the next job and use their lap-tops for time synchronicity all over the place; the students compensate for coming too late for lectures etc. by leaving too early. The latter is becoming universal, with the possible exception of US students, not because they are less post-modern, but possibly because they pay more and value time, even with dubious professors more highly. When asked whether students would also walk in on a concert the answer was: no, that would disturb musicians and audience. True, but it also applies to professors and students. “Broken windows” all over, overcrowding, anomie/atomie. Not strange that professors and researchers seek other venues: at home, on leave, think tanks, retirement.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

A dying institution, in other words. There are remedies: make them small, expensive, untied to the state but possibly tied to a cause, including a nation or some other sect offering solidarity, togetherness. The heyday of the nation-state is over. So, what is in? What are the alternatives? A moment’s reflection will lead to two answers: global, and local. Could be related to big and small, but does not have to. But before we develop this further let us look at another case, somewhat, or quite, similar: the case of the media. They are also products of the nation-state, or better put: of the age that produced both media and the state-system. There is usually one paper/ station/channel (the latter two often under state control) on which the government can count, both to convey what they want people to believe, and in order not to convey the opposite, the disturbing, the nonconformist. More often than not those media are located in the center, the capital. If the country is part of an alliance system, like NATO, EU or in the old days the WTO (interpreted as the Warsaw Treaty Organization, not as the World Trade Organization), then the signals will come from the center of the Center, the Center state in the system. They will define what constitutes news fit to print, as they will also define academic excellence. And be believed. Countless people work with great intensity to get an Op-Ed placed in one of these media outlets, forgetting that the wrapping is the message, not the content of one deviant message; like for the deviant course at a mainstream university. Usually the deviant will have not only to work hard, but also to be side-shunted, off the central stage, to some peripheral Hyde Park corner. The message is also the site, the niche. What is the alternative for the media? Again, a moment’s reflection and the answer is obvious, as evidenced by the last war launched by the System under tight media control, the NATO war against Serbia. Global, and local. The global answer is clear: the Internet, for good and for bad a surprisingly free info-niche. Anyone can learn more about the world from than from almost any single medium; and that is only one example of many. The local answer is also clear even if it hasn’t been seen that often: the single sheet in the local market place, in postmodern societies meaning the shopping center. There is always a wall, and we do not have to live in Beijing 1979 to appreciate the importance of a Wall for Democracy, well knowing that information is an indispensable basis for democracy. And that means not only that what is being said corresponds reasonably well to reality as experienced by our senses, but also that information is not systematically left out. Behind information there is always some point the sender wants to get through; that is unavoidable. So let the basis for drawing conclusions be rich, broad, deep. And diverse: balance the global with a diversity of



locals. Let the locals meet, fight any middle level, state-imposed uniformity of information. Or of curriculum design. I have spent much of my life promoting peace studies, and have experienced X (X > 50) times the enormous difficulties a government, any government, through its Ministry of Education, has with the word “peace.” War, security, conflict—no problem. But peace? Why? The aspiration of the millions? Yes, but threatening to the freedom of action of a state to go to war, hence to be treated with utmost care. So the argument is in favor of global universities, and a diversity of local universities. For the latter there is a model that fits by being local, but also very misleading by being state-controlled: the Gymnasium, lycée, high school. Today the high school is admirably local after an early history limited to the cathedral cities of Europe, about as (in)frequent as universities in countries following the OECD “one university per million inhabitants” model. So why not one local university for each municipality? They do not have to offer everything; few universities do. Very many small towns today have some cultural facility, some place for symbolic interaction. We are already moving in that direction. Fortunately we still have a lot of variation in food fares, we have national and local cuisines. Fortunately no Ministry of Eating prescribes the same menus all over; some corporations do. But standards of hygiene could be imposed, as could standards of mental hygiene for institutions offering information, like “do not stimulate hatred.” Millions of diverse local restaurants, millions of diverse local academies. For global universities we have a failed effort: the United Nations University, originally proposed by then UN Secretary General U Thant. He saw it not only as a place for research; but also as a place of teaching where an international body of professors would meet an international body of students. The big academic powers killed that idea: they wanted those students for themselves, using culture for obvious political and economic purposes (the latter not only by charging exorbitant US/UK fees, but also by implanting tastes for the products of the host country high up in countries recruiting students.) But then we have the industry of ; certainly a growth industry. It fits the general hypothesis of social change made use of here. No doubt it is global, at least as potential. Internet knows no border, or almost none. Some countries, deemed to be authoritarian, try to stem the tide into and/or out of the country, difficult given the link to modern telephone technology. Some countries, deemed democratic, use another strategy: they spy on the information flow (project Echelon, by the USA, UK, Canada and Australia; maybe others). This is, of course, much wiser: they get to know what people are up to instead of preventing them from being up to anything at all. Democracies can pinpoint the “enemies”; dic-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

tatorships have to assume that anybody is a potential enemy and frightens almost everybody into inaction. Democracies offer symbolic interaction as a sting, and registers who gets off in the wrong direction. The opportunities for global teaching, learning, dialogue are tremendous, making the university more universal, not just national. There is an important exception: the medium is likely to be English with the USA as de facto center and the UK a pretender thinking it has some special rights and duties. In the spirit of the day they may have liked to patent the language. Future vision: the classical, state-based universities are dying; the global universities are coming up, mainly on-line (but also as caravans, on cruise-ships, maybe on plane); the local, on-site, academies are also coming up—flexible, keeping the notion of a “course” but with all kinds of professor-student relations (one-on-one, the on-line tutorial; many-on-one, team-tutorial; the classical one-on-many, one professor teaching several; and many-on-many, a conference with no borderlines. Let us look backward a little, in order to look forward. The medieval universities were very close to what is envisaged here. They were global, not on-line but on foot (or horseback); knowledge being disseminated by peripatetic, highly globalized, monks. They were also local, given the slow locomotion catering to their immediate environment in Bologna, Paris, etc. There was a global tongue, a lingua franca: Latin. The state “system” set a stop to all of that. Borders were drawn, states were “given” (meaning they arrogated it to themselves) the right to go to war provided the war was declared (John 1:1: “In the beginning was the Word”). The university, based on words, became a part of the state armory; albeit with an underlayer of the medieval system that has survived through the whole unfortunate period of more than 350 years. A particularly peripatetic person was Desiderius Erasmus (c1466– 1536); the European Union has done well naming a major inter-university exchange program after him. What this means is that medieval conditions are being recreated, inside the EU territory. But we should aim for more. A region is also a super-state, and likely to use super-university structures for super goals, like the USA does. However important, a region is not global, but could also set the stage for a super-war if the super-state is underpinned by super-nationalism, some kind of least common denominator europeanism. But globalization is neither americanization, nor its presumed antidote, europeanism. Globalization should articulate the knowledge and wisdom of the whole world, and develop it further. That is the dramatic challenge to our universities. And that is the dramatic challenge to peace education.






Norman E. Cantor, in Inventing the Middle Ages (New York: Quill, 1991) remarks that “Hitler’s New Order was accepted as readily in the universities as elsewhere in German life. As guardians of the national spirit professors turned out to be nothing special.—-In all German academia only one Nobel physicist who was a Gentile left of his accord—Erwin Schrödinger, who went to Dublin” (p. 88). In other words: if we assume one basic criterion of science to be its availability in public space then such institutions are not scientific but more in the category of the whisperings of the Geheimrat in the ears of the Prince. It would be interesting to test two obvious hypotheses: 1. These professors were in the forefront of the resistance; 2. These professors were not in the forefront of peace movements.





There is a transnational process going on building a sixth non-territorial continent, the quickly expanding continent of international and transnational organizations, some of them non-profit, many for profit. It is dominated by the north-western continent—culturally, economically, politically—both with regard to structure, human resources and concepts. A couple of words about this are needed before any attempt to develop some thoughts about transnational universities. As we know, more than 80% of the headquarters of international organizations, whether they are profit or nonprofit, governmental or nongovernmental, are located in the northwestern part of the world and very often in what one might call the far north-west, the USA. This means that structurally speaking, to a very large extent, the non-territorial continent is a replica of the territorial one: the system of States with their power relations More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages 67–115 Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

is reproduced inside the non-territorial organizations which for that reason to some extent reinforces the system of States. This is particularly true for intergovernmental organizations, but less true today than 20 years ago, and it will be even less true in 15 or 20 years. Studies have shown that this type of activity brings into the foreground, as secretary generals, presidents, directors of international organizations, middle-aged men, urban, universityeducated from small, rich countries like Norway, Israel, Switzerland. They are the colonizers of the sixth continent, to some extent because the big countries colonized the territorial continents. It is very important to keep this in mind because sooner or later reaction will come, and some of the points about transnational universities is in anticipation of just that type of reaction. There is also the conceptual bias. Why are there no Chinese in international organizations, or so few Chinese? One reason for it is conceptual: the very idea of detaching an individual from his or her habitat and placing that individual in the context of a conference room is an idea highly compatible with individualizing western civilization, but not so compatible with the thinking, concepts and traditions developed elsewhere. However, while we should be aware of our limitations, the non-territorial continent is in fact growing, and much more quickly than the territorial one. The territorial, geo-political, area has its obvious limitations; the nonterritorial, socio-cultural area is practically unlimited. It can grow endlessly. We can multiply the number of organizations, being only limited by one single factor: the number of human beings and the amount of time available for meaningful participation. But with 4.5 billion human beings and each one of us capable perhaps of being a member of say ten organizations, we still have some work to do saturating the non-territorial continent if we want to continue. Let us then add two more phenomena to this picture. The schooling level is rising in all countries; people demand and seek deeper and deeper educational experiences. Education has become a way of life for many, also after schooling. So has international travel. In short, people are to a large extent ready, and have been for some time.

CASE 1: INTER-UNIVERSITY CENTRE IN DUBROVNIK, CROATIA The following is based on some experience as the first Director-General of one transnational university, the Inter-University Center (IUC) in Dubrovnik, which by 1977 had 83 universities and university organizations from different part of the world as members, and had organized 30 courses in the 3 years of its existence from 1974, involving hundreds of student and professors from various countries.



These were very intensive post-graduate courses, of 3 to 4 weeks’ duration, with 6 to 8 hours of work every day. Without referring much to this particular case, it gives some basis for reflections on what a transnational university should be like, and they can be divided into two parts: form and content. The Form of Transnational Universities. This is terribly important, the structure of the enterprise is already half the message. One can easily imagine the false transnational university. It is the socalled “international university” founded in one country, where all teachers are of one nationality and the students are of different nationalities. It looks colorful because there are students from different corners of the world, but they are all given the same kind of thinking and training. This form is, of course, associated with territorial colonialism, and is a continuation of territorial colonialism into the cultural imperialist forms of our age. I am not saying it cannot be useful. Sometimes the reactions developed by students in such places when they put a minus or “no” in front of all they hear can be very useful. In the Third World many people used to say, only half-jokingly: if you want your son/daughter to be conservative, send them to the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow; send them to the US if you want a Marxist. But to the extent that teaching merely consists of imitating and reciting, this fake type of departure is essentially a continuation of the status quo or even a reinforcement of it. It is a way of colonizing other countries by colonizing the minds of their elites—by making national study programs internationally available. It is big power politics. There is another interesting variety that is just the opposite of this traditional model: students from one country, but a faculty of all kinds of colors and nationalities. It was a form practiced by Japan in the early Meiji period, inviting professors from other countries. It is also a form practiced by Cuba today for technical assistance. As a matter of fact socialist Cuba and imperial Japan had exactly the same idea: invite professors from all kinds of places, but let them stay for a short time only and kick them out afterwards. Give the professors the same task, but do not let them communicate too much with each other, listen to what each one has to say, and when they have left, see what they have left behind, compare notes. This puts the recipient country in a very advantageous position because it can compare the messages. It has the advantage that they can see clearly that there is no such thing as an objective, unambiguous expertise in the world because the moment you bring together one Norwegian, one Pole and one Japanese teaching economics, one has three different types of concepts of economies, which means, there is more to draw upon.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

On the other hand, however, this clever strategy is also a part of the territorial system. It is one territorial unit using the multiplicity of the territorial system for its own advantage as a resource that it can convert into its own national growth, as was the case with Japan, and as is the case with Cuba. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is not necessarily what we mean by a transnational university. A transnational university has faculty members, resource persons from all kinds of places, and students, participants from all kinds of places. In addition the topics of study, the themes are international, not conceptually limited to one nation only. And there are the fourth and fifth internationalizations, the composition of the governing body and the sources of finance. As there has to be a territorial base somewhere that leads to a key question: Where is that host country in the world willing to locate this when the purpose is neither to spread national doctrine nor national growth? To the extent that there is such a place, one might say that Geneva comes closer than most others, that Geneva is the place in the world where the non-territorial continent intersects with the territorial one. One finds it in such celebrated institutions in that particular host city as the Institut Universitaire des Hautes Etudes Internationales and the Institut Universitaire d’Etudes du Développement (the latter now, 2008, being absorbed into the former). But again, it will take color from the territorial setting in which it is located, a western one, even a Swiss one: of the five internationalizations the student body comes closest; the other four are predominantly Swiss, with international coloring. Some people have suggested that one should take the consequences of this and establish the transnational university on board ships. Let them circle around the world, let them be transterritorial at the same time as they are transnational! It is one solution and in interesting one to the asymmetry in having a host country, but it is also an artificial one, not located in the type of environment where things can be tested in real concrete human practice, immediately, in interaction. Ideally, a place like the IUC in Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, once a free port, should become a free intellectual port. But it is not as simple as that: the moment the transnational idea of bringing together resource persons, participants, professors, students with the purpose of promoting knowledge puts down roots on a concrete spot in our territorial world, the particular circumstances of that territory will easily transgress into the little transnational cell. Thus, the IUC was rocked 1976–77 by the demand from Yugoslav professors not permitted to teach at Yugoslav universities should not teach in Dubrovnik either. But there is hardly any country in the world where there would not be some kind of constraint, some type of limitation. In Norway, for instance,



a transnational university wanting to organize a course on Quisling’s philosophy would have problems if the conclusion were not known in advance to be negative and if someone had proposed to use some of Quisling’s old ministers as resource persons. Or, to explore why so many of Norway’s best artists at the time were on his side; Hamsun, Munch, Vigeland, Flagstad to mention some. Adoration for German culture? Anti-americanism? We say this to arrive at a symmetric solution in addition to the transterritorial, oceanic shipping enterprise: to see a transnational university as something with many campuses, one here, one there, a network, with each one of them fulfilling certain roles under certain rules and obligations, set up so that the course that cannot be taught in country X can be taught in country Y. In other words that network itself is the transnational university, not a particular place. That, then, would be the sixth internationalization; in space. The United Nations University comes relatively close to this concept. Five of the six internationalizations are there, but the one missing is rather crucial: there are no students! Five years after its inception there is still no education for development program—possibly indicative of how much is at stake in this connection. The Content of Transnational Universities What is the content of transnational universities, what do they do? The form is already half the content; more is communicated through form than through a curriculum because students these days take structure every seriously, just as they will look more at the lifestyle of a professor of ethics than at the brilliance of his teaching, watching carefully how he relates to his family for comparisons with his lectures about inter-human relations. Let us start by making one small but important point: national governments have traditionally been used to one very comfortable thought, namely that if there is a crisis, when the chips are down, then they can call upon their academics to rally to the national cause. Ideals of universal science and dedication broke down very quickly in 1914, as they did in 1939–40. Brilliant US academics made use of their brilliance to devise ways and means whereby the population of a certain country in Southeast Asia could be substantially reduced: Viêt Nam. Thus, it seems obvious that a transnational university would have as one of the goals, as part of its content, to inspire other loyalties. But which are those other loyalties? They are, of course, vaguely put, to humankind on the one hand, and to the global system on the other. That does not mean to any global system. We think for instance very many people in the world, particularly the Third World, would say that they would be more willing to


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

sacrifice for the UN system today than for the UN system as it was designed in 1945 by the Allies, the victors of the Second World War. How does one build such transnational concerns into courses? In the experience in Dubrovnik, there are two very transnational topics that are eminently teachable, researchable, discussable, debatable in such courses. One of them relates to human needs. It is an endless topic: material needs, non-material needs, the theories of human needs, the practice of human needs, the idea of human needs, variations in time and space, the problems of founding some kind of theory of peace or development on a theory of human needs. These topics bring together, across disciplinary borders, philosophers, theologians, social scientists, biologists, economists, physical scientists, just to mention some. Ideal topics for transnational universities, also because any human is an expert at least on the peculiarity of his and her own needs. It is very interesting to see how the UN agencies in recent years are moving their whole thinking about development towards basic human needs and away from economic growth. The very important conference which took place in the ILO building in June 1976 was all expression of this based on a world model to a large extent developed as an antithesis to the Club of Rome, by the Fundación Bariloche in Argentina. Unfortunately, however, there is the tendency for the UN agencies to pick up only material needs, because they are less controversial. Another topic equally eminently researchable, teachable and discussable has to do with the conditions for the satisfaction of human needs, such a production, distribution, structural transformation, cultural conditions, institution-building, ecological balance. All these things are so much better taught in a transnational setting and a multiplicity of experience gives testimony to this. But there is one condition. It is our experience, and not a very original one, that professors are much more similar to each other than students. If there is a transnational setting with 20 professors and 100 students, there will be much less variety among the professors than among the students, the reason to a large extent simply being that professors have come further in reading the same books than the students. They have had their minds more formed by the superprofessors, read in all countries. The students will soon follow suit when they catch up in years and get their degrees and positions. But as long as they are still fresh, meaning 25 years old rather than 35, not to mention 45—at 55 they are lost—national and other differences will show up for full. The condition needed to reap full benefit from this variety is the type of setting where participants and resource persons have a very high degree of symmetry in their relations. In other words, a basic point of transnational teaching is precisely to establish dialogue, for if one does not have dialogue, the pluralism in the transnational setting it to a large extent lost, and that



pluralism is best articulated if the students are permitted to say as much as possible. This may often be a trying experience, and our experience is that we have rarely seen so many people upset and to some extent frightened because things they regarded as universal, scientific truth just simply did not look like that from other countries. The first temptation, then, is of course to say that such countries are underdeveloped and that they will catch up when the material for the appropriate degrees has been communicated through telesatellites. On second thought, one gives up the idea, and the problem becomes how to establish the kind of setting where this type of world diversity can be made use of in a critical and constructive way. Transnational Universities: Form and Content Combined A transnational university takes transnationalization seriously: it appeals to people having some kind of double existence. There is nothing so terribly new in that: one of the most important non-territorial movements in the western world for 2000 years has been Christianity. It has national color, yet it is also a transnational college exploring what for Christians are perennial truths. But a truly transnational enterprise has to understand, as Roger Garaudy has expressed it, that western civilization is only one among many and for that reason our task is to call for a dialogue des civilisations. A painful experience because it may make us see better some of the dubious assumptions that we have not questioned in the last 2000 years. And yet this is a third topic of tremendous importance ideally suited for an institution that has realized all six internationalizations. As the world is coming closer together, in part because of communication facilities, universities will also come closer together. But this, curiously enough, will not make human knowledge more universal; on the contrary, it will probably have just the opposite result. The idea of universal science is a typical western idea, because the assumption has always been that it is western science that will be the nucleus of universal science. Thus, one will hear no western mathematician seriously questioning the basic idea of western mathematics, namely to arrive at contradiction-free systems, although so much of for instance Chinese thinking is based on the idea that contradiction is fundamental to everything. One will hear no western mathematician (and I was once one of their students, although later deserter from the cause) develop on the theme which now seems relatively obvious, to me at least, namely that mathematics is some kind of western conspiracy, brilliantly developed, brilliantly disseminated, but nevertheless a western conspiracy. As our world develops more along horizontal lines, the variety of human experience will become more obvious to us and it will be a plu-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

ralistic concept of knowledge more than a universal, western concept that will prevail. And in that lies its real strength, and a clear program for transnational universities: to contribute to that essential dialogue, to offer a forum for exchange rather than indoctrination of any kind. For if the quest for knowledge is a process rather than an end result, then the form of the process becomes as important as the content of the deliberations. The task for transnational universities is to provide that form and fill it with a content that responds to the deep problems besetting our world today. That transnational universities are very effective sources of personal enrichment for student and faculty alike is obvious. They also serve a function as a source of cross-fertilization among intellectual milieus. We should add the third dimension of growth of global solidarity through the exploration in true dialogues of global problems. The model here is not convergence toward a universal consensus = Truth. At least in social affairs truth is particularistic rather than universal, and precisely for that reason it should be tested through dialogue in a transnational and the more diverse the partners, the richer the dialogue. And the more stimulating the moment the goal of consensus is abandoned in favor of mutual enrichment: others see better than I the truths left out and can often see my truths better than myself. A true spirit of mutual intellectual and emotional aid is needed for this, and that is not so easy within a western tradition of universalism and centralism, with the West being the center of the universe. With a more polycentric world, such illusions can no longer be upheld. Hence, transnational universities are not only attractive but a necessity, for types of knowledge more relevant to the new world order emerging. CASE 2:


There is an enormous need in the world for people with skills in nonviolent and creative conflict transformation and work for peace in general. By solving conflicts in peaceful ways, creative energy can be released at the personal, social and world levels and material and nonmaterial destruction avoided. Peace studies, like health studies (medicine) are clearly value-oriented: to save and promote life for all, to meet the basic needs for security, well-being, freedom, identity and a livable environment. Some argue that peace research is “advocacy,” not a real science, because it portrays the world the way in which we wish it would be, rather than how it really is. Nothing is further from the truth. There is nothing wrong with applied, goal-oriented sciences, like engineering, medicine or peace research. To achieve their goals, they must be strictly scientific. If a medical researcher—as has happened—paints micro-



scopic black spots on tissue samples of mice in an effort to “prove” his hypothesis of the origin of cancer, he does not advance human health, but harms it! To achieve a goal, it is necessary to be strictly scientific. Whereas a physicist may study how a bridge collapses under a heavy weight, which point breaks first and how the process unfolds, an engineer will want to use this insight to design a bridge that will not collapse. To say that because engineering has a goal it is therefore unscientific is nonsense! The same is true about peace research. While a biologist may study how an organ decays under the influence of microbes, a medical researcher will use that insight to develop ways to prevent or cure disease. Similarly, while political scientists and historians may study why and how countries went to war, a peace researcher will want to use these discoveries to develop ways to prevent or end wars. Being scientific and value-oriented is not incompatible. On the contrary, by falsifying observations, we can never achieve our goals. The goal of peace studies is to train not only theorists, but practitioners who can apply what they have learned. Learning about peace without putting that knowledge to use would be as irresponsible as studying medicine without using the insights gained to alleviate the suffering of the sick. Johan Galtung used the following analogy to criticize those who maintain that science must be “value-free”: Imagine you are sick and visit a doctor. He looks at your tongue and measures your temperature and pulse. Then he tells you, “You have a very interesting disease, I will write it up in my next scientific publication.” You ask, “But don’t you have a cure for me?” The doctor protests, “Oh no, I am value-free. I simply observe, I do not intervene.” An architect who designed a building that collapses “because that is how it has always been done” would lose his professional license, and may be taken to court. For the same reason, as the international lawyer Richard Falk pointed out, “The greatest utopians are those who call themselves ‘realists’, because they falsely believe that we can survive the nuclear age with politics as usual. The true realists are those who recognize the need for change.” In 1988, Johan Galtung and George Kent designed a comprehensive and systematic curriculum for a “Master’s Degree in Peace and Conflict Resolution” at the University of Hawai’i. Hawai’i did not adopt it, but it served as model for the curriculum offered at the European Peace University in Schlaining, Austria, where Fischer was Academic Director from 2003–2009, and now at the World Peace Academy (WPA) in Basel, Switzerland, founded in 2009 by Pierre and Catherine Brunner ( A peace studies program needs to convey theoretical knowledge, including the intellectual ability to analyze conflicts and their underlying causes. It needs to train students in practical skills to transform conflicts peacefully, using case studies, role-plays, exercises in dialogue, negotiation and mediation, and field work, to supplement academic learning with real life


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

experience. Finally, it must help motivate students to do everything in their capacity to help create a better, more peaceful world in which everyone’s needs are met. A conflict involves Attitudes (“enemy images”), Behavior (violent or nonviolent, verbal or physical) and Contradictions (incompatible goals), the ABC triangle. Conflicts can rarely be completely “resolved” so that they simply disappear, but they can be transformed from being fought with violent means to being conducted by peaceful means. In this way, conflicts can have a constructive function by helping bring about desirable change. Conflicts are analyzed in terms of diagnosis (sources of a conflict), prognosis (likely trends without intervention), therapy (proposed interventions to reduce violence) and also “counter-factual history” (what could have been done differently in the past, by whom, to prevent or reduce violence). The courses deal with conflicts at all levels beginning with micro-conflicts within and between persons: how to overcome domestic and work conflicts on a daily basis, particularly useful for couples, parents, teachers, social workers and many others. Meso-conflicts deal with issues on gender and generation, race or class, employers vs employees, where groups of people are in contradiction with each other. Macro-conflicts take place between states and nations, like the numerous conflicts among nations within states for independence or autonomy. Finally, mega-conflicts concern contradictions between East-West, North-South and between civilizations like Christianity-Islam. Conflicts at all of these levels of human society exhibit some similarities, and insights gained at one level can often be applied to other levels. There are many different ways to find solutions to conflicts. If the only tool we have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. A good doctor has a comprehensive medicine chest, with a variety of cures for different illnesses. Peaceful conflict transformation requires empathy (as attitude), nonviolence (as behavior) and creativity (to bridge conflicting goals), to achieve mutually acceptable and sustainable outcomes. Peace includes the absence of war, but it is much more. It is the absence of violence in all of its forms and the presence of mutually beneficial cooperation and mutual learning. Just as there is a distinction between negative health (absence of disease) and positive health (the capacity to resist disease), there is a distinction between negative peace (absence of violence, and more particularly absence of war) and positive peace, the capacity to contain violence and to transform conflicts by peaceful means. The distinction between peace-keeping and peace-building resembles the distinction between curative and preventive medicine. Johan Galtung (in “The Coming One Hundred Years of Peacemaking: Visions of Peace for the 21st Century,” a lecture given at the Centenary Conference of the International Peace Bureau in Helsinki on 30 August



1993) distinguishes between four forms of power: military, economic, political and cultural. They correspond to four basic human needs, for survival, economic well-being, freedom and identity (the opposites being death, misery, oppression and alienation). These lead to the distinction between four forms of violence: direct violence (hurting and killing people with weapons), structural violence I (the slow death from hunger, preventable or curable diseases and other suffering caused by exploitation and unjust structures of society, which now kills over 100,000 people every day), structural violence II (deprivation from freedom of choice and from participation in decisions that affect people’s own lives), and cultural violence (the justification of direct and structural violence in education, the media, literature and art, in the form of nationalism, racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination and prejudice). Peace has then eight components—the absence of these four forms of violence (“negative peace”), and the presence of activities to bring relief for past or present violence and to prevent future violence (“positive peace”), in their military, economic, political and cultural dimensions. A comprehensive peace studies curriculum needs to address all of these eight components of peace. A sample of 45 corresponding courses is listed in Table 1. The Master of Advanced Studies program in Peace and Conflict Transformation at WPA requires three trimesters of courses, lasting 12 weeks each (fall, spring and summer). Most courses meet for 15 hours (3 hours per day in the morning, Monday to Friday). Most of the courses are taught by visiting faculty members, and we seek to invite the best specialists in their field from around the world and from a wide variety of disciplines, with real life experience, offering a great variety in perspectives. In 2012, there were 30 lecturers from every continent. Academic disciplines represented include history, political science, international relations, international law, human rights, economics, business, engineering, environmental studies, psychology, sociology, anthropology, gender studies, education, communication, culture, philosophy, ethics, world religions, conflict transformation and conciliation. Courses in the spring trimester focus primarily on direct violence and how to avoid it. Courses in the summer trimester focus mainly on structural violence and ways to overcome it. Courses in the fall trimester concentrate on cultural violence and cultural peace. Some courses (e.g. Introduction to peace studies, Forms of violence, Peace theory, Strengthening the United Nations system, Strategic planning and management of peace projects, Conclusion) relate to all aspects of peace and are therefore not listed in any particular category in Table 1. In all courses, students are invited to contribute their own experiences.

Good and bad governance; Human rights; Democratization; Peacebuilding; Global The domination system governance; International law and world order; Protection of minorities and self-determination; Research for social justice Culture and conflict; Global mass media, information warfare and cyberwar

Political power (structural violence II)

Cultural power (cultural violence)

Peace culture; Peace education; Deep culture and conflict culture; Conciliation; Nonviolent communication; Peace and gender; Peace and ethics; Peace and religions; Peace psychology; Peace journalism

Alternative economic systems; Theories of development; Peace business; Gender and development

Causes of poverty and inequality; Pollution and resource depletion

Economic power (structural violence I)

Conflict transformation by peaceful means; Crises prevention, intervention, post-conflict reconstruction and conciliation; Dialogue, negotiation, mediation and arbitration; Nonviolence-from philosophy to practical tool; Working for peace in conflict zones; Peace and social movements; Transition from civil war to peace; Alternative security systems; Nonmilitary approaches to security: Conflict mitigation

Conflict theory; Terrorism and state terrorism--causes and prevention

Positive Peace

Military power (direct violence)

Negative Peace

Eight Components of Peace, and Courses Addressing Them

Form of power (form of violence)


78 More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development



Short Course Descriptions Introduction to Peace Studies Key questions, concepts, theories and research methods within the field of peace and conflict studies, laying the foundation for special courses. In a multicultural environment, students learn how to deal with diversities and conflicts within small groups. Group dynamics, intercultural awareness and communication play important roles in daily activities and contribute to personal development and academic achievement. Forms of Violence Violence as denial of basic human needs (survival, well-being, freedom, and a sense of meaning). The mega-violence of the holocaust, the silent holocausts of hunger and avoidable death, the gulags, concentration camps. Direct, structural and cultural violence. Violence cycles and histories; genesis, dynamics, termination. How do wars begin and end. Survey of violence among the regions of the world and among countries; violence between the state and citizens, and between age, gender, race, class and ethnic groups. Case studies. Peace Theory Peace as the struggle to contain direct violence, transform violent structures and promote peaceful cultures. The roots of peace in basic human needs for survival, well-being, freedom and identity. Diversity of concepts of peace in different civilizations and in human history. Introduction to alternative security systems, alternative economic systems, alternative political systems and peace cultures. Visioning peaceful societies and peaceful worlds. Case studies of relatively enduring peace, such as the European Community, ASEAN and the Nordic countries, with theories as to how and why. History of peace movements, the “high road” (the abolition of war as a social institution) and the “low road” (focussed on short term goals). Comparison with the struggles against slavery, colonialism, imperialism, age-group, gender and class exploitation; and against racism and sexism. Peacekeeping, peacemaking and peacebuilding. Strengthening the United Nations System The UN has been amazingly successful in achieving the main goal for which it was created after World War II, preventing interstate aggression. But it has been hindered from preventing or ending civil wars by the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of member states. After a survey of the United Nations family of organizations, some proposals are discussed how the UN system could be strengthened, including a People’s Assembly, a UN Institute for Mediation, and a World Treasury. By strength-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

ening the UN we do not give up control over our lives, but can overcome dangers where nations are powerless. Strategic Planning and Management of Peace Projects Six steps are practiced with examples from peacebuilding: (1) assess the problem; (2) construct a goal; (3) map a path from the present state to the goal state, which can get around obstacles; (4) divide the path into a series of well-defined feasible steps; (5) define milestones indicating when each step has been achieved; (6) implement the plan. Conclusion The connection between theoretical analysis and practical applications, between the intellectual and personal sphere, to assure the necessary competence and reliability in judgment of the graduates. Students are encouraged to examine what they have learnt from a personal viewpoint to see what consequences emerge for their own vision, life and work. Conflict Theory Conflict as incompatibility of goals, with attitudinal and behavioral manifestations. Actor-oriented and structure-oriented analyses; actors and parties; values and interests; Self-Other gradients; roots of prejudice and discrimination; transformation of structural conflicts to actor conflict through mobilization and conscientization. Typology of conflicts and conflict outcomes. Conflict cycles and histories, genesis, dynamics, resolution. Case studies. Terrorism and State Terrorism—Causes and Prevention Terrorism, whether used by states or non-state actors, seeks to instill fear among the civilian population to achieve political ends. Causes and motivation for terrorism and ways to prevent it; structure and function of terrorist organizations; failed states; causes of genocide, a special case of terror; the role of legislation and political leadership, education and the media in opposing terrorism. Conflict Transformation by Peaceful Means In a conflict, parties are pitted against each other because their goals seem incompatible. Attitudes and behavior harden, violence threatens. Through dialogues with the parties one-on-one and joint creativity, the conflict may be transformed so that the parties can handle it themselves, creatively and peacefully. Conflicts are analyzed in terms of diagnosis (sources of a conflict), prognosis (likely trends without intervention) and therapy (proposed interventions to reduce violence). To discover mutually accept-



able outcomes requires nonviolence, creativity, and empathy with the parties involved. A code of ethics for professional conflict workers is proposed. Crises Prevention, Intervention, Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Conciliation Preventive, curative and recuperative aspects of managing socio-economic-political crises; principles such as “do no harm,” needs orientation, interdependence, cooperation and sustainability in the planning, implementation and evaluation of crisis interventions; foreseeing potential crises, human rights monitoring, early warning, and humanitarian interventions in crisis situations; conciliation, retributive and restorative justice. Dialogue, Negotiation, Mediation and Arbitration Dialogue, which seeks to explore and understand, is different from “debate,” in which the parties seek to defeat each other. Developing skills in negotiation, mediation and arbitration, releasing creativity. The goal is to find mutually acceptable, sustainable outcomes. Nonviolence—From Philosophy to Practical Tool Theories and definitions of nonviolence with practical examples, ranging from individual via group and nation to global conflicts; analytical tools to understand conflicts; how nonviolent means can have a positive influence; the Gandhian perspective on nonviolence and conflicts; group exercises are used to transform theories into skills. Working for Peace in Conflict Zones Developing empathy, compassion, and self-awareness; practicing skills, such as accompaniment and interpositioning; the contributions to peace that individuals and teams can make around the world. Peace and Social Movements Successful future strategies for peace movement; alternative programs for security, economics and society; Lessons from the history of the anti-war, women’s, civil rights, anti-slavery, anti-colonialist and workers movements. Transition from Civil War to Peace A ceasefire is only the first step towards peace, not yet real peace. It is necessary to overcome not only direct violence, but also structural and cultural violence: injustices that generated the war, and a culture that dehumanizes the “enemy” and justifies violence. Real peace also requires positive actions, such as reconstruction of war damage, satisfaction of everyone’s basic needs, and mutual learning and cooperation. The role of a truth and conciliation process in restoring peace is examined.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Alternative Security Systems Transarmament to nonprovocative and nonmilitary defense as alternative to armament and disarmament. Examination of the military doctrines of the Swiss, Swedish, Finnish, Austrian, etc., systems. The use of nonprovocative, minimum military capability for peacekeeping. Examination of the UN experience in Sinai, Cyprus, the Middle East and other places; and non-UN efforts at peacekeeping. Nonmilitary Approaches to Security How we can learn from nature to create systems that maintain or restore a desired state of peace and security. It explores how societies can meet their citizens’ basic human needs and protect them against violence from the inside and outside by peaceful means, with a view to the abolition of war as a social institution. Conflict Mitigation An effort to reduce violence and make conflict less serious, even if it is not possible to eliminate it immediately. It helps the conflict parties focus on common goals and interests, and on mutually beneficial joint projects. Community leaders and members of the civil society who are able and willing to bring the conflict parties closer together are identified and supported. The course discusses many concrete case studies. Causes of Poverty and Inequality Neoclassical economic policies tend to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Poverty and high unemployment often lead to war, because they make the cost of recruiting an army low. The pursuit of quick material gains by seizing precious resources (gold, diamonds, oil, timber etc.) has also been a cause of wars. Has globalization reduced or exacerbated income inequalities? International aid seeks to alleviate poverty, but sometimes keeps corrupt and dictatorial regimes in power. Pollution and Resource Depletion How externalities (costs and benefits incurred by others than the decision-makers) are responsible for environmental pollution, depletion of non-renewable resources, and conflicts over scarce resources. Case studies include ozone depletion, global warming, over-fishing, species extinction and possible future wars over drinking water. The role of taxes on pollution and resource depletion, legislation, and non-governmental organizations such as Greenpeace in preserving a livable environment.



Alternative Economic Systems Systems for less exploitation, based on markets, planning, compromises between the two (social democracy), both (Japan), or neither (the green economy); growth vs distribution; sustainable development; human enrichment; cooperatives, sarvodaya, ujamaa, and other experiences for control and distribution of surplus; peacebuilding trade patterns; development cooperation. Theories of Development Perspectives, methodologies and explanatory categories proposed by various development theories; proposals for alternatives, including community based development theory. Peace Business Most businesses (except arms and related industries) benefit from peace. Therefore, they form part of a social fabric that protects against violence and can handle conflicts creatively. How the private sector can become more cooperative, more responsive to the needs of employees, customers, suppliers, the community, and nature, to foster sustainable development. How it can support the universal satisfaction of basic needs and a more equitable distribution of opportunities. Gender and Development How to create more gender equality and justice for all human beings, at the personal, organizational and political level. Personal stories and experiences as learning tools. Strategies for development including transformatory leadership, team-building, organizational and personal empowerment. Good and Bad Governance The lack of good governance and democracy is one of the root causes of conflict. Good governance requires awareness of people’s grievances, and constant efforts to address legitimate grievances and meet people’s needs. Dictatorial regimes that stifle open discussion of problems may be able to stay in power temporarily, but lack people’s allegiance necessary for any government to last. Case studies from many countries’ history. The Domination System Working for change to create and sustain peace can be a challenge as reforms often return to where we were before. To be effective change agents, we need clarity about the functioning of the domination system, which we often carry unconsciously within us. How we can create a more life-serving, sustainable system and be the change we want to see.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Human Rights The three human rights generations of civil-political, social-economiccultural and collective rights to peace, development and a clean environment. The major universal human rights instruments, how to assess whether they have been violated and how to proceed in case of violation. The relationship between human rights and peace. Democratization It involves elections by free and secret ballot, the right to free expression, human rights implementation, a high capacity for dialogue, an active citizenry in a vibrant civil society, and an ever higher capacity for solving conflicts (including over who shall govern) without violence. Cultural factors are explored without falling into the trap of cultural relativism. Peacebuilding Mapping conflicts and planning concrete, viable strategies to overcome direct, structural and cultural violence, by (1) conflict transformation by peaceful means, (2) ending violence—cease fire, (3) addressing root causes of violence—peacebuilding, development and meeting basic human needs, (4) empowering individuals and communities to build peace resources, and (5) conciliation and healing. Global Governance Under globalization an increasingly complex world is emerging, with states and regions, their relations of conflict and cooperation, their intergovernmental organizations and above all the United Nations; with numerous municipalities, NGOs, interacting civil societies, transnational corporations etc. What models do we have for governance? How can the steering process be democratized? International Law and World Order The impact of terrorism—and the US response—on the basic structure of international relations and the dimming prospects for global reform. The changing role of the state, the role of individuals, and the worldwide religious resurgence; law, war, and morality; the role of domestic courts in the international legal order; human rights and state sovereignty; strengthening the World Court and the International Criminal Court; revolutionaries and functionaries; humane governance; ecocide, genocide, and the Nuremberg Principles of individual responsibility. Protection of Minorities and Self-Determination The rights of minorities (ethnic, linguistic, religious, sexual) and their frequent discrimination. Oppressed minorities and conflicts over self-



determination represent a major threat to peace (Darfur, Kosovo/a, the Basques, Northern Ireland, the Tutsis in Rwanda, Nagaland in India, Quebec in Canada, Native Americans in the USA). Examples where minorities are treated well, and lessons for conflicts that persist. Research for Social Justice Quantitative and qualitative research, action research, appreciative inquiry, and social research; developing a research proposal, literature review, data collection and analysis; how research can contribute to peace, social justice, and equity in the world. Culture and Conflict To understand how different people act in conflict we need to link ethnographic, anthropological, psychological and sociological insights. To help transform conflicts we need to understand the parties’ deeper emotionladen fears, not only the specific surface issues of contention. Examples of successes and failures are drawn from small traditional cultures as well as modern cases of intense conflict. Global Mass Media, Information Warfare and Cyberwar History of the structure of the global mass media, their growing concentration, their role in promoting war and their potential role in reducing tensions and building nonviolent structures. Practical aspects of peace networking and future trends of mass media and communications. Peace Culture Each civilization carries, in its deep culture, the seeds of peace and violence, of development and misery, of conflict solution and conflict hardening. We will search for peace themes and nonviolent approaches in religions and ideologies, language and literature, art and science. A dialogue of civilizations has to explore the deep cultures, a process that is painful but necessary for possible transformation to more peaceful cultures. Peace Education The task of peace pedagogy is to convey knowledge about causes of conflict and violence and conditions for peace, from micro to macro. Basic is the capacity to handle conflicts with empathy, nonviolently and creatively. How to facilitate the learning of peace from kindergarten to university, within formal and informal education. How to deal with group violence, such as bullying. Peace pedagogical methods include futures envisioning and collaborative learning. A survey of major actors and theorists in peace education provides a foundation for further research and applications.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Deep Culture and Conflict Culture Fundamental causes of war and violence, rooted in deeply held, often collective subconscious thinking patterns. Differences between genders, generations, classes are discussed. How we can help parties in a conflict transform them nonviolently, at the personal, group and international level. Case studies include the Spaniards, the Basques and the Catalans; the Gulf War; the Yugoslavia War; US deep conflict culture; UN deep culture. Differences between genders, generations and classes; dimensions of therapy. Participants are invited to contribute examples from their own experience. Conciliation After violence the parties are traumatized, not only the victims but also the perpetrators. Conciliation means healing the wounds on both sides and closing the bad relationship so that the parties can move on and relate to each other in positive ways, often for the first time. Approaches include reparation/restitution; apology/forgiveness; juridical/punishment; historical/truth commission; joint sorrow/healing; joint reconstruction; joint conflict resolution; and the Hawai’ian ho’o pono pono, which combines all of these approaches, with an emphasis on acts of omission, not only commission. “Conciliation” is used because “reconciliation” (returning to the situation that existed before, which produced the violence) is not sufficient. Nonviolent Communication It is a total system of thinking and being, profoundly egalitarian non-authoritarian and compassionate. It is remarkably effective in resolving conflicts. Topics include expressing observations, feelings, needs and requests; gratitude; initiating social change; nonviolent communication with children, parents, partners, in schools and at work. Peace and Gender Interdependence between gender and power; theory and practice of gender roles in different societies; connections between militarism, gender based violence, gender based social roles and violent societies, using examples from the Middle East, South East Asia, Western and Eastern Europe and the United States; dichotomies such as active/passive, hero/victim, strong/weak, war/peace, and masculine/feminine stereotypes; understanding such social constructions can help overcome gender inequalities and promote peace. Peace and Ethics Kant’s universalism, Bentham’s utilitarianism, Rawls’ theory of justice and other schools of thought about ethics. Can goals justify means, can violence be used to stop gross human rights violations? Efforts to establish



international rules of behavior, from Grotius’ writing about international law, the Hague Peace Conference, the Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and more. Peace and Religions Every religion has “soft” aspects, emphasizing charity, acceptance of diversity and promotion of the common good, and “hard” aspects, emphasizing strict doctrine and intolerance towards believers in other faiths. The potential contributions of various religions to peace, or to sectarianism, fanaticism and violence. Interreligious dialogues to find common ground. Peace Psychology Psychological causes of direct, structural and cultural violence; psychological characteristics that produce nonviolence, conflict resolution, social justice, peacemaking and conciliation; biological foundations of human behavior; schooling; memory and perception, motivation and emotions; social and cultural influences on attitudes, behavior, personality; social psychology, mass psychology and mental illness and their impact on war or peace. Peace Journalism The media still tend to focus on portraying violence and “who wins,” rather than on the underlying causes of conflicts and possible solutions. The course will explore how the media often contribute to violence and exacerbate conflicts, as well as the many ways of improving the situation. Students also do research to write six term papers and a master’s thesis, usually after completing their course work. Every thesis has to include concrete proposals how to transform a conflict by peaceful means or solve a social problem. Mere analysis of the causes of a problem without offering possible solutions, or criticism of poor policies without offering alternatives, is not sufficient. In addition to courses, students also learn through seminars where they present their work and receive comments from faculty members and fellow students. Films, cultural evenings, excursions to places of interest, reading, library research, written assignments, dialogues with faculty members and fellow students, and the immersion into a culture and society at peace complement the learning process. This has an effect beyond mere book learning. It is remarkable, for example, that Alexander Yakovlev, Gorbachev’s closest adviser and the key architect of perestroika, glasnost and democratization, was a member of the first delegation of thirty Soviet students who studied a year in the United States with a Fulbright fellowship in 1958. I


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

have no doubt that this scholarship did more to help end the cold war than billions spent for weapons, which only exacerbated tensions. In the fall of 2010, WPA had 38 students from 26 countries from every continent, about half from Africa, Asia and Latin America. Many of our about one thousand former students from over one hundred countries now have successful careers in international organizations, NGOs, businesses, universities, or work with their governments. The Master of Advanced Studies (MAS) program at WPA, offered in cooperation with the University of Basel, is designed to give a comprehensive overview over all aspects of peace. Willy Brandt once said, “Peace is not everything, but without peace, everything is nothing.”

A LIST OF RECOMMENDED LITERATURE Barash, D., & Webel C. (2002). Peace and conflict studies. Sage Publications. A comprehensive introductory textbook to peace studies. Curle, A. (1995). Another way: Positive response to contemporary violence. Oxford: Jon Carpenter. Based on experience from India and Pakistan, Nigeria, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Ireland, Sri Lanka, Yugoslavia to mention some. Equally recommended is his classic, Making Peace (Tavistock, 1971) Fischer, D. (1993). Nonmilitary aspects of security: A systems approach. Aldershot: Dartmouth. Covers strategies for nonmilitary defense, development, protecting the environment and human rights, at the individual, local, national and global level. Galtung, J. (1984). There are alternatives! Four roads to peace and security. Nottingham: Spokesman. Neutrality, nonoffensive and nonmilitary defense, domestic peace, and usefulness for others as national security strategies. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means. Thousand Oaks, CA, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications. A comprehensive and concise overview of Peace Theories, Conflict Theories, Development Theories and Civilization Theories (roughly corresponding to direct violence, conflict transformation, structural violence and cultural violence). Galtung, J. (2000). Conflict transformation by peaceful means: The TRANSCEND approach. Geneva: United Nations. 50 concrete lessons in practical conflict transformation, with exercises for self-study. Available at, where literature on peace and conflict from many authors is posted for free downloading. Galtung, J. (2004). Transcend and transform: An introduction to conflict work. London: Pluto Press. This book presents a carefully developed theoretical framework, the TRANSCEND approach, and illustrates it with numerous concrete cases based on five decades of experience as mediator, ranging from conflicts at the personal to the global level.



Galtung, J. (2008). 50 years: 25 intellectual landscapes explored. AU: COMPLETE REFERENCE. An overview of the potential contributions of various social sciences to peace, their strengths and weaknesses, and what is still missing. Galtung, J. (2008). 50 years: 100 peace and conflict perspectives. AU: COMPLETE REFERENCE. Peace proposals for 100 conflicts that he has mediated worldwide, some of which he helped resolve. This book marked the 50 years since he founded Peace Studies as an academic discipline back in 1958. Galtung, J. (2009). The fall of the US Empire—And then what? AU: COMPLETE REFERENCE. Explores the present decline and fall of the US Empire (which may lead to a blossoming of the US Republic), based on a theory used in 1980 to predict the fall of the Soviet empire within ten years. Galtung, J. & MacQueen, G. (2008). Globalizing god: Religion, spirituality and peace. AU: COMPLETE REFERENCE. Draws together the best ideas from the major world religions, and examines their hard (sectarian, cruel) and soft (understanding, compassionate) aspects. Lederach, J. P. (1995). Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. Syracuse. New York: Syracuse University Press. Based on the author’s extensive experience in Latin America, Asia and Africa, and his “elicitive” approach to understand the goals of the parties. Rosenberg, M. B. (2004). Nonviolent communication: A language of compassion. Del Mar, CA: Puddle Dancer Press. Focusses on behavior as a factor in conflict and provides many striking examples of how hostility was turned into friendship. Sandole, D., & van der Merwe, H., Eds. (1993). Conflict resolution: Theory and practice. Manchester and New York: Manchester Univ. Press. An introduction to different approaches in the field of conflict resolution.



From early September 1989 till May 1990 the Universität Witten/Herdecke in Germany organized Peace Studies Around the World. The following is a short report about a complex exercise, mainly intended as a guide for other study tours around the world. The general impression in retrospect is positive, to some extent even overwhelmingly so. There are also negative experiences, to be pointed out below, but they should not be permitted to overshadow the general impressions of helpfulness, generosity and capability on the side of the many local co-directors, and the great personal enrichment and insight and experience gained by the participants. One major positive experience: the peace study tour was administratively feasible. No catastrophes. Consider this: • 35 participants from 10 countries;


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

• Visiting 11 places, the long stays organized by codirectors: Soviet Union (Moscow, Estonia); Germany (Witten/Herdecke); Egypt (Cairo); Israel (Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, etc.); Palestine (Bir Zeit); India (Ahmedabad); Vietnam (Hanoi); Thailand (Bangkok, etc.); China (Chengdu etc.); Japan (Tokyo, etc.), USA (Hawai’i); • Visiting 7 places with shorter stays: Washington, D.C.; New York/ United Nations; London; Warszawa; Berlin; Aachen-Brussels-ParisGeneva-Luzern-Crottorff; Delhi; • Traveling around the world by plane; • Traveling around Europe by train and (mainly) by bus; • With six graduate courses and at least one paper from each in each course, the courses being: – Macro-Peace (research course); Micro-Peace (research course); Culture, Peace and War; Gandhism; Theories of Conflict; Theories of Peace. The first two courses gave 6 (or 8) credits in the US system and the other four to 3 (or 4) credits; a total of 24 (32) credit; – With 289 resource persons addressing the participants, in lecture/ seminar form, with 289 question-answer/discussions; and – All of this within a total budget of $375,000 (20 participants paid $12,500 each, the UWH participants contributed $125,000); covering the round-the-world-trip with all major excursions, accommodation, two meals per day, academic fees (but not transportation within some cities). The original US-UK budget was $594,000; the administration by UWH students accounting for a part of the $219,000 saving; generosity and Galtung’s numerous contacts for the rest. Another positive experience is the high academic achievement by the participants. In principle there were 35 papers in 6 courses, in practice somewhat less (see below). Some of these papers were among the best the academic director had read as a university teacher, at that time for about 40 years; and will probably also be among the best many of these participants will ever write. The trip inspired. Not strange. The participants lived these subjects day and night; this was, indeed, high temperature pedagogy. Agonies of various kinds by and large proved productive. The prediction by the academic director in the opening speech in Washington 10 September 1989, that PSAW would not be easy, even painful, was fulfilled: who ever said deep learning is painless? In the end 22 of the 35 participants got diplomas, having participated in (practically) all activities and passed all 6 courses (5 of the remaining 13--3 from UWH and 2 others--had been engaged in the administration; 3 had



been ill, 1 had been absent for a too long period; and 4 had been disinvited for lack of attendance, and left the PSAW at some point). A major negative experience was a too diverse pattern of motivation. PSAW was very clearly announced as a traveling university at the graduate level, and the applicants had been informed again and again that there would be very much work, at least counting on six hours a day. Yet in terms of motivation: Peace Studies Around the World:

maybe 8

Studies Around the world, studying anything:

maybe 15

Around the world, just traveling:

maybe 8

Around, just simply being around:

maybe 4

However, having said this, the experience was that those who had made up their mind to study quickly ended up also studying peace and conflict issues (just like the peace students certainly learnt a lot of other things in addition). Those who actually had joined mainly to see the world certainly ended up learning a lot. And those who were around with no clear motivation pattern related to the tour at least engaged in considerable person-building and sightseeing along the road. Some of the latter were disinvited. The clear lesson for the future is to put much more emphasis on motivation. Another negative experience, certainly related to what has been said above, was at times unacceptable manners, actually from the very first days. There is a way in which particularly US college students manage to make any place, including foreign ministry meeting rooms, look like college dormitories after only some minutes of occupancy. The use of chewing gum on any occasion decreased, but never down to zero. There were late arrivals for lectures, ungracious departures, lack of expressions of gratitude, questions sounding like attacks rather than openings of a conversation, sloppy appearance (unshaved, no hairdo), noisy, loud behavior. The lesson for the future is clear as application forms do not tell: in general have older participants (not college level, this also for academic reasons) and fewer US kids. Another major problem was the poor level of group self-organization. It took five months of travel before the group even organized a party for itself. A student council was never elected so there was no small group of students with whom the organizers could interact--not even a system of six students, each one checking whether five others were healthy, well and present. A weekly General Assembly was useful in articulating problems but not so useful in solving them. But self-organized discussion groups for joint papers etc. never took off.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

The lesson for the future is probably the same as for the preceding point, but also points to the necessity of having some preparation with all participants together, before the traveling really starts, so that group activity can crystallize in a less hectic setting with all kinds of small and big problems. That kind of preparatory month would of course include introductions to the places to be visited so that the most elementary questions have already been answered. Many details can be added, in the form of observations: • The group should start from the same point in order to share all experiences, including group dynamics. Most started in Washington, but Europeans joined in London. Not a good idea. • The group should travel together. PSAW permitted too many individual deviations; this had a distorting impact. • The group should share the economic conditions. Scholarships had a negative impact; on the one hand giving those who pay a feeling of being short-shrifted; on the other hand leading to a spirit of gratuitism in the scholarship holders. Much better would be scholarships as substantial subsidies to everybody. • No letter grades should ever be given. This is alien to the spirit of an adult undertaking, creating a college atmosphere. Pass/not yet pass would be the maximum grading, with diplomas in the end for those passing all courses. • Arrangements for credit transfer etc. should be entirely up to the individual participants and not be a part of the general organization. It creates distorting bonds to other universities. • The use of one organizer’s personal network around the world is double-edged. On the one hand it helped enormously in the organization, also saving expenses as he was teaching himself (in Estonia, India, Viêt Nam, China and Japan) in return for some of the tremendous hospitality received. But on the other hand: those personal relations made “bad manners” even less tolerable. • It must be clear that the program is a contract, not only with the participants, but also with many others. This still leaves ample space for improvised variations, but courses and academic work must be carried out as announced. The alternative is simple: better not to join an experience like PSAW. At the Universität Witten/Herdecke there have already been follow-ups. The Faculty of Economics made a Central Europe excursion (by the same bus that was used by PSAW) Leipzig-Praha-Ostrava-Blatnice-Krakow-Warszawa-Berlin, the theme being Development Politics in Europe. 25 students participated two weeks, among them 5 of the 7 who had participated in PSAW. The organizers were also to a large extent the same, with academic briefing



and debriefing before and after about periphery market economy systems, using the Western Hemisphere as a model. Other trips were organized to Southeastern Europe, Russia, the World Bank and Bonn for seminars with key decision makers. The general conclusion is not only the obvious that less ambitious programs are more easily implemented, but that the problems of shallow motivation and bad manners disappeared completely. However, considerable preparation and discussion together, built into the UWH course work as seminars, played a major role in making the trips more meaningful. The students knew better what to look for and what data to collect for their papers. And, concentrating on neighboring countries in Europe accessible by bus made the impressions less bewildering. Students at the UWH Faculty of Medicine carried out a Health Studies Around the World (HSAW), around such themes as: • The world system for production, distribution and consumption of health and ill health; • Comparison of how school medicine functions in different countries; • How physicians and patients experience each other in different countries; • Local and alternative medical traditions in different countries; and • The costs of therapies and prevention in different countries. The basic idea was to stay longer at each place, also in order to function, work, inside the medical system in order to experience different medical traditions. For India and China the places chosen could easily coincide with those chosen by PSAW, Gujarat Vidyapith and University of Sichuan, both with UWH cooperation agreements. A future PSAW should be integrated with one of the centers for postgraduate training in peace and conflict resolution, and one possibility might be the European Peace University in Stadtschlaining, Austria. Their pilot project Spring 1990 had, like PSAW, mixed experiences, but was by and large successful, and has been repeated with great success each term, starting September 1992 (see 3.1 above, Case 2). A full trip around the world might be too ambitious, but smaller trips with the same format covering parts of Europe, like parts of ex-Yugoslavia— carried out—possibly Mediterranean and Middle East countries, could be possible. Typically such shorter study tours could last from two weeks to two months, and be carried out between terms so as to be combinable with regular academic courses. For a repetition of PSAW the full recognition of one year PSAW as the equivalent of one year graduate university study would be a condition. For


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

some purposes one might even in the future think of some version of PSAW as obligatory, the exposure being so much more realistic and intense than any ordinary university year. Having said that, however, this is obviously not a question of either-or, but of both-and. Much can be said for PSAW first, and then a postgraduate second year building on PSAW experience. And much can be said for doing it the other way round. In other words, the best would be to have the two within the same academic program, but that would probably presuppose an inter-university consortium. Given the experiences gained and reported above this should be possible in some years.

3.3. NGO UNIVERSITIES: TRANSCEND PEACE UNIVERSITY Peace knowledge and peace skills are caught in exactly the same dilemma as the universities and the media: between the waning state-system, and the vexing regional and global systems (both in the sense of intergovernmental, nongovernmental and transnationally corporate), and the vexing local system. The old knowledge and skills were based on the inter-state system, and included diplomats with their competence in inter-state linguistic and behavioral skills, trained to represent, to get information and to “negotiate ratifiable treaties.” The people used by intergovernmental organizations, including the United Nations, have usually had this background; more often than not even seconded by the state who may continue paying their salary. If “who pays the piper calls the tune” we would expect strong elements of national interests to be a more or less hidden agenda in that kind of process. But even if the pay is internationalized, or irrelevant for character reasons, the training is still nation-state based. The assumption remains that world interest = harmonized state interests. Omitted are the many nations that are not primus inter pares nations in states; omitted are gender and generations interests; race and class; the excluded and many others, including the local level and the global levels, with their own interests. The diplomat is likely to be immersed in a cultural cocoon defined by nations linguistically and historically, and not only nationally but also sometimes regionally, as a “specialist.” But regionalization fragments the world, like seeing Africa but not the EU (more than half of them colonial powers) or Latin America without seeing the USA. A global perspective is needed. The diplomat is also likely to be trained in political science, economics or law. Unfortunately, he needs all of this but also more. Thus, how can he do without a profound insight in the cultures moving nations and states,



genders, generations toward war, or toward peace? Anthropology, theology, philosophy—a holistic perspective is needed. Peace studies are programmatically trans-national = global and transdisciplinary = holistic. Can that be taught, at all, in one place; or does it call for some kind of interactive, global and holistic approach? Difficult to tell. It is easier to see the shortcomings in existing schemes than to design something new. And yet that is what we have to do. TRANSCEND is a nongovernmental network of, in most cases, scholaractivists who try to combine knowledge and skills; some more knowledgebased, some more skills-based. The mission statement focuses on the reduction of direct and structural violence. Direct violence is seen as the tombstone over a conflict badly handled; structural violence as structures that have gone wrong, and badly so. In both cases people are suffering; they may die, quickly if by direct violence, more slowly if by structural violence. Both problems are exacerbated by cultural violence defined as those aspects of our culture, our symbolic existence, that are used to justify/legitimize the two other types of violence. Obviously, the goal is to transform conflicts, and structures, peacefully, i.e. without resorting to direct violence and/or structural violence. States usually have armies, and tend to use them to impose their peace or their structures, often making the situation much worse than it was before the violence started. A peace culture is needed. This is not the place to go into curricula, but to bring in the two approaches to the university TRANSCEND has launched, the TRANSCEND Peace University (TPU). The reader has guessed them: on-line and onsite, possible adding “on board” for teaching on board a suitable ship and “around the world” for combining the teaching with a “Journey Around the World,” for instance in 80 days. But let us focus on the global/Internet solution, on-line, and the local/academy solution, on-site. On-line has international and interdisciplinary faculty, on the way to becoming trans-national/disciplinary; and students from all sides of the traditional fault-lines marking the human condition. The language is English, but symbolic language like mathematics or some special symbolism for peace education is also used. There is a good spread of courses, tapping into many fields of peace knowledge and skills. The basic formula for conflict transformation; empathy (with all parties), creativity (to solve the contradiction) and nonviolence (physically, verbally) does not imply neutrality in the sense of evenhandedness in all cases. The stand against direct violence is clear, so is the stand against structural violence that means promoting the interests of the repressed/exploited/ alienated party (women, the young or the aged, non-whites, lower classes, endangered nations and states). What is ruled out is the unreflecting use of one’s own, or some, nations-state’s interests as the guide to peace. Again, we see clearly the link between subject (peace) and the structure in which


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

peace education is embedded. The state structure is unfortunate although periphery universities may be more suited than those in the center. On-site workshops, and they are numerous, should be local, preferably removed from state interests; but of course open, like on-line to anybody, including ministries of defense and foreign affairs, the classical carriers of state politics of war and peace. The teaching takes the form of training, with lots of group exercises, focusing on skills—for instance dialogue skills in tense conflicts, with one party at the time, or several. The teaching would generally be in the local language. Whereas the on-line courses probably would generally be ordinary university-length courses (15 weeks, one long or two shorter sessions per week, say, 40-50 hours), on-site teaching could be based on modules more like 15 hours, like a long weekend (3 hours on Friday, 6 hours on each of Saturday and Friday). Three modules, then, would add up to one course. TPU combines on-line and on-site. They of course complement each other, catering to the needs of postmodern, globalized students and professors. Both knowledge and skills can be taught in both ways; all four teacherstudent relations are possible in both of them. But, as the Table above indicates, there is a strong argument in favor of using both approaches, leaning on both so to speak. That, of course, presupposes a relatively good network of sites around the world. TRANSCEND is working on that, and again with the same experience: the content does not lend itself easily to traditional, center universities; they look for skills and knowledge demanded at the state and some regional level. TPU is self-financing. Starting in 2003 participant fees covered expenses, 60% to teachers and 40% to administration. TRANSCEND is identifying sites around the world for face-to-face training activities in peace and conflict knowledge and skills, so far related to TRANSCEND’s 15 action programs. The sites identified so far by and large meet the following requirements: 1. 2.


The leadership of the Site should feel comfortable with the TRANSCEND approaches to peace and conflict. The Site should be physically adequate in terms of lecture-seminargroup rooms, video facilities, access to the Internet. An aesthetic dimension would be desirable. The Site should be financially able to cover travel, accommodation and honoraria for the trainers. The economic arrangement with the participants will vary from site to site.


4. 5.


7. 8. 9. 10.





The Site should be able to deliver participants who are both able and motivated for postgraduate level training. The participants should be students and practitioners (or both in one) with no discrimination with regard to gender, generation, race, class and nation. The participants would generally be expected to be aiming at using training in peaceful conflict transformation knowledge and skills in their professional careers. The Site might be interested in developing sub-sites nationally, for training in the national language. The Site will be asked to develop links to other sites internationally for mutual training exchanges in English. The Site will be asked to organize TPU skills institutes based on the manuals for the TRANSCEND action programs. The Site will be asked to participate in the TPU distance education by helping organizing at the national level the TPU Certificate Program and the TPU Master’s Degree Program. The Site should have links to a national institution (usually a university) than can offer credits/certificates to the participants in addition to the credits/certificates they will receive from TPU. The Site might be interested in links to international organizations (nongovernmental, governmental) for internships and practice in general and for future careers. The Site might be interested in developing a TRANSCEND Peace Service for conflict and peace work. People stuck in a conflict or deeply worried about some conflict could contact that service and enter in some potentially useful dialogue.

TRANSCEND will do its very best to prepare, and offer, state-of-the art training in the knowledge and skills needed for conflict transformation by peaceful means. The global/local combination does not exclude traditional state-based universities; both faculty and students may like riding on all three. What is mainstream in one is countertrend in the other, what is conventional in one is subversive in the other. One of us some years ago offered a course in alternative economics to four universities. Two said that our economists are very sensitive, so do not refer to it as economics, but, for instance, as sociology. One university said: this is certainly something we would like to add to our offering in economics. And the fourth one said: this is what we mean by economics!1 A remark about financing. A government is unlikely to offend heavy institutions in the society; business is heavy and neo-classical economics is custom-tailored to their needs. Money may have to come from global


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

(IGO, NGO, TNC) and local (municipal, local civil society) sources. One argument would have to be that academic freedom can only be guaranteed through a multiplicity of sources of funding. Another argument could be that states known to kill people, including their own citizens and to spy on them, probably are ill suited to run universities; others, without such ambitions might do better. There are subjects that can be left even to states, such as assyrology, but generally the state is like the fox in the chicken coop. But TRANSCEND explored successfully a very old, tested, approach: the market. A supply of good courses and books will create a demand. Consequently, both the Transcend Peace University and Transcend University Press are self-financing.



Case 1: Sabona, I See You—Conflict and School I see you. So what did we see? The amazing effects of embracing children with an understanding of goals and means as different areas in action when there where conflicts, misunderstandings or bad behavior. An example: “I saw you hitting someone when entering the class room this morning. You know this is not allowed, no one should come to school and be afraid of being hurt by others during the day. But I would like to talk to you about what happened before you hit, and what you wanted to express. It seemed to me that something happened that was very important to you.” Beautiful things start to happen when we are sending messages about both goals and means each time there is trouble. Step by step the children picked up on the understanding that these two things were different: Even though he or she did something that was considered “bad behavior,” the goal behind the action might be good—or legitimate. When encouraging the children every day to express their goals, dreams and wishes became a part of the school culture, the focus in conflicts was changed from stopping and sanctioning violence to finding effective and positive means to reach the goals—and develop creativity to be able to include other people’s goals in the processes/solutions as well. What a change of focus! What a wonderful way to meet a child searching for her or his own voice; eager to learn how the world works! So we were unable to keep this knowledge and results to ourselves. In deep gratitude to the person who put these theories forward in the first place—Professor Johan Galtung—we now invite you to take part in this groundbreaking experience!



The School is the Unit When we started Sabona In School autumn 2005, we focused on one class level only, and planned to develop the concept for that level. We soon found that Sabona is very much about attitude—of the grown ups—and the kind of conflict hygiene that develops between teachers and between teacher and the pupils. When the children are met with a “Sabona attitude” from all the grown ups at school—wonderful things start to happen. Therefore—we are only working with whole schools. 4 Parties All institutions have their own infrastructure, framework and parties. The four parties in the school system are: teachers, children, parents and administration. The four parties might have the same goals, but more often there might be conflicts along these lines. It is important to recognise the different parties’ goals—in order to be able to work constructively with everyone involved. The conflict lines are not necessarily the problem, but how we deal with them, and how good we are at finding creative and constructive solutions. Some examples may clarify the kind of conflicts that arise from the school system: twenty-five children competing for the attention of one teacher. Teachers ask parents/ guardians to participate—but get frustrated when they become too busy. Staff would sometimes like to have a quiet working place—children are not likely to be quiet. The school system put restraints, demands and limitations on a child’s life. Children did not ask for this in the first place. The figure shows the parties in the school, and how they are interrelated. Knowing this will help us reduce/ overcome structural violence, and give ideas on how to plan for positive circles and constructive actions.

FIGURE 3.1. Four Parties.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

3 phases The venture of introducing SABONA to schools happens in three phases: 1. 2. 3.

Learning—Firstly, teachers and staff need to gain an understanding of SABONA and make it their own. Teaching—Pupils will acquire knowledge of SABONA as a part of social practice and school norms. Applying—When teachers and students have internalised the conflict tools, it can be applied actively in conflicts that arise in the classroom or at the playground. The knowledge enters as a part of the schools culture—and as a part of everyday language.

SABONA: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CONCEPTS Sabona: ”I see you,” ”I acknowledge your existence,” “I take you in.” This is how they say hello in the Zulu culture. Seeing a person, and seeing beyond behaviour is the essence of the concept. Grownups with skills in conflict hygiene give children possibilities to develop their own identity, personality and skills in building relations.

I see you: Everything that lives has goals. In order to achieve our goals we employ a wide range of means. Goals and means—children need adults to see both. Grownups that are able to distinguish between goals and means, and help children develop empathetic and effective means are vital. This is how children understand which goals are OK to have. A part of growing up is to discover their own goals, and trying out different means to obtain their goals. Sometimes a positive goal is pursued by negative means. When the grownups acknowledge the positive goal, it is easier for a child to accept the need to find better means to achieve what they want. ABC Triangle: Conflicts can be defined as incompatible goals, rather than incompatible persons, countries etc. When goals collide, a contradiction is born. Something has happened between people and leads to negative feelings and thoughts inside the involved persons. The body’s reaction to blocked goals is to release adrenalin and noradrenalin so as to increase strength to be able to overcome the obstruction. A frustrated attitude is followed by action—verbal and nonverbal—and this is what we can see from outside. Though the action is easy to see, the objective might not be. We usually treat the reaction—“the smoke” so to speak—as if it was the fire. The ABC triangle is a diagram that can help us separate means from ends; behaviour from thoughts/ feelings. Moreover, it can help identify the point where goals collide.



TRANSCEND method: Mapping, legitimising, bridging. The first two steps are based on one-on-one dialogues, doing the bridging process together. Mapping is the process of identifying all the parties involved as well as their different goals. Legitimising is to evaluate means and ends to see if they are okay. By ”OK” we mean that they do not violate other peoples basic needs. When the legitimate goals are found we come together and start bridging a solution anchored in the future. Creativity and dialogue are required to see which future can hold/ accommodate/ host the legitimate goals. SortingMat®: The SortingMat is used in the mapping dialogues. In oneon-one dialogues with the teacher/ conflict worker each and every party has a chance to explore their feelings, thoughts and experiences in different frames. Future, past, good, bad—the concept is built on basics that can be acknowledged by everyone. Respect is basic in the situation, and the problems are shared with, but not overtaken by the dialogue partner. Focus is on developing a future that can hold all the legitimate goals. 5’er Scheme: 5’er Scheme helps sort out and analyse the different solutions that are suggested in the process. Position one and two represent winning or losing. Three is withdrawal, and four is all kinds of compromises between the different claims/ goals involved. Five is the outcome where all parties are seen and heard, and where the solution is to create a new reality that can hold all the legitimate goals of all the parties. Sabona • • • •

”I see you,” ”I acknowledge your existence”; Originates from the Zulu culture; Seeing a person; seeing behind the behaviour; and Conflict hygiene.

Background The rationale behind choosing SABONA as the name for the conflict solution programme was to indicate the underpinning attitudes behind the concept: respect; mutuality; dignity. Although we can all agree that these values are important, it might not be as simple to put them into practice. We discovered a number of practical explanations and concrete tools when working on SABONA; it make it easier to reach through to people with these sets of attitudes. Seeing a Person From the moment we are conceived we have goals. We want to matter. Wanting things or wanting to do things is what gets us up in the morning. This is what motivates us to develop, learn, reach, love—and all the positive


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

TABLE 3.1.



Goals -



Neg Goal Neg Mean

Pos Goal Neg Mean


Neg Goal Pos Mean

Pos Goal Pos Mean

Exercise: Think of something you wanted very much during the last week, and try to visualise what it would mean to you if you got what you wanted. Then try to think about what you did to achieve this important goal. Then you can take it through this model that basically connects us to other people. Whether my goals and means are positive or negative depends on how it affects others. Does it violate other people’s basic needs? Does it go against dignity (as we shall explore later)? This exercise helps us reflect upon the difference/ similarities between goals and means.

things in life. And we want other to recognize who we are and what we do. We want to be seen. So we do things to be seen, to achieve our goals. It is very common to confuse goals and means. If a child does something bad—we more or less unconscious think of the child as bad. We usually do not have an automatic response that starts figuring out—was it the goal, the mean or both that was negative? And if there seemed to be a negative goal—what positive goal might hide underneath the negative one? And yet—this is exactly what we will work on in Sabona. Conflict Hygiene Developing skills like this is much more than traditional conflict handling. This is to acknowledge goals and means—both the good ones and the bad ones—as a normal part of life, and learn to go about it in a skilled and competent way. When we acquire the knowledge that goals and means are different and have to be addresses as such, then we are building conflict hygiene into the school culture. Cultures with this trait are able to hold much more goals for much more people, with more creativity, happiness and health. Or in professor Galtung’s word: “Tell me how you behave in a conflict, and I will tell you how much peace culture you have” Learning Objectives • SABONA means: I see you; • SABONA builds on respect, mutuality and dignity; and • SABONA means seeing beyond people’s behaviour, seeing the goals behind the actions.



I See You • Everything that lives has goals; • Goals and means—Adults need to distinguish the two in children; and in themselves; and • Learn which goals are ok to have, and which means are ok to use. The path of change goes through acknowledging and supporting children’s goals. It is then easier for the child to accept the need to find better ways of achieving goals. Background Goals and means. It is human nature to want something. Being goal focused is embedded in humans as a vital survival instinct. We are focused on self-preservation and activities that provide our basic needs. We consider the following as basic needs: • • • •

Survival (as opposed to death); Wellness (as opposed to illness); Freedom (as opposed to repression); and Identity (as opposed to alienation).

These four needs can be summed up in the term ‘dignity’. To use dignity as a guideline when being around children—is a good rule of thumb. As goals are closely linked to basic needs—dignity in particular—there is also a close correlation between basic needs, strong emotions and high motivation. If you scrape the surface of the goals that different children have, you find strong similarities. It is about being seen, acceptance, justice, safety and an experience of being valued. However, the methods they employ are incredibly varied. A child with a narrow and negative repertory from home is vulnerable in school as they can be perceived as more challenging and demanding by teachers and pupils alike. The various ways a child express their will is partly dependent on heritage, but largely because of the environment in which they grow up. At home, and when socialising with persons the child perceives significant, the child observes and learns what pays off, and what adults do to get it their way. They also learn what is OK to want, what isn’t, and what is out of their reach. It is easier for children to accept when they make a mistake, if they also receive encouragement when they get it right, when they do something positive. The path of change goes through: • Supporting legitimate goals;


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

• Saying clearly when behaviour is unacceptable; and • Communicating confidence and belief to the child that they can develop better means. Learning Objectives • • • • •

Separate goals from means; There are both good and poor goals; There are both good and poor means; Be able to express own needs; and Practice good ways of expressing own goals.

ABC Triangle • • • • •

Conflict can be defined as incompatible goals; When goals collide, a conflict is born; Something has happened between people; This can lead to negative feelings and thoughts inside people; Frustrated attitudes may lead to violent behaviour—on the outside; and • All three must be dealt with to resolve the conflict. The goals are in A, the means in B—we need to see both. Background Conflict = incompatible goals. When my goal collides with other peoples’, a contradiction arises between me and my goal—and the ‘opponents’ and their goal. It is therefore vital to explore which goals collide, or are incompatible, and what needs to be done for these goals to be achieved. The conflict may turn very personal if we do not separate the goals from the confrontation that arise due to their incompatibility. A negative perception of the other persons might occur when they obstruct me in achieving my goals. A conflict has three sides, and all three needs to be taken into account in order to resolve and reshape the conflict. Although ‘A’ comes first in the alphabet but for the following outline, we will make a small alteration: • C—Contradiction: Something has happened between the parties. • A—Attitude: collision of goals leads to frustration and negative thoughts and feelings—inside. • B—Behaviour: Negative thoughts and feelings often lead to negative actions—outside.



The ABC triangle creates a basic understanding of conflict, and creates a foundation so as to consider the various options available when a conflict arises. • C orientation—has a focus on the relational; what happens between the parties. Where did the goals become at odds? Which goals were hindered? How do we bridge the gap between the various goals? Or—creating a new future together? • A orientation—has a focus on the psychological; what happens inside each of the parties. What are they thinking and feeling? What is the connection between what happened now and previous experiences? How can they be strengthened to handle this and similar situations? • B orientation—has a focus on the reactions; behaviour is seen from the outside. Who has hurt whom? How can we hinder negative behaviour? How can we stop bullying? How can we teach children better methods of behaving? How can we prevent violence? Will punishment create a better pattern of response? How can we teach them positive and constructive means? Learning Objectives • • • •

How to identify the goals of the involved; Clashing of goals is at the heart of the conflict; Attitudes and behaviour are reactions to the contradiction; Understand that a legitimate goal can be hiding under illegitimate means/ behaviour; and • Learn to reveal our own good goals in situations where we have employed poor means

Steps to Solution (The TRANSCEND method) • Separate the parties to avoid violence—then: • Mapping, all parties and all their goals (one party at the time) • Legitimizing, check if the goals and means are ok (one party at the time) • Bridging, find the future that can accommodate all the parties legitimate goals (together) Background Steps to Solution is both a practical tool for solving conflicts, and a framework or script for thinking that will enhance children’s competence in building relations. As a tool it can be used by the grownups even before the students have learnt the concept. Gradually, as the children gain knowl-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

edge and experience with the model, they will themselves start thinking along these lines when a conflict arises. An important objective for this work is that the children will be able to handle conflicts on their own. The ladder is to remind us that the last phase may be very challenging…! Mapping Who are the parties, and what are their objectives? In traditional conflict handling one usually concentrate on two parties. Experience has proved over and over again that this is rarely the case. It is difficult to solve a problem if some of the parties are left out. But what is the underlying goal for each and every party? What does the class look like that you would like to be a part of? How would you like your walk to school to be like? What would you like your relationship to the teachers to look like? What do you want to achieve by hitting someone that is smaller than you? Through the process of mapping parties and goals a picture of the conflict is taking form. In dialogues one on one with every party, the teacher has an opportunity to give the children good role models on how to behave in conflicts—even towards a person who has employed negative means. Legitimizing Dialogues about legitimacy of the participant’s goals are also conducted with one party at the time. When the student has the possibility to reflect on the validity of their goals, and on possible reactions from the other parties without them being present, the tendency of including the goals of others in their own increases. And this enhances the children’s own ongoing legitimizing processes. Children are often equipped with a very well developed sense of justice, and this can be used as a resource. Is this solution fair? Is it likely that someone will be offended by this suggestion? The key question is if the suggested solution violates any of the parties’ basic needs. Bridging The first two phases may very well be on the agenda in the same dialogue, and it is essential that both mapping and legitimizing have been addressed. When this has been done, the parties are ”ready for the table.” Now they all join together in the bridging process where the challenge is to visualize a situation/future/solution that is able to accommodate every party’s legitimate goals. Creativity is much needed in this process. When children have understood the method, one can easily be amazed by their creativity and ability to find new and unexpected solutions. We are not chasing the one right solution, but the many good ideas—that will create a sense of thrust for the future: ”Of course we will find a solution to this”! The end result may very well be a combination of solutions, or one is tried out first—with the others in reserve if needed. One important lesson from



this method is that the children trust they will find solutions—it is there if they try hard enough. Learning Objectives • Most conflicts consist of more than two parties. What about silent spectators? Or she who tricks a third party to harm her enemy? • The three phases: Mapping (parties and goals), legitimizing (goals and means), and bridging • It is okay to have different goals, the problem may be their compatibility • Creativity and imagination are some of the most important resources in handling conflicts. SortingMat® • Has every parties reality as a starting point • Allows each person space to see their own goals—as well as the common goals • Creates a useful way of thinking that encourages reflection • Creates a strong feeling of being acknowledged Background The theory behind the SortingMat is a way of conducting a dialogue with conflict parties that has been used and developed over the last 30 years. Common expressions have a better possibility of reaching people in conflicts than more advanced concepts. You have to meet people where they are. The SortingMat is based on two dimensions: past—future, and positive—negative. Something has clearly happened in the past, and there will be a tomorrow—how would we like that to be? Some of our experiences are good, and others are unpleasant. When we cross these two dimensions, the four squares of the SortingMat appear. The concept was named SortingMat because it gives a good opportunity to sort out your own thoughts, feelings and perceptions when having the possibility of being in one square at the time. When I think about my own goals it is ok to be selfish. When the negative that happened is in focus, it is my experiences that count. The same goes for the place where we are looking for happy memories and for the last square when we are asked to find possible problems connected to our goals, dreams and visions. The SortingMat creates a sense of responsibility because everybody is given a chance to process and reflect on their own situation. Each round on the mat increases the understanding of the other side. This produces a sense of ownership to a solution and a motivation to carry out what has been agreed to do.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Square 1: Future Positive What would have been a good solution of the problem the way you look at it? How do you want a good friend to behave? This is where we start because we want to anchor the solution in the future, in the energy field of goals, dreams, and visions. Square 2: Past Negative Listen with empathy to what every party has experienced, thought and felt during, around and after the conflict came into the open. When we have listened for some time, we point out that square 2 is not a place to hang on to, lest we want to walk backwards into the future. Square 3: Past Positive Another field of energy. This time the focus is on whatever has been positive in the past about the person(s) with whom we presently are in conflict. Did they do something you really appreciated? Get some humorous episode, something that made you happy! The purpose is to increase the motivation to rebuild, or create, such relations. Square 4: Future Negative Choices made—and equally so choices not made—have impact on the future. When the conversation comes to this square the purpose is to elicit awareness of possible negative consequences of the solutions that have emerged. Encourage concreteness. Challenge them to understand deeply the situation of others. Learning Objectives • Somebody cares about what matters to me; • Two truths at the same time: I feel strongly—I think clearly; • The better I am at handling conflict—the more goals can I attain; and • If the situation permits me safely to empty myself of negative feelings, then I can handle conflicts better. The 5’er Scheme • Any conflict has at least five different types of outcomes some of which may be solutions—acceptable to the parties and sustainable • The line from (1) to (2) is the war diagonal—asymmetric! • The line (3)-(4)-(5) is the peace diagonal—symmetric! • A good solution can be a combination of solutions like (3)+(4)+(5)



Background Conflicts can be solved in many ways and the method we use matters for the acceptability and sustainability of the solution. Societies have developed many ways of handling conflicts, like the court system, mediation councils, family counseling. Even war has been used in efforts to solve a conflict. The method we use is “conflict solution through dialogue,” and dialogue means in this context empathy—nonviolence—creativity. The 5’er scheme maps different types of solutions. Clearly, solutions on the peace diagonal will be more sustainable than solutions on the war diagonal. Type 1 and 2 Solutions These are outcomes with winners and losers. Like one is found right and the other wrong. There may be situations where this is true—like cases of exploitation: slave versus slave-owner, repression and other ways of insulting basic needs. But most conflicts are about less dramatic relations among those involved, and an either-or solution is experienced as unjust. If it is nevertheless chosen, then the seeds of the next conflict become a part of the outcome. Type 3 Solution We are talking about withdrawal—temporarily or permanently. A neithernor solution. Sometimes a solution of that kind comes out of cowardice, sometimes because the parties do not feel the goals are worth that much trouble, and sometimes it is simply a wise decision: we’ll return to the issue, making sure that no party is forgotten. Type 4 Solution All types of compromise. Some parties may get more than the others, or they may share equally. They all give something and receive something. In the end they are equally satisfied—or dissatisfied. Type 5 Solution This is the result of a real dialogue, not only a debate, to identify the real goals in order to anchor the solution in a future based on the legitimate goals of all parties. Relations are nurtured, and creativity blossoms! 5’er Detectives Identifying good 5’er solutions is a way of developing human relation competence and creativity. A 5’er detective knows the 5’er concept, and knows the steps toward a 5’er solution. There is safety in knowing that something can be done when disagreement and other conflicts arise. 5’er detectives in higher grades at school can be helpful when conflicts arise at lower grades, among


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

the youngest. And—not to be disregarded: parents and others in the inner circles may also have something to learn from 5’er detectives! Learning Objectives • All conflicts have at least 5 different variations on the theme of conflict resolution; • The war diagonal connects points (1) and (2)—asymmetric! • The peace diagonal goes along (3)-(4) and (5)—symmetric! • To get from the war diagonal to the peace diagonal all parties must be seen and heard; • A 5’er detective can tell about the 5 different outcomes of conflict; • A 5’er detective knows why 5’er solutions are good, acceptable and sustainable; and • A 5’er detective knows how to identify 5’er solutions. Case 2: South Asian Community Center for Education and Research (SACCER) To adapt the words of Selig Harrison, an American journalist, Kanyakumari district is the whole of India put in close quarters. A significant number of Hindus, Muslims and Christians, several dominant caste groups, and linguistic minorities live on this tiny but fertile piece of land with high population density. Accordingly, quite a few socioeconomic-political conflicts have come up in this southernmost tip of India. Poverty, bigotry, intolerance and lack of understanding in dealing with differences have all resulted in high level of socioeconomic-political stress on the people of Kanyakumari district. Some of the indicators of this stress include high rate of homicides, suicides, communal skirmishes and so forth. The overall socioeconomic-political stress in India and South Asia has an impact on the already deteriorating situation in Kanyakumari district as well. With the bilateral relations between India and Pakistan steeped in mistrust and disdain, many citizens of our district foster prejudices and illwill toward Pakistan and Muslims in general. With four large refugee camps for the Sri Lankan refugees operating in the district, the island nation’s politics also has an impact on the daily life of Kanyakumari district. To put it tersely, Kanyakumari is one of the most sensitive and vulnerable corners in South Asia. Any effective counter-measure should seek to revive and entrench the peace-making, peace-keeping and peace-building heritage of Kanyakumari district (and that of the larger Tamil, Indian and South Asian societies) that is based on forgiveness, reconciliation, nonviolence, conflict transformation, Futures envisioning, and struggle for social justice.



Objectives and Activities: With these convictions, the SACCER Trust was launched in 1993 to undertake several educational programs and activities that would help the young people of our area to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Cherish their childhood and youth for holistic and harmonious growth; Discover themselves and identify their talents and strengths; Improve their communication and social skills; Think for themselves and choose their roles in the society proactively; Nurture peace & reconciliation in families & communities smaller and larger; Strive for diversity, democracy, human rights and dignity; Achieve South Asian regional understanding and world peace; and Engage in life-long, life-wide and life-deep education.

The various activities that we decided to undertake include: 1.

2. 3. 4.

5. 6.

Personal Growth Programs (Camps, retreats, talks, seminars on personality development, leadership training, and career counseling; organic farming; local arts and crafts trainings); Language Institute (Classes on spoken English, Indian and international languages); Civil Services Academy (IAS/IPS/IFS exams and interview preparations); Peace and Futures Programs (Training and workshops on Conflict Transformation, Nonviolence, and Futures Envisioning; ‘Marriage Education’ workshops for engaged and married couples; School for Politicians); Human Rights Programs (Workshops on communalism, casteism and threats to democracy and diversity; Human Rights education); South Asia Programs (India-Pakistan Reconciliation School (online-cum-correspondence); SAARC Circles, UNESCO Clubs etc.

SACCER Community Education Center Although the SACCER Trust was founded in 1993, the first SACCER Community Education Center was inaugurated by Johan Galtung in 1995 at Esankan Vilai in Nagercoil. The SACCER Nursery and Primary School was inaugurated in June 2003 in a village called Pullu Vilai that is some 7 kms outside of Nagercoil town in Kanyakumari district, Tamil Nadu. The rural location was selected with the conviction that it was in the rural areas that quality education should be provided in order to


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

curtail the urban exodus and to build on the strengths of rural settings. The rural settings with a lot of trees and lush green provide the natural learning environment for the children to appreciate Nature, understand environmental issues, and value environment for a healthy and robust life. The complete absence of noise pollution, dense population, heavy transportation, air pollution and the overall stress is an additional bonus. The children are at ease and can breathe easily and move around effortlessly without the modern stress factors. Consequently, the children tend to be very much relaxed. So the social environment is also as natural and conducive as the physical environment is. The adults treat the children with love and respect and dignity. We completely avoid corporal punishment, derogatory language and degrading treatment. Naturally, the children have no fear in their hearts and minds when they come to school and in their dealings with their teachers and administrators. Contrary to the popular perception that such a free environment would lead to indiscipline and lack of seriousness, our children are more responsible and earnest. In fact, some of them even call the teachers and administrators to ask why we do not have school on holidays. The children feel free to approach the Principal and talk to her freely and openly. Unlike the other schools where Principal’s Office is treated like a police station or a court room, our Principal office is a communication centre where children can come and talk and be part of the community. Unlike regular schools, the children’s voices are respected and counted in SACCER School. For instance, when the Kindergarten classroom was painted last time, all the children (age group 3-5) were asked about their preferences. Some preferred green color, others wanted yellow and yet others liked red color. The teacher with the help of a German visitor asked them to go to the blackboard and mark their preference on the board under the respective colors. When most of them voted for green, we discussed that with the whole group and decided to paint the walls green. The children participated in the process with such enthusiasm and learned a great deal about democratic decision-making. Similarly, children run the school assembly without teachers commanding them what to recite, or sing or say at the assembly. It is all decided by the pupils themselves. Teachers also seek and incorporate pupils’ opinions and thoughts and feelings when they take important class and school decisions. In addition to the environmental consciousness, yearning for freedom and democracy, our children also accept and respect diversity. We have children with physical disabilities and learning difficulties but they are always treated as equals with no positive or negative discrimination. In fact, the children tend to be very caring and responsible when some of the children with disabilities require any assistance. When we encounter some rare instances of carelessness or thoughtlessness, we do not threaten or punish the con-



cerned children but talk to them. Such direct dialogues often make them realize their slip and they correct themselves. We keep the school premises and administration completely secular with no religious preferences and without displaying any images or symbols anywhere. We believe that the religion of a particular child is their family’s business and we do not have to meddle with that either overtly or covertly. Since the larger community is communally so sensitive with a lot of religious strife and tensions, we take the children on a “Communal Harmony” trip once a year. We take the children to a Hindu temple, a Christian church, and a Muslim mosque. In the beginning, the parents were reluctant to let their children visit other religious places or to get influenced by their values. But they came around when they were convinced that the idea was not to influence them with other ideas and values but to expose them to various belief-systems and values. We pointed out that such an exposure and understanding would only make them more broad-minded and respectful, and that they would understand their own family’s values and faith even better. When the parents appreciate our logic, it is easy to lead the children. In all these various places of worship, the children see for themselves different types of architectures, sculptures, external and internal arrangements, dresses, customs, habits, ways of worshipping, rituals and so forth. The children respect the rules and regulations of the places they visit and observe everything keenly. At the end of the day, a detailed debriefing session is held and children are asked to share their observations, thoughts, opinions, feelings, doubts and questions. Children invariably understand why the various religious groups do what they do and come to accept them as they are. Although the SACCER School abides by the state government’s curricular stipulations, we also incorporate as much peace education content and activities as possible. For instance, we commemorate the Earth Day, the Environment Day, the World Water Day and so forth. We invite a resource person to give a brief speech at the school assembly and we also have a few students talk on the topic. We also organize exhibitions with books, photos, posters, children’s paintings and so forth. The teachers also talk about the subject in their respective classes and re-entrench the message. We also commemorate the Hiroshima Day and Nagasaki Day to talk about nuclear weapons, war and violence, conflict transformation and so forth. Similarly, Thiruvalluvar Day (Thiruvalluvar’s birthday), Buddha Poornima, (Buddha’s birthday), Mahavir Jayanti (Mahavir birthday), Gandhi Jayanti (Gandhi’s birthday), Miladi Nabi (Prophet Mohammed’s birthday), Christmas (Jesus’ birthday) and other such days are commemorated with much fanfare to drive home the messages of nonviolence, love and peace of these great people. We welcome international visitors to our school and utilize those opportunities to learn more about their countries, cultures, languages, literature, politics


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

and so forth. The visitors also share their own expert and specialized knowledge and insights with the children and teachers. The visitors are encouraged to be with the community and interact with the children informally and freely. Another important initiative of our school is the peer mediators. When children face conflicts, we encourage them to approach the peer mediators to facilitate a dialogue between the conflict parties. This helps the children to resolve their issues among themselves without adult intervention and train the peer mediators to be efficient conflict workers and leaders. This early training in mediation will certainly come to help them in whatever profession they may choose later in their adult lives. Besides helping the children with communication skills, negotiation skills, mediation skills and over all conflict transformation skills, this activity entrenches their faith in nonviolence and humanism. A related activity that inculcates a similar set of values is organic farming. Each class is given a small patch of land within the school compound. The respective home room teacher and the class students decide what to grow on the land and do it collectively without using any chemical fertilizers and pesticides. They also take their produce home and share with their families. Some parents resisted this activity first because their children got dirty working on the land. When we pointed out in a specially convened Parent-Teachers Association (PTA) Meeting the fact that whatever their children become, they have to eat what is grown on the land, they were convinced. When the children grow a life on their own by watering, nourishing and taking care, they also learn the value of life. They appreciate the need to take care of our land and develop a respect for agriculture, farming, food, water, air, living organisms and life in general. When the children take their organic produce home, the families also learn the need for organic food and alternative eating style. We organize a UNESCO Club in the school that contacts many embassies in New Delhi for educational material and uses them to commemorate those countries’ national days and important events. The students themselves administer the Club with teacher advisers. Similarly, the students also run a Wall Newspaper with a teacher-editor on which the students post their own creative pieces, family photos, newspaper articles, news pieces of their liking and so forth. This particular activity helps them with journalistic tastes and talents. More importantly, it inculcates the habit of reading newspapers and magazines in them. We also have a school band with musically-talented children playing instruments and singing songs. Besides this, we make it a regular activity for all the classes to enjoy music in our Seminar Hall. The children learn to appreciate classical and instrumental music of India, the West and other regions of the world and to center themselves with music. With the audiovisual equipment, we also screen biographical movies, and educational



documentaries on various subjects. We offer regular yoga classes, martial arts classes and classical dance classes for interested children with qualified visiting teachers. We work with the conviction that the childhood should not be denied to the children in the name of schooling and education. We encourage the children to play and have fun. The children’s park is the most favorite place for the younger children and the school playground for the older children. They play kabadi, kho-kho, cricket, badminton and so forth. The teams always consist of both boys and girls and thus we try to breakdown the gender barrier among the children. The pupils also sit in the classrooms next to one another and not in a secluded fashion. As far as the curricular activities are concerned, our teachers prepare weekly lesson plans and plan well ahead what they are going to teach, how they are going to teach it, what kind of teaching aids they would employ, and what would be overall objectives of a particular lesson. We have a mandatory lesson plan meeting on Friday afternoons in which all the teachers take turns and share their plans. Other teachers, the principal and the correspondent share their thoughts and give their suggestions also. The teachers give very minimal homework in order not to burden the children with too much school work and to work up the parents with their children’s learning process. In fact, many of our parents are either illiterates or neo-literates and it increases the workload of our teachers. In a way, this is a blessing in disguise because children get to be children at home rather than students. Another successful and very productive approach we do in our school is peer teaching. We request the older children to teach the lower classes. For instance, when a seventh grader teaches “simple machines” to the class of Grade V, the children learn a lot more easily and effortlessly. The interactions that take place in the class are complementary, the communication process democratic and the learning so smooth and natural. The peer teacher also learns so many things such as public speaking, presentation skills, communication abilities, leadership skills and many other positive personality traits. Over all, we have a strong feeling and avowed hope that the seeds we sow today will fetch wonderful fruits tomorrow. NOTE 1.

The book, Peace Economics: From a Killing to a Living Economy, has been in the process for some time, and is now coming. The work is very much based on my tenure at the Faculty of Economics, Universität Witten/Herdecke, mainly under the inspiring leadership of the Founding Dean, Ekkehard Kappler.





Peace in the limited sense of safety and well-being is one ultimate aspiration in life for all sentient beings irrespective of their external packagings or internal make-up. Even the most wicked thing is carried out allegedly for peace. A snake bites to ward off its dangers and enhance its own safety, or a criminal strikes as he sees some perverted peace in it. Being the goal of almost everybody’s struggle, peace becomes everybody’s business, such as health or education. There may be specialists and savants such as peace researchers or doctors or teachers but the preoccupation with these issues cannot be simply restricted to the experts or their expertise. As western medical science leaves out spiritual health, and modern education leaves out being/becoming, contemporary peace research just deals with socioeconomic-political peace but fails to include personal peace, inter-species peace, planetary peace, cosmic peace, or spiritual peace within its purview. A broad thematic study of war and peace is not always helpful for individuals engaged in personal quest for peace. As medical science is only a part More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages 117–141 Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

of broader health science, or schooling an insignificant element of selfactualization, peace research is only a segment of larger peace search, a life-long search for peace. Peace search then becomes a larger life process where we concern ourselves with both general and universal, and unique and particular peace. Leaving the study of peace just for peace researchers is like letting just the medical doctors deal with all our health. Peace researchers are a rather small number of individuals around the world with higher academic degrees and honors, stable job, steady income, and many other securities in life. If we look closely enough, peace research looks rather elitist and the peace researchers rather well-off. Such a peace research smacks of a brahmanical air of exclusivity and sophistication. When not followed by actual application, research becomes an exclusivistic, pedantic, and normative exercise which focuses mainly on the intellect rather than the emotive and cognitive aspects which are equally important. This is not to mean that peace researchers are unnecessary just as doctors or teachers do not become unnecessary. Theories of peace cannot afford an unproblematic subject-object binary opposition and the observer-observed model cannot be a very valid peace search. After all, peace researchers are not some kind of holy angels who descend on the earth, discern the human issues and hand out remedies, but they are also part of the problem and hence they become part of the solution. Peace search is a constantly moving process and the peace researcher is also moving within it, witnessing the process, analyzing it, and acting about it with the whole humanity. They research peace and we all search for peace in our own ways with our own means for slightly varying ends. Prevailing theories of peace are mostly western as the academic discipline of peace research/studies itself is of the West. As modern socioeconomic-political system is North-American/Eurocentric with the Holy Trinity of “scientism, nation-statism, and developmentalism,” so is peace research/studies. Peace is always seen at the backdrop of modernity, industrialization, Westphalian framework, security concerns, power struggles and order building. Peace scholars are mostly westerners or western-educated, or trained in western colonial educational system. The scholarly quest for peace thus far has been preoccupied with European imperialisms (both Capitalist and Communist), their expansionist schemes, and preparations for nuclear annihilation. Peace, for many, still means nuclear peace. In the Western cosmology, peace is a security concern rather than a matter of survival; it is not an issue of justice but an interest of maintaining the status quo. In consumerist Western thinking, peace is a condition, an end product, not a constant struggle, or a continual process. Western political establishment does not view peace as a basic human activity such as food production but as a matter of human manipulation. It emphasizes power-



centered “shallow peace” which treats humans as objects and not life-oriented “deep peace” which considers humans as actors. In the industrial social order, wealth, power and position are worshipped and the use of untruth, violence, and selfishness is widespread. Based on vicious possession and virulent competition, the present social order helps a privileged minority to acquire a disproportionate amount of wealth and makes them luxury-loving and wasteful. The present western industrialization and commercialization have given rise to rampant consumerism and hedonism, profiteering corporations, proliferation of social injustices and evils, and the slow death of the Earth. This so-called modern industrial society is concerned with only “shallow peace” and is at war all the time. In indigenous peoples’ cases, for instance Native Americans, peace time is “deep peace” and the war time is just an interruption of that deep peace. “Shallow peace” is just the condition of physical well-being and superficial mental contentedness. “Deep peace,” on the other hand, is a nourishment of soul (not just body and mind), harmony with the universe, and constant growth of life. One’s inclination for “shallow peace” or “deep peace” gives rise to what Erich Fromm calls “necrophily” or “biophily”: While life is characterized by growth in a structured, functional manner, the necrophilous person loves all that does not grow, all that is mechanical. The necrophilous person is driven by the desire to transform the organic into the inorganic, to approach life mechanically, as if all living persons were things. ...Memory, rather than experience; having, rather than being, is what counts. The necrophilous person can relate to an object - a flower or a person - only if he possesses it; hence a threat to his possession is a threat to himself; if he loses possession he loses contact with the world. ...He loves control, and in the act of controlling he kills life.1

As the necrophilous system leads us in the wrong direction, there is a strong need in our world today to view peace from a biological setting as peace is foundational like life. Peace always grows, changes, sheds parts, shoots fresh beginnings like a plant or a tree. Peace is a living concept and not a synthetic product to be produced in a laboratory and commercialized. It is a vibrant process to be fostered and protected like a crop; it cannot be for mass production and manipulation. Peace is an ecological spirit and it touches everything which comes within its purview, both animate and inanimate. It is passed on to subsequent generations as the Earth itself is. An analysis in terms of isomorphism may shed fresh light on the complementarity between peace and agriculture. The isomorphism hypothesis identifies and spells out a pattern in one thing and searches for the same in another. This heuristic tool makes peace and agriculture each other’s metaphor. Peace is an ideal socio-economic-political condition brought about by the social elements such as culture, socialization, and human creativity. So


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

is plenty, a desired goal in agriculture, brought about by natural elements such as land, water, wind and weather, and human resources. While farming relies more on natural elements than on human planning and preferences, peacebuilding depends more on human factors -general and political culture, conflict transformation heritage, peacekeeping tradition and so onthan on natural factors such as geography, environment, or demography. Suffice it to say here that the isomorphism between agriculture and peace is much broader and deeper as explicated below: Agriculture


land and water



political socialization & culture

enriching land



education (peacebuilding, peacekeeping, conflict transformation methods)




judiciary, enforcing mechanism


socio-economic justice




social ills and evils

scarcity & theft

physical violence

hunger & famine

structural violence

natural calamity

ecological violence (nature-made)

deforestation, dams, mega- ecological violence (human-made) development Peace, like food, is a fundamental prerequisite for the nurture and preservation of life. Elements of peacefulness are abundant in land and agriculture. A symbol of nonviolence, loving and giving, and caring and sharing, it is in our hands what we make of the land. Such is the case with peace too. The agricultural activity requires that you prepare the conditions, preserve them, work on that, reap the benefit, and stretch it to successive seasons. Struggle for peace is just that and it is stretched to successive generations. Raeburn points out another dimension of this agriculture and peace isomorphism: “Agricultural problems with solutions requiring “economic and social changes” are liable to be regarded as political problems about power in governments, and conflicts of interest between particular groups—rural and urban; rich and poor; landowners and tenants; the industrialized “North” and the agrarian “South”; and so on.”2



Likewise, peace issues with solutions requiring systemic changes could be considered highly political with grave implications for the power configurations and the mode of conflict or cooperation among different groups in a society. When a society performs well in agriculture and achieves “plenty,” it could turn its attention to improve the quality of life in other spheres. Although peace and development go hand in hand, attaining minimal “peace” becomes an absolute requirement to concentrate on the development of a society too. Let us take development to mean, for argument’s sake, “economic development” as it is largely the case in mainstream thinking. Any discussion on economic development of a society has to begin with two key questions: what are the aims of economic development, and how do we achieve that. The “developed” countries see development as higher standard of living and transform it into series of aggregates such as raising the Gross National Product, achieving a high rate of growth, and accomplishing some specific production, consumption and utility functions and other such factors. Viewing development in terms of GNP, the so-called “modernization” approach emphasizes providing market for manufactures in international competition, warranting large investments in industrial growth and infrastructure, providing the basis for diversification, and creating a critical mass in technical personnel and investment resources. For modernization proponents, the problem of development is poverty and inequality, and the solution is more growth and even more modernization. For a predominantly rural “Third World” country this means a necessary shift from a rural structure to an urban one based on large scale industrialization compromising on agricultural sector and small industries. The aim of this kind of economic development is “never-ending-growth” and the strategy is “never-mindthe-path.” Take more and more and care less and less, and the end justifies the means. This civilizing instrument of modern, urban metropolitan life actually exploits and destroys the natural environment that is very essential to human survival. This development model has been proved to be horrendous and even catastrophic to most of the “developing” countries. Shahid Kardar sums up the pathetic failure of this approach in two simple questions: “Is the affluence that one sees, in the shape of increasing number of palatial houses, fancy and brimming five star hotels, and relative abundance of expensive motor cars, color TVs and VCRs, an indication of a wider distribution of the benefits of growth? Or is this apparent prosperity only limited to a small island in the sea of unrelieved poverty?”3 Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of independent India, who himself was a relentless believer in industrialization and economistic growth, confessed after sixteen years of independence and industrialization: “One thing that distresses me greatly is that there is a good number of people in India who have not profited by



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

development planning and whose poverty is abysmal and most painful. I do think that some method should be found to remedy the situation.”4 When the European settlers or colonizers violated the indigenous peoples, the first thing they invariably did was sapping their victims’ strength: usurping the land, pillaging the resources, and breaking in on the traditional customs and beliefs. Having succeeded in making the natives feel weak and worthless, the intruders imposed their own values and ways of life on their victims. The indigenous models and methods were interrupted and an alien system imposed in their place. The spate of “partial political decolonization” of the 1940s to 1960s has changed the scene a little, but the overall game continues to be played the colonizers’ way with their rules and strategies. The power elites in the “Third World” accepted the colonizers’ models and tried to imitate that by turning a blind eye to the indigenous system. Most of the newly independent countries made a conscious decision to pursue the western model of nation building which required a particular economic model, a standing army, strategic industries and an extensive bureaucracy to direct and shape “national development.” In this project of infamous development, as Pradeep Bhargava points out, those sectors of the economy where the capitalist mode of production had been adopted emerged as “a nucleus of economic activity and political power” and the other sectors which continued with the pre-capitalist mode of production were pushed to the periphery of the nucleus.5 For instance, “the dominant ideologues and rulers of Pakistan after 1947 charted a course of action which had no relation to the historical aspirations of a people who had borne the oppression of exploitative class relations under centuries of pre-colonial and colonial modes of production.”6 While the ruling class and the dominant classes of industrial bourgeoisie and capitalist farmers vie with each other to dominate the regime, “a great majority of the population in the periphery has been excluded from institutional participation in the political process especially in the non-democratic power structure.”7 The subaltern classes which include urban poor, landless rural workers, marginal farmers, deprived ethnic groups, women and children have no leverage whatsoever in policy decisions or development activities as these are all top-down projects. Viewed from the political economy perspective, poverty and inequality are not the problems but rather symptoms of deeper socio-economic-political illnesses, and the viruses causing the diseases are the obscene practices and the obsolete institutions abetted by powerful groups such as the bourgeoisie, politicians, bureaucrats, professionals, administrators, middle-class, modern technocrats, bankers, financiers, expatriates, and corporations. The power elites, or more appropriately, the pseudo-Northerners, having been functionally dependent on Northern powers and their capitalism,



are linked with the global market. One of the outcomes of this infatuation is the pseudo-Northerners’ growing reliance on borrowings from the Northern powers. Giving rise to debt-service which consumes substantial portion of export proceeds, the borrowing also obliges the pseudos to externally imposed structural adjustment programs, the “civilized” version of human sacrifice. These conditionalities normally include across-the-board price increases, import liberalization, rise of utility charges and so forth. Fuelling inflation and increasing the hardships, the structural adjustment programs hit the subaltern classes hardest and most directly. Large-scale export production hit the small producers and farmers; labor rights get overlooked; women and children become more vulnerable to further exploitation; the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. The national economies are being rapidly globalized with World Trade Organization and “free trade” paraphernalia. It liberalizes the economies, globalizes the American culture, and westernizes everybody on the earth. In this grandiose scheme of economicolonialism, human beings become consumers, communities become markets, societies become economies, and the Earth becomes one big dump. Given the nature of the structure, the subaltern classes in the South will never “win” the game of the North played so cunningly by the rich Northerners in collaboration with the soldout pseudos in the South. Even if the subaltern classes won somehow, it would never be a victory. The trail of destruction of modern industrial development characterized by enslaving technology, abused Nature, social alienation, greedy consumerism, and criminal wastefulness can take the victor only to slavery not salvation, to death not life. It is high time that the subaltern and other victims see the futility of our efforts of mastering the game of development and winning it. We should redefine the game and start playing it our way using our resources while adapting some of the newly-acquired techniques. We need a totally different approach of development which empowers us to transform the society with due respect and consideration to the humane aspects of our cultures, traditions and value-systems. Ashis Nandy, for instance, advocates that India recognize its cultural roots and return to the former ways of life. He argues that poverty is acceptable within the confines of the traditional village model, but misery that is caused by the centralized growth model is not. He argues: “The role of the state should, therefore, no longer be to steer development, but rather to reduce this misery by allotting all of its resources to education, health and agriculture. Renouncing the illusions of the modern state, as well as economic and military power, returning to village democracy, accepting poverty, and eliminating misery could constitute the outlines of a good state.”8 The agricultural societies should take the land more seriously and revitalize their traditional development models. After all, of the two-thirds of


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

humanity who live in the so-called Third World countries, some 80 percent of them live in about two million villages. It means that more than half of the entire world community lives in villages. Going back to the land and agriculture is, by no means, a revisionist or Luddite program because we can authoritatively proclaim that humans will never be able to eat industrial waste or computer chips. This going back to the land and agriculture also does not mean reverting back to subsistence agriculture and reviving obsolete “pre-modern” tendencies, institutions, and practices. As a matter of fact, any project of withdrawing to a murky romantic pastoral nationalism is not only a wishful thinking but also impractical in today’s world. This going back to the land and agriculture means reaching out to the people who were left behind in the infamous path of industrial development, re-starting their journey with appropriate technology, and envisioning a better future for the whole Earth and its beings. Gandhi states powerfully: “What I object to is the craze for machinery, not machinery as such...Today machinery merely helps a few to ride on the back of the millions.” So the idea is to let Nature be the Master, humans the protector, and science and technology the tool. Not in the reversed order! What will come of the cities, the rich, and their corporate-consumerist culture is a legitimate question. The answer could be simple: why not cities and villages coexist with each other exchanging their strengths and expunging their weaknesses. As it is clear now that the whole world cannot afford to become cities and to adopt the consumerist life-style, we try to create an alternative lifestyle. Instead of surrendering to the scheme of the powerful and blind, and subjecting ourselves to further exploitation, we resist and struggle to save all of us. By the examples the villages may set, the overwhelming stresses and strains inherent in city-life, we can hope to win them over eventually. Reviving the pre-colonial traditional agriculture and industry, revitalizing them with the newly acquired knowledge and skills, let us create autonomous, self-reliant “rurban” communities. Shunning nation-states, mindless industrialization, heartless commercialization and careless consumerist culture, and hugging a communitarian world society with green model economy, appropriate technology, and participatory democracy, the biological definition of peace must characterize our struggle. Nonetheless, one has to be careful here that the above conviction should not be stretched to either of the left or right extremes. If it is, we will witness either left-wing annihilation, or right-wing reactionary degradation. According to one interpretation of the Khmer Rouge revolution, they wanted to return to the pastoral simplicity of the Angkor era of Cambodian greatness between the ninth and fourteenth centuries. With their outrage concerning urban inequality and corruption, they emptied the cities, eliminated many bannheu (people with no rights such as former landowners, army officers, bureaucrats, teachers, merchants, and urbanites), abolished



money and market, adhered to the class struggle doctrine between the penh sith (revolutionaries with full rights and triem, candidates for full rights) and bannheu and struggled to create an egalitarian society. An Angka commissar was reported to have said to a group of foreign Catholic priests right after the Khmer Rouge had captured Phnom Penh and ordered the people to move out of the city: “From now on, if people want to eat, they should go out and work in the rice paddies. They should learn that their lives depend on a grain of rice. Plowing the soil, planting and harvesting rice will teach them the real value of things. Cities are evil. There are money and trade in cities, and both have a corrupting influence. People are good, but cities are evil. That is why we shall do away with cities.”9 Likewise, an ultra-right strategy could cunningly confine the rural people to the land, manipulate them into submission, and maintain a tight control over them. Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, the first native Governor General of India and later the Chief Minister of Madras, had an ingenious idea to enhance elementary education and impart creative skill to village children. Claiming to correct the bias against manual work and to revive the initiative and resources of the village, Rajagopalachari launched an educational “reform program” in the southern Indian state of Madras in 1953. According to his plan, the occupational families would automatically impart the skill to their wards. The ploy in the plan, according to opposition groups, was to condemn the boys of lower castes to their fathers’ occupations, to preserve the caste system, and to perpetuate the brahmin domination. At a meeting of washermen, Rajagopalachari praised “their skill” and then went on to speak of kuladharma, the social obligation of each clan or caste.10 To sum up, the following “peace-development-education” triangles elucidate the existing paradigm and the proposed one (Figures 4.1 and 4.2). Development, viewed from the biological perspective as in Figure 4.2, will not mean projects planned on a large scale for the benefit of a few, but will signify change, growth, progress, advance, or reconstruction. If there was to be anything worth calling “development” in the agricultural societies, “it must mean helping the poor to be more productive, and therefore able to support themselves.”11 Hence development becomes much more than an economic activity or an economistic assessment but encompasses a much broader spectrum. Sustainable village-based development could be defined as development activities that emerge from discussions among the village residents, and the plans, designs and projects that evolve from these discussions. It is based on the premises of, among other things, local participation, cultural compatibility, internal sustainability, environmental sustainability, and networking. The clear force lurking behind all these is the people of the village. So a clear human development strategy becomes a fundamental prerequisite and an integral part of sustainable development. In short, people should


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

FIGURE 4.1. Existing Paradigm

FIGURE 4.2. Proposed Paradigm




be both the end and the means of development. Such a human-centered development would “stress education, basic learning opportunities and the empowerment of ordinary people as the key to real development.”12 The relationship between development and the enjoyment of human rights is given serious consideration as development has come to be seen as a right.13 When we compute the existing and proposed understandings of “development” and “education,” we can see the resulting peace dynamics in any given society (Figure 4.3). Let us put the proposed “self-actualizing education” and the existing “domesticating schooling” process on the two poles of an axis, and situate the dreamed “sustainable development” model and the deeply entrenched “western developmentalism” on another axis. In order to attain both internal and external peace, one has to go farther on both axes toward “self-actualizing education” and “sustainable development.” The blind following of the Northern development model, senseless pursuit of “shallow peace” philosophy, and mindless imitation of Northern educational and larger value system has done and will do more harm than


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

any good to the South. A long-term sustainable development-based on the land and biological processes coupled with life-oriented education is the only means to salvation for the South. With this model in mind, let us see how to make it a possibility at least for a very narrowly defined target group in a South country such as India.



If there is one activity which starts with the birth of humans and ends only with the death of us, claims not just a specific period in life but continues throughout life, that is education. Hunger and thirst, sleep and sex, exercise and excretion all have particular and finite time. Health comes closer as one keeps working constantly on it throughout life. When we are well, we contribute to it by preventive care; and when we are ill, we concentrate on curative, recuperative and regenerative cares. However, it is important to note that health does have distinct periods of wellness and illness. When one satisfies certain basic conditions or requirements, one can claim that he/she is in the state of wellness. But how does one claim that one is in the state of “being (ultimately) educated”? After all, wellness is not identified with a few years of health center internship and an eventual diploma certifying that so and so is healthy for life. But “being educated” unfortunately is identified with a few years of institutionalized learning and a certificate verifying that so and so is educated in such and such subject up to such and such level. In the case of education, the state of “being (ultimately) educated” is never achieved in one’s life as we learn new things every wakeful minute of our life from internal and external, physical and spiritual sources. So we can safely conclude that education is a never-ending life-long process and there is no such state of “educatedness”. If somebody utilizes the state of wellness for one’s own or somebody else’s destruction, he/she is no longer in the state of wellness because such a state also includes psychological and spiritual dimensions. Likewise, one slips out of the process of education, when one deviates from the constructive and peace-oriented life. As all wellness should be oriented toward good things, all education has to be for the good of everyone, the peace and development of individuals, communities, and the larger world. Peace is not simply a human action, but it is and must be human nature. It is not peace knowledge but peace awareness and spontaneous peace action which is the end product in peace education. How does an individual attain peace thoughts and peace awareness and transform her inherent peaceful nature into peace action? Quite evidently such a life-building education requires a higher consciousness coupled with a range of skills and



knowledge. If peace is a subsistence crop, education becomes the protective fence. When the fence begins eating up the crop, it means we are in for a huge famine and devastation. Modern education turns human beings into objects instead of actors by bureaucratizing learning into “schooling.” Languages are “taught”, ideas are “given”, standardized identities are “shown” by states and schools, and teachers and textbooks. In the Western cosmology, education is a one-way transaction taking place between the all-knowing wise old man up there and completely ignorant total idiots down here. It is no wonder the West has such a view of education because everything else in that scheme is designed in a hierarchical order. Christianity, for instance, is a spiritual business between the all-powerful male God and hopelessly vulnerable sinners. The economic design is an exchange communion between the smart and sanctified capitalists, and feeble and slovenly labor. Similarly, education is very much a commodity; the end is consumerist utility and personal profitability, and the means, cramming with little character or conviction. The neo-colonized countries of the South have adopted the typical Western model of formal education based on single-point entry, sequential annual promotions from class to class and full-time instruction by full-time professional teachers. The overemphasis on professionalism increases unit costs, makes the spread of education difficult, and hence the system is inimical to both quality and quantity. Education is planned and carried out in such a way as to support and maintain the country’s preferred method of economic development. Take, for instance, India. Since the implementation of the Sixth Five Year Plan (1980–1985) in India, education has been considered to be an input in the development process rather than a social service. Following the Western model of nation-building, blind adherence to modernization and unflinching globalization require a particular economic program and development model. This scheme requires engineers, technicians and scientists and hence India’s educational policy has been shaped accordingly. Consequently, almost half of India is illiterate today, and India is one of the poorest countries on the Earth despite the economic boom. Education is a particularly strong political tool in this process for powers that be. European colonial education entrusted the teacher with grandeur and authority. School teachers continue to perform an important political socialization function. The influence of colonial education around the world has promoted the “textbook culture” which has invested the teacher with authority on “official knowledge.” The textual practices of textbooks may vary from hiding to highlighting, adding to avoiding, casual sloppiness to calculated slips, factual errors to political slanting. These are nothing but documented perceptions of bias or subtle bias. History programs particularly contain a lot of mythical, victimological and banal information.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

The content and form of textbooks could be either indoctrinating or politicizing. In California, for instance, world history begins with Plato and ends with NATO, and history is taught as the saga of heroic deeds of white Anglo-Saxons. The idea is to see everyone in a single metanarrative. Consequently, as Carter Woodson claims in his book The Miseducation of the Negro, “Negroes are taught to admire the Hebrew, the Greek, the Latin and the Teuton and to despise the African.”14 The creative imaginings of the dominant powers and the repeated recitals of their “facts” in the so-called educational process have invariably left deleterious effects on the society. As Joao Coutinho contends, education can be “either for domestication or for freedom” of people.15 Naturally, as Richard Shaull points out, two different possible functions of education emerge: “Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate the integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity to it, or it becomes “the practice of freedom,” the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.”16 Passive conformation to the present system, or critical reflection of the situation and creative intervention are the two choices left for us to choose from. Conspicuously, reconsideration of the meaning of school, and redirecting education toward liberation from dehumanization are of paramount importance. Hence emphasis has to be shifted in human learning from the existing negative viewpoint to positive values as depicted in Table 4.1. Such a revamping of human learning, thinking and feeling will not hide or ignore the negative aspects and potentials of things but highlight their destructive capabilities and concentrate on positive values and approaches. Given the changing nature and demands of human polity,

Table 4.1. Subject

Present Orientation

Proposed Orientation






Resource for Humanity



Realization and Receptiveness


“The” Only Truth

Many Truths



Servant Leadership


Trade and Profit

Exchange and Justice




Science and Technology




Confusion and Pessimism

Hope and Optimism






and the compelling need for a new educational orientation, the narrow nationalistic education has to be replaced by one which tells the people about the humanistic traditions in their culture and at the same time helps to realize the human soul-force. Education should be re-oriented toward life with “deep peace” as the end and humanistic values the means. Such an educational system, as Maria Montessori posits, will emphasize individuals bringing out their full potentialities and resourcefulness by themselves and cherishing “cosmic charity,” the lifelong dedication of each human to all humankind. After all, education is not just to know. No one can know every single thing in the world; in fact, no one can know everything about anything in the world. We can only know many things about a few things, a few things about several things, and nothing about many things. Knowing is just the beginning of education. Those who know something and those who want to know something come together and share their time and energies. In this process, those who did not know something before know it now and those who had known something before know it better now. The more one learns, the more one knows; the more one knows, the more one sees; the more one sees, the more one lives; the more one lives, the more one learns. We live to learn and learn to live! Swami Vivekananda, one of the greatest Indian educationists, puts it succinctly, “Education is not to know but to be.” Hence, it never ceases. Children may be encouraged to identify their interests and inclinations, tastes and talents at an early age. If they are helped to develop those naturally-endowed gifts and attain self-actualization, they will be original and creative. As a result, the human resource will be both “human” and “resourceful” not just mechanically reproduced mediocre menace. This educational model is not a wishful dream. Take the health analogy again; the health of children is a more important factor than their education. But children are not put up in “health centers” for a particular period of time so as to make them healthy. Instead, they are taken there only for periodic check-ups, or when they are ill. Likewise, they must learn in a free and favorable atmosphere from parents, peers or patrons. There should be freely accessible “Community Education Centers” (such as the “Casa dei Bambini” -House of the ChildrenMaria Montessori inaugurated in Rome on January 6, 1907) in scattered locations in a community which will be loosely-organized, creative, and educational with no rigid curriculum, hierarchy, or discourses within the premises. The CECs may have both traditional arts and crafts, and modern educational material. They will be more of a recreational, curiosity-inducing, “learning together” centers rather than the monotonous, compulsory, “teaching” centers. When the home-taught kids visit these centers periodically on their own, identify their interests, and develop them, they will be able to deepen their


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

learning. As the youngsters who have acquired good health (owing to their parental help and guidance, and primary health care) visit gyms, or yoga centers to work further on their health on their own, the kids in our model may visit libraries, resource centers and resource persons to learn more about their interests and subjects. As an unhealthy person meets with a doctor for better knowledge about his/her problem, medical advice, and possible remedies, the young people may consult with learned people or learning centers for better knowledge and deeper insights in their own fields of interest. Any effort to give an individual the facts and information she needs to have makes her not just an object of education but the whole exercise results in, what Erich Fromm may call, “having education.” Such an education will make machines out of men and women as Shalini Advani points out: “In our society’s untiring pursuit of technological excellence, the current value placed on the sciences promotes a system in which students are trained very largely to think in disaggregated ways by absorbing discrete items of information. The model of excellence here is the computer: the more the student can store and regurgitate, the more successful his performance.”17 Only the pursuit of seeking for the relevant knowledge and inspiration, internalizing them and living by those precepts will make the individual the subject of learning and the whole experience a “being education.” Such a “being education” will be measured not in terms of the duration of schooling, or the diploma one is holding, but how much of a peaceful person one has become and how much of that peacefulness reflects in one’s interaction with the other beings, Mother Earth and the Cosmic Spirit. Peacelessness with oneself is a frequent result of modern education. Even if one manages to escape its wrath, there await unemployment or underemployment, frustration, alienation, passivity, pessimism, aggression and terrorism. The absence of any self-knowledge, self-awareness or self-actualization in individuals inevitably reflects in their relations with others. In the modern system, self-centered individualism makes one fit, wealth and fame proves one to be smart, and ruthless competition helps one survive. I, me, mine are the guidelines. Elie Wiesel points out that the Germans of the 1920s and ‘30s were the best educated people but their education provided no help to ward off barbarity. In his words: “It emphasized theories instead of values, concepts rather than human beings, abstraction rather than consciousness, answers instead of questions, ideology and efficiency rather than conscience.” What kind of relationship these “educated” B.A.’s, M.S.’s, and Ph.D.’s establish with the Earth or the Cosmic Spirit is anybody’s guess. In the mid-1990s, on a typical day on planet Earth, we lost 116 square miles of rainforest, or about an acre a second. We lost 72 square miles to encroaching deserts. We



Table 4.2. Self

Who am I (are we)? Why am I (are we) here on the Earth?


Am I (are we) an island? What is my role (our roles) here? Am I (are we) a liability or an asset?

Earth Cosmic Spirit

Do I (we) sap or sustain? Do I (we) live or just make a living? Do I (we) die and vanish or transform and transcend?

lost 40 to 100 species and added 2,700 tons of chlorofluorocarbons and 15 million tons of carbon to the atmosphere.18 So, the education for being purposes should help one answer the questions in Table 4.2 meaningfully resulting in and enhancing internal and external peace at all the four stages: Diagnosing the “modern” situation precisely, Herbert Read gives out a specific remedy: “Unless we can discover a method of basing education on primary biological process, we shall sink deeper into disunity, mass neurosis and war.”19 Such an education alone will nourish the Earth and nurture life, foster the Universe and promote togetherness.



Our world today is no longer divided between East and West, or Communists and Capitalists, but certainly between North and South, rich and poor, whites and nonwhites, people on a diet and people starving. There are roughly 1.5 billion poor people in the world of whom some one billion are absolutely poor and they are concentrated in South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, east and southeast Asia, Latin America, North Africa, and the Middle East. The state of the economy, skin color (or ethnicity), gender and socioeconomic grouping account for the distribution and persistence of poverty all over the world. One of the main reasons for poverty, however, is the uneven distribution of and unequal access to land. With the rich in possession of the most fertile land, the poor are left either without land or with useless or overused land. Of the 850 million people living in the world’s drylands, 230 million live on land affected by severe desertification.20 Dispossessed of the means to obtain food, the poor go hungry and this insufficient food availability prevents children from reaching normal body weight and intelligence and that hampers normal activity and good health later in the life. In contrast, in the


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

US, lawns occupy more land than any single crop and there are 25 million acres of turf grass in the country. They use 60 percent of water in Western cities of the US for lawns. In 2003, the US consumers lavished $38.4 billion on their lawns and gardens.21 The modern education system, which claims to treat every child equally irrespective of their socio-economic status, or individual capabilities, is a fallacy. This educational disparity is even more troubling at the international level. Of the estimated 900 million adult illiterates today, almost all of them are in agricultural societies (developing countries) and two thirds of them are women. Illiteracy is widespread particularly among the rural women--91 percent in Nepal, 85 percent in Egypt, and 81 percent in Ethiopia. In Africa, for example, women do most of the agricultural work but receive no agricultural training at all. They have also been taught fewer technologies than men as the programs in the past misidentified the actual agricultural producers. In LDCs, the rate of illiteracy hovers around 50 per cent, as compared with around 20 per cent in other countries. Out of a global total of 113 million children not partaking in formal education, 41 percent are in LDCs. Rural areas have fewer schools, teachers and material. As there exists an obvious urban-rural imbalance, so does a huge disparity in educational expenditures of rich and poor countries. In two-thirds of all agricultural societies, the expenditure per primary school student in real terms has dropped since 1980. According to the UNESCO, in 1987, it was $29 per student per year in poor countries and $1,987 in rich countries. In 2007, 10 to 20 times more resources are allocated per student in high-spending countries than in those spending the least in relative terms. Even the poor countries allocate more resources to urban schools because they rely mostly on those schools for their “human resources.” This urban bias together with rapid urbanization takes its toll on the rural children. The present-day primary education, as Gandhi says, “is admittedly a snare and a delusion.”22 Giving the poor a broad general education is neither liberating nor meeting their basic learning needs. It is not only inaccessible for them but also proves to be quite unproductive. Even when it is accessible, it proves to be of little worth for their peace and development. It neither attracts the poor parents nor excites the helpless children nor fits into the unjust socio-economic setting in question. One of the grave consequences of this system is that the poor are driven to child labor. Take India, for example. More than 50 million children are engaged in child labor. In indigenous (adivasi) communities, illiteracy, lack of access to education, lack of availability of schools, continuous drop-outs, discrimination and no quality and technical education drive the children to child labor. Similarly, the fishing communities in India are also quite poverty-stricken. The practice of engaging children below 14 years of age in fishing and other related



activities is common. However, unlike other child laborers, the coastal children earn a good sum for their work as each fisherman who goes fishing in a vessel gets “share” and the children also get almost equal share. The child laborers are denied their legitimate birthright, viz. a joyous childhood. Instead, they are forced to add to their families’ income at the cost of their natural growth and development. They work long and hard in unsafe work places and under oppressive circumstances for meager salaries. Their amenability to discipline, punishment and control, easy acceptance of deprivation, and absence of any kind of organizational support make them even more vulnerable. The widely acclaimed global trade will only stimulate “child slavery” further as companies try to mass produce for export by locking millions of children worldwide into workplaces such as factories, fields and brothels. In 1996, according to the International Labor Organization (ILO), the number of child workers around the world remained extremely high with 73 million children from 10–14 years old, more than 13 percent of all children in this age group. No one really knew how many children under 10 were working and the number of girls engaged full-time in domestic work etc. If all these aspects were taken into consideration, the ILO felt that the total number of child workers around the world could very well be in the hundreds of million. In 1999, child labor accounted for 22 percent of the workforce in Asia, 32 percent in Africa, 17 percent in Latin America, and 1 percent in US, Canada, Europe and other wealthy nations. In Bangladesh, according to a UNICEF report, more than 6.3 million children under 14 are working. In the Philippines, some 2.06 million children work in factories, farms, rock quarries, mines and fishing boats and these minors are recruited from rural areas to work in bonded labor in urban centers. According to all Pakistan Labour Force Survey 2007 and 2008, over 21 million child laborers are working in the country out of which 73 percent are boys and 27 percent are girls. The response to this crisis varies. Several countries have passed national laws against using child labor but do not implement them earnestly. The Indian Law ministry is amending the Child Labor Act to raise the age of child labor to 18 as per the International Labor Organization convention. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions is organizing a boycott of products made by children. Their report, “Child Labor: The World’s Best Kept Secret” points out: “Between 100 and 200 million children are laboring in the mines, making matches, selling gum in the streets, weaving carpets, sewing underwear and working in the fields.” The child laborers struggle working on construction sites, breaking heavy stones, laboring in fireworks factories, shining shoes, acting as porters, or toiling at home on delicate needlework on clothes. Asian traders, who obviously stand to lose millions of dollars worth of exports to the United States and Europe, argue


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

that industrialized nations should spend more aid funds on education and training in the region instead of calling for import boycotts. As George Kent points out, people concerned with the exploitation of children are either “abolitionists,” who want to end child labor, or “ameliorationists,” who want to improve the conditions of work.23 Their legislation or regulations do not take the larger socio-economic-political setting into consideration. This kind of lip-service or paper-exercise is not of much use to the poor and marginalized. We need to be adaptionists; abolish where we can and ameliorate where we should. With a radical revamping of the basic philosophy of education, development, and peace, we need to come up with pragmatic plans and programs for specific situations. If “education for all” includes the poor and marginalized, we need to reinvent the education system to focus on life-oriented “basic education” instead of a school curriculum geared toward higher education. Even if a poor boy or girl manages to go through the present school system and attend a vocational school, it becomes a lopsided effort. Both public and private polytechnics and industrial training institutes concentrate on producing fitters and plumbers, welders and wiremen for the urban centers which operate with the Western development paradigm. The rural youth are often attracted to urban areas and skilled-labor opportunities. There are few such agriculture learning centers in rural areas for the peasants or their youth. Even the existing agricultural education programs are poorly implemented thanks to bureaucratic inefficiency, political corruption and social negligence. Education has to play a completely different role for the poor as it should help them build skills, generate earnings, and develop self-reliance and self-respect. We have to come up with innovative educational programs where the poor children earn an income and learn a job skill, preferably in agriculture sector. The “World Declaration on Education for All” itself proclaims: “To serve the basic learning needs of all requires more than a recommitment to basic education as it now exists. What is needed is an “expanded vision” that surpasses present resource levels, institutional structures, curricula, and conventional delivery systems while building on the best in current practices.”24 Such empowering educational programs should combine education, work, and play. These programs should give the working children an opportunity for education without actually putting them out of work. The children may learn a skill, general literacy, numeracy, oralcy, conflict transformation skills, and also earn remuneration for their work. The pedagogy for the poor must be adapted to the local circumstances and coordinated by local resource persons with local resources and needs in mind. The program obviously calls for skill training, field work, group learning, games and sports, and economic remuneration. It should also take into consid-



eration the assets of “the culture of poverty” such as oral communication skills, listening abilities, memory power, survival techniques, resource utilization, and occupation skills. The poor and marginalized families will support such an educational program enthusiastically as their children get educated and contribute to the family’s income. The overall community too gains in terms of human resources and social peace as several problems such as child labor, illiteracy, poverty, and unemployment are addressed at the very rock-bottom.



With the foregone theories of peace and development, and education, let us visualize an experimental project which may address the issue of child labor in India. The project will address the nexus of problems such as poverty, child labor, illiteracy, disease and the overall structural violence unleashed on the poor and marginalized people. Given the long history, extensiveness, interrelatedness, and intensity of these problems, they can be effectively addressed only at the micro level with concentrated action on a well-defined issue in a specific geographic location. In India, according to the Educational Survey of 1978–79, 626,162 villages had some 964,664 rural habitations with an estimated total rural population of 509.16 million people. Among these, 46.80 percent of the rural habitations had primary education facility within the habitation and 80.24 percent in a distance of 2 kilometers. There were 570,010 primary schools with 68.60 million children enrolled in them. They constituted 81.65 percent of the total population of children in the age group of six to ten. There were only 26.25 million girls enrolled, constituting 38.27 percent of the total enrolment at the primary school age. According to the Seventh All India School Educational Survey of 2002, the total number of rural habitations has increased to 1,231,391. Of these only 653,076 have primary stage schooling facility within them and 1,070,863 habitations have such a facility beyond 1 kilometer distance. The All-India rural primary school enrollment stands at 65,763,129 which includes 310,99,240 girls. There are 573,091 rural primary schools of which 15,084 are schools functioning in tents and open spaces. These figures clearly show that literacy is hindered by adverse economic conditions. Poverty is the main cause of child labor, and both are widespread in India. There are quite a few constitutional directives and legislation on child labor. Even during the British colonial period, the Indian Factories Act (IFA) of 1881 had forbidden employment of children under seven years, which was raised to nine by IFA of 1891. Article 24 of the present Indian Constitution directs that “No child below the age of 14 shall be employed to


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other arduous employment.” Despite national and international documents such as the Juvenile Justice Act 1985 and Rules 1989, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989, child labor and exploitation is very much prevalent in India. The problem of child labor has been a major issue at the International Labor Organization (ILO) ever since its founding in 1919 when the minimum age of employment in industry was fixed at 14. Another ILO convention of 1973 raised the minimum age to 15. A new ILO initiative, International Program on the Elimination of Child Labor, was launched in 1992 which commits the organization “to a major effort to halt child labor in its most unacceptable forms and to begin reversing the trend toward reliance on child labor for economic support.” But indications are that the number of children at work is growing fast because of increasing international trade and investment. When India exported $100 million worth of hand-knotted carpets in 1984, there were approximately 100,000 children working in the industry. As the export figure reached $300 million, the number of child laborers also increased proportionately.25 The total value of carpet exports for 2002-03 was estimated to be $532.96 million by the carpet export promotion council. And the industry employed about 130,000 children in 2003 according to an ILO figure and this did not include a very large section of population of artisans, weavers, manufacturers and traders. Estimates of the number of child laborers in India vary from 50 million to 20 million depending upon estimating authorities. The Census Report of 1981 computed it at 13.59 million, 5.55% of the total labor force of India. If one considers closely the unorganized sectors such as farming, construction, and house keeping, along with widespread corruption in the government and societal indifference to child labor, one can put the above figures at a much higher bracket. According to an Indian government report, child prostitutes constitute up to 15 percent of all prostitutes in India. A special educational project for the child laborers can have an enormous impact on the larger community. It addresses the age-old problems of poverty, child labor, illiteracy, and ill-health of the society more optimistically with a viable alternative. It creates a “win-win-win” situation for poor families, their children, and the overall community. The approach adopted in this special CEC for Working Children project should be quite liberating and empowering for all the parties concerned. The poor families must get the economic support from their children, and also have them educated. Besides contributing to the families’ income, the working children also learn new skills and talents, and general education. The overall community gains in terms of human resources, and social peace. The objectives of the CEC are to impart free “basic education” for working children (child laborers) of ages 6 to 18; and to contribute to the elimination of the poverty-child labor-illiteracy-ill health nexus in and around the CEC area.



The CEC for Working Children combines education, work, and play. It gives the working children an opportunity for education without actually putting them out of work. The children learn the occupational skills, general literacy, numeracy, oralcy, conflict transformation skills, and also earn remuneration for their work. They gain multiple advantages of skill training, general education, self-confidence, regular wages, support to family, and overall self-esteem. The pedagogy could be adapted to the local circumstances and coordinated by local resource persons. The project obviously calls for skill training, field work, group learning, and games and sports. The pupils may be provided with all occupational implements and educational equipment. The children may also be given the mid-day meals. A tentative syllabus may comprise three areas: I) General Literacy, Numeracy, Picturacy, and Oralcy: 1. 2. 3.

Basic Tamil (local language) literacy, folk songs, folk stories, children’s literature, diary writing etc. Basic arithmetic, keeping accounts, maintaining stock book and cash book etc. Communication skills, listening, conflict transformation etc.

II) Occupation: 1.


Theories and practical training on a wide range of agricultural principles and practices or fishing or forestry and so forth will be taught. In a CEC for Farming Workers, the subjects may include basic things such as maintaining a nursery, weeds and weeding, study of different ploughs, threshing, winnowing and so forth. Study may also include more advanced topics such as soil management, plant growth, crop raising, nutrition, marketing methods, cattle breeding, poultry farming, principles of cooperation and cooperatives etc.

III) Creativity Activities: Sports and games; drawing, painting, singing, dancing, and drama will be part of the curriculum. The Daily Schedule of the CEC may be: 7:30–11:30 : Class I—Field work 11:30–1:30 : Lunch and rest 1:30–2:30 : Class II—Theory Class 2:30–3:30 : Class III—Literacy, numeracy & oralcy 3:30–4:30 : Sports & Games/Other creativity activities


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

The CEC could be started with some seed money and a couple of voluntary workers on a small piece of land that would house a simple thatched shed for group learning and recreational activities. In a CEC for Farming Workers, the adjacent paddy field would be used for agricultural training and field work. The agricultural tools and equipment, seeds, natural manure, and educational supplies may be bought with the seed money also. At the end of each harvest, a portion of the produce would be sold at the local market for maintenance, staff salary and purchases such as seeds, manure and supplies etc. The remaining produce would be equally distributed among all the child workers. As George Kent points out, a loan scheme similar to the micro-loan programs of the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh could be developed to pay school tuition to learn a marketable skill. In order not to make it sound like the infamous “bonded labor,” explicit contracts and repayment schedules with plain and limited consequences of default on the loan could be devised. The parents, relatives, and perhaps community members could share the liability of repaying the tuition loans of the child workers. This kind of help-out schemes will invigorate the self-respect and selfreliance of the poor rather than conventional hand-out charities. An anonymous Chinese poet said some twenty-five centuries ago: If you are thinking a year ahead, sow seed. If you are thinking ten years ahead, plant a tree. If you are thinking one hundred years ahead, make people aware. Peace, development, and education follow that order.

NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7.

Quoted in Freire, P. (1990). Pedagogy of the oppressed (p. 64). New York: Continuum. Raeburn, J. R. (1984). Agriculture: Foundations, principles and development (p. 25). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.. Kardar, S. (1987). The political economy of Pakistan (p. ii). Lahore: Progressive Publishers. Nehru quoted in Dhar, P. N. (1989). Constraints on growth in India. Mainstream, Annual, 141. Bhargava, P. (1986). Political economy of regional cooperation in South Asia. In B. S. Gupta (Ed.) Regional cooperation and development in South Asia; Volume 2: Political, social, technological and resource aspects (pp. 157–159). New Delhi: South Asian Publishers. Gardezi, H., & Rashid, J. (1983). Pakistan: The unstable state (p. 4). Lahore: Vanguard Books. Ibid.


8. 9.

10. 11. 12.


14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.



Sorman, G. (1989). Barefoot capitalism: A solution for India (p. 76). London: Vikas. Barron, J., & Paul, A. (1977). Peace with horror: The untold story of communist genocide in Cambodia (pp. 16–17). London: Hodder and Stoughton. Gandhi, R. (1984). The Rajaji story 1937–1972 (pp. 244–256). Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. Cole, J. (1976). The poor of the Earth (p. 77). London: Macmillan, 1976. Address of the Unesco Director Federico Mayor at the opening of the World Conference on Education for All, Jomtien, Thailand, March 5, 1990 (typescript). p. 6. See the 1986 UN Declaration on the Right to Development, the General Assembly resolutions 45/97 of 14 December 1990, 46/123 of 17 December 1991, etc. Kirp, D. L. (Summer 1991) Textbooks and tribalism in California. The Public Interest, 104, 37–49. Kozol, J. (1977) The night is dark and I am far from home (p. 2). Toronto/New York/London: Bentam Books. Quoted in Freire, 1990. p. 15. Advani, S. (November 29, 1992). Schooled in silence. The Hindu. Orr, D. W. (January/February 1994). Nine ways to improve public schools, Utne reader, 87. Read, H. (1961). Quoted in A.A. Williamson, Biological forces in world affairs. Washington: Public Affairs Press. Jackson, B. (1990). Poverty and the planet: A question of survival (p. 7). London: Penguin Books. Newsweek. (June 21, 1993), pp. 62–3. Also see Coulter, L. (June 2005) Addicted to gardening. Sky, 88. Gandhi, M.K. (1938). Educational reconstruction (p. 9). Bombay: Vora & Co. Publishers. Kent, G. (July 5, 1993). Liberating child labor. Manuscript. World Declaration on Education for All and Framework for Action to Meet Basic Learning Needs (Jomtien, Thailand, 5–9 March 1990). New York: Inter-agency Commission, 1990. p. 4. Senser, R. A. (November-December 1993). Outlawing the crime of child slavery. Freedom Review, 24(6), 31.





Theater is an extremely powerful tool of communication; one reason why Dictatorial societies (Nazi Germany, Soviet Union) tried to control the theater. The focus here, however, is not so much on the impact theater can have on an audience. Obviously, there are great possibilities as form of presentation1 for social science findings and insights, building on the way theater language as entered social sciences (actor, role, stage; roletaking, enactment, enacting the script, etc.). The focus will be on the sender side of the theater, on writing the script and enacting it. And, more particularly, on students doing both with minimal interference from the teacher, as a standard part of a course. A course without enacting some major part of the content should be seen as meaningless, somewhat in the same way as mathematics without a blackboard, chemistry without experiments. More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development, pages 143–179 Copyright © 2013 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.



More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

We have both used theater as a teaching tool, and the following are some reflections on one way of doing it, and some experiences. Let us start with a concrete example: Enclosed is a copy of the first chapter, “Pursuit of Policy Contrary to SelfInterest”, of Barbara W. Tuchmans The March of Folly From Troy to Vietnam2; a nicely arrogant review of some major “follies” in world history. You do not have to accept her premise that folly (often) derives from not pursuing policies contrary to self-interest. The cases are well chosen. You divide yourselves into groups of 5-6 persons; we should end up with no more than 5 groups. And you pick your favorite folly from that chapter. One of you will be the Wise Guy, the person who argues the Tuchman theory. Another will be the Fool, the person committing the folly and thereby defining it, persisting, giving all the arguments of continuing. A third role will be the Peace Worker, this being a course on peace theory and practice. And then you will need some of the historically defined roles. When you think it through, write it up and act it out you try to steer the historical process in the direction of peace through a debate with all kinds of arguments and happenings, not necessarily succeeding. Try to show some of the hurdles on the way and how they may have been overcome. All you are asked to do is to rewrite history and then enact it. Do not think you have to be witty in doing so. This is drama more than comedy. Good luck—see you next week!

Usually the instructions are not that elaborate. Another example might be a cast written on the board: God I

God II

Chosen People I

Chosen People II


SATAN II A Conflict Worker

In other words, seven roles. One group of students picked men and woman, another picked Serbs and Croats; in both cases the conflict workers had a hard time. Germans and Jews in Nazi Germany proved too emotional for some. There has to be some preparation, like a couple of lectures, giving a substance to the role and the script the students can share. But apart from that the less that is said, the better. The students have to find the theme, the plot, the beginning and the ending, and weave a story through it, however skimpy. The performance will typically last 15–20 minutes for groups of 3-5 actors. Much can be said and done in that course of time. One little piece of



advice, as valid for students using theater as self-pedagogy as for seasoned speakers: make sure you know how the whole thing is going to end, otherwise you may run the risk of never ending. And as to the beginning: avoid introduction and explanations, just jump right into a verbal or action dialogue, like Henrik Ibsen’s opening of Peer Gynt: “Peer, du lyver!”—“Peer, you are lying!” Of course such tasks can be performed more or less well. A temptation, derived from high school and college experiences, is to try to draw laughter. However, much more important is to enact good theory with new facets unthought of by the instructor, and do this without becoming only talk, no action, the famous talking heads of television. Not so easy, actually. If we now follow standard Parsons-Bales sociology from the 1950s3 there should be a phase after the adaptation to the task (conceiving the theme, discussing, writing it up, rehearsing) and the goal-attainment, acting it out, some kind of integrative phase. The first two phases are by far too demanding, and too important for the participants just to be left like that, “Thank you, that’s all for today”. An integrative phase is indispensable. And there may also be a latency phase with students longing for next play. One possible approach is a dialogue after the play is over, using as opening question, “How did you come upon this interpretation?” The discussion is usually quite lively. According to theory there should then be a “latency phase.” The group exists as a potential, not performing any theater, but as such, an sich. And this is exactly what has happened in several cases. This was high temperature pedagogy, and as such melted down some personal Panzer and made the members of the same team come closer to each other than class-mates usually do. This is perhaps particularly pronounced on US campuses because students in the same class have a tendency only to meet in class, study being a race from one room to the other with a probability close to zero that different students will be on the same trajectory for a longer period of time. Theater makes for romances, even marriages. In short, theater makes for theater. In a more trivial vein: the method can be recommended for summer courses where pedagogy has to be compressed and students have to get to know each other quickly if they shall not spend more than 10% of the total time to get acquainted. They will also spin a more solid web of relations to each other, focused on the subject of the course, than to the teacher. As a result the teaching can become less top heavy. Here is another example, from a university of Hawai’i courses on Hawaiian sovereignty and independence, co-taught by an activist in the independence movement and one of the authors: Haole4 I, in Washington baffled, angry Haole I, in Honolulu, demoralized, angry, Red Neck type5


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Haole II, for independence, eager not to interfere East Asian Hawaiian, nice guy, waiting, sitting on the fence Hawaiian II, pro-sovereignty, maybe for independence Hawaiian I, ali’i6 Chinese descendant, waiting to take over

In this case the complexity of the cast, with three types of whites, two types of Hawaiians and two types of East Asians, one mixed as is very often the case in Hawai’i, is already far beyond what is found in conventional media debates and presentations with one of either, reducing the conflict to the traditional 2,1 type, two parties, one issue. One group solved the task by having just become proud parents of babies, speculating on what their future would be; in the end confronting the activist. Another group solved it by having the activist play a role as governor of independent Hawai’i in the future, year 2015, exposing him to all kinds of problems that were articulated in 1995. The discussion afterwards brought up emotional issues that often are taboo. The transition to a real, deep dialogue between the Activist and the Redneck came easily after this preparation. Things are speakable. Incidentally, there may be some roles some students simply refuse to play, for ideological/religious/emotional reasons. The problem is easily solved by the student picking another role. More problematic is the case of a play the student refuses to participate in; the solution obviously being to prepare a second round of plays. And announce theater pedagogy as part of the course from the beginning, warning total objectors in advance. Introducing Acting. To proceed straight from lecture with dialogues to a play may be too dramatic, literally speaking. As in-between form a political problem can be presented, roles be defined as carriers of interests. Students are then asked to pick a role and enact a political dialogue, making interests explicit. Feasibility. Theater is eminently feasible. All that is required is a course with dramatic content (with peace and development as themes that will never be a problem if the teaching is not too abstract). The props are easily found, nothing elaborate is needed, modern theater is almost stripped down to action and verbal dialogue anyhow. Pedagogy. Do students learn from this? All testimony is in that direction. Particularly important is their own dialogue about how to solve the problem. Obviously, it has to be done in a group, forcing the students to cooperate on a subject deep inside the course, not some extra-curricular activity. Some students claim they know more about conflict and peace trying to reconcile ideas about how to perform plays about conflict and peace than



from courses on conflict and peace. This is deep learning, emotional and reflective at the same time if the cast is well conceived. Having used this approach for years at different places of higher learning some patterns seem to stand out. Gender and Nation. One impression is that female students perform with greater ease than their male colleagues; possibly because acting is more relational, less positional. Another is that US students, with their high social competence, generally are better than European students, who in turn perform with more ease than Asian students. One reason may be that US schools prepare students better by having them recite, debate and perform in front of class; European, not to mention Asian schools are more based on teacher-to-student, not student-to-students pedagogy. Relation to Role-Playing. Not the same. Theater is total, with interlocking roles. The students write the script themselves, or enact partial scripts with pre-defined roles. There are all kinds of in-betweens and role-playing may be a fine introduction. Ideal for this approach would be the Rashomon theme: a number of persons are exposed to the same experience, like the professor reading a text for, say, 5 students who are encouraged to tell, and perform, what they heard. Any professor in this world has been through a fair amount of misunderstandings of his own teaching and had it rendered in very different ways in writing. The problem may not always be with the students. But the point about the Rashomon approach is that this is a normal aspect of the human condition, not something that merits a low grade. The approach is particularly useful in teaching conflict where the parties usually perceive very differently what the conflict is about. In conclusion: in Venice, in the overwhelming church of San Marco, a special case of the Rashomon effect was observed: The Christian: What a great monument to the greatness of God. The Marxist: What an illustration of surplus value expropriation! The Capitalist: I wonder how much this church is worth. The Developer: Attract tourists by having them come to church. The Architect: Pretty good job at balancing all that stone mass. The Artist: Interesting use of color and shadow. The Child: How long do we have to stay here?

Even if not very subtle, the basic point using theater as pedagogy is to sensitize students to how different the human condition looks, depending on where in the Big Cast you are. And we are all in it, somehow. Can be used at all levels of schooling and be meaningful at all levels. A marvelous mirror to hold up for ourselves—and for others.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development



Let us start with the point of departure: the definition of peace studies. Here are three components in that definition: 1. 2. 3.

Studies of the conditions for peace by peaceful means; In a global perspective; With a holistic approach

Security studies will focus on how to obtain peace by non-peaceful means, such as deterrence. This is not excluded completely from peace research but would be of more marginal interest. Peace research will make a contribution to world peace by exploring new arenas, not by repeating old concerns. Most words in the tripartite definition given above are problematic, but that is not our concern in this connection.7 Suffice it only to say that the word “global” is inserted to rule out any preconception to the effect that any particular country, or any particular civilization or region, should have some kind of monopoly on how to conceptualize and operationalize peace. And the word “holistic” serves the same function in intellectual territory: no discipline has any kind of monopoly on conceptualizing or exploring peace. All such borders should be broken down, the approach should be not only international but transnational; not only interdisciplinary but transdisciplinary. Global and holistic. Peace studies is the study of the findings of peace research with a view to developing them further. In this there is no assumption that “peace research” somehow started at the end of the 1950s. The concern comes from times immemorial. In all religions, particularly the softer aspects, people have tried to come to grips with peace. There is an enormous tradition to draw upon, just to mention one major source. It follows from what has been said above that peace studies cannot be inserted in a university curriculum at any point with the same possibility of being meaningful. Although peace education could start at home and with kindergarten, professional peace studies, not unlike business administration, comes after a college education, not as a part of it. A certain level of maturity and a grounding in various disciplines is needed. Just as studies of business administration would lead to an MBA (Master of Business Administration), peace studies should lead to an MPCT, Master of Peace and Conflict Transformation. Whether that course lasts one or two years is less important in this connection. But two years may be needed precisely because the field is global and holistic, and requires much reflection and maturity. And a paper is needed; the student has to see his or her own thoughts eye to eye, so to speak, as also the professor.



But then there is another setting, the quick approach. That setting should ideally take the student out of his and her usual intellectual habitat, heavily imprinted with the codes, explicit and implicit, of the country, the nation and the discipline. The student should be maximally open to global and holistic approaches. That openness is not obtained under standard conditions of low temperature pedagogy, but may be obtained under conditions of high temperature pedagogy: deep immersion, a setting of total dedication to the studies, being together with others who are motivated and dedicated but otherwise different, challenging, even threatening because world problems are seen from so many different angles. In short, a truly international summer school. But the school should not be of too short duration. Two weeks might be insufficient, four weeks like IUC in Dubronvik better, six weeks perhaps ideal, including field studies, time to write a paper and have it discussed. The participants should be mature, with experience. To be a college graduate would be neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition. And then there are the in-between solutions of half a year’s duration, for instance. But this is neither the deep, quick exposure that has to be limited because fatigue sets in, nor the hard work over time, with the problems, sufficient to get a real grasp and get beyond being a clever student absorbing facts and theories, to individual and group creativity. We should keep in mind that knowledge and skills are not enough. To become a good peace and conflict worker much more is asked for: a basic orientation toward nonviolence which must have some spiritual grounding, imagination to come up with creative ideas for transforming conflicts. Compassion. And perseverance. Capacity for empathy with all parties in a conflict. And creativity to overcome, transcend conflicts. So much for the setting, then something about the form, and then, indeed, much about the content. The only meaningful form would be multi-form. Neither one-way instruction and teaching in the most traditional way, nor group discussions and learning from each other and from oneself, also actually rather traditional, will do. A combination makes sense. It is naive to believe that one book or a person has it all and naive to believe that acting out personal experiences together in a dialogue is sufficient. There is need for instruction and a need for dialogue. The balance should not only be the obvious dialogue period in conjunction with each period of instruction. Dialogue is not the same as the highly disciplined and narrow Q&A, “question and answer,” like a press conference, however useful that may be. The open workshop with agenda items decided by the participants, criss-crossing and/or transcending the formal pedagogical agenda would be very useful. The field trip, seeing each other and the


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

problems from other angles, even if nearby, using the time-machine built into most societies, or using class differences and rural-urban discrepancies, adds experience. But this is no substitute for serious study using books, resource persons and other resources with a view to absorbing what they have to offer in addition to developing original peace research. As to the content: first, a distinction between studies of the situation within actors, intra-actor; and of the situation between actors, inter-actor. The actor, then, could be at any level of social organization starting with individual humans, proceeding to groups based on gender, race, class and nation, then proceeding to countries, onwards to regions, and finally to the world as a whole. The inter-world combination is still empirically empty, only science fiction, leaving us with an interesting arena to explore, using theory on the non-empirical. The distinction is important because there are extremely aggressive actors who do not engage in any warlike behavior, and very peaceful ones suddenly enwrapped in a conflict that they do not manage in an empathic, nonviolent, creative manner. From there they proceed into destructive behavior for which they may even be badly prepared, and the results are even more disastrous. There are Chinese boxes here, inside an actor there may be actors such as classes within societies, and inclinations within a human being, the Id and the Super-Ego. There is inter inside the intra and the intra-approach inside the inter. And yet the two perspectives can also be kept apart. To understand an actor a structural perspective is certainly indispensable and vice versa, we need an actor-oriented and the structure-oriented approach. Peace studies comprises both. What is the use of negotiation studies, and more particularly disarmament studies as negotiation between two actors with no understanding of the inner forces driving them? What would be the use of excellent knowledge of all possible actors in the world if we are not in a position to say something about how they relate to each other peacefully in a system of actors? The problem is not only to tie the actors well together; there is also the problem of making them less aggressive. There is the actor-in-itself versus the actor-for-others. The latter gives us ideas for the curriculum of two large areas: conflict studies and cooperation studies. They can easily be joined. The theories of exploitation/inequity, and equitable relationships, would play a major role. But how about the first? For instance area studies, starting at the regional level, then studies of the countries in the world, of course adding studies of their subdivisions according to gender (who invades whom?), generation, race, class, nation and other “fault-lines.” And then studies of “human nature,” meaning basic biology and psychology, but with a view to the differences across the fault-lines.



They exist. So, we enter a large building for the study of the human condition, from macro (not only inter-state and inter-nation but also inter-regional relations) down to micro (including in “human nature” the study of human needs, both of the body, mind and spirit) as a foundation for peace studies. That trip should be taken up and down and up and down again, through the study. On each floor we shall be confronted with inter-actor approaches in order to give meaning to the intra-actor approach, at the same level, the level “below” and the level “above.” And vice versa. That gives rise to a division of peace studies in terms of level, or better space of concern. Seven such spaces can be identified, including human (referred to as “individual” above), social, which would include the group, society and country, and world (including region) spaces. The other three, left out so far since there are no actors in the usual sense of pursuit of goals, would be nature space, culture space and time space. And that gives us an opportunity to simplify the whole edifice. What has been said so far, roughly speaking, is that peace studies is concerned with all kinds of actors from micro to macro, singly and combined, studied as single actors and in systems. And there is nature, usefully explored from angles so close to peace studies that they become parts of each other. The ecological balance, peace with nature, can be added to the basic human needs as a foundation for peace studies. And that also goes for the inner ecology: our relation to hormones and brain processes. what happens to us when we are angry, or very happy? Concretely, in the beginning of a two-year study we need the basic findings in the ecology of the planetary system, with the factors threatening and upholding ecological balance (including human demography); theories of health and ill-health for the human body and mind, psychology-philosophyreligion for the human spirit; social psychology for inter-human relations; sociology-anthropology-economics-political science for what goes on inside human society; interstate and interregional relations including the study of world institutions. Teachers are needed to synthesize knowledge, the way it is done in medical schools. But from what perspective could we do this? We cannot do everything; there has to be some simplification. Certainly, but in so doing two types of reductionism should be ruled out as worthy of study, but insufficient as a basis for peace studies. We cannot assume that human nature is inherently aggressive and for that reason let peace studies degenerate into a study of how human beings must be checked and balanced, even behind bars if necessary. The assumption would have to be that we human beings are capable of the best to the worst, of the most egoistic and most altruistic behavior, the most destructive and the most constructive, hatred and love, peace and


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

violence, even war, conflict and cooperation. The question is under what cultural and structural conditions the good prevail over the bad. We cannot assume any single factor on which it all hinges; class struggle, balance of power systems, world institutions or the “human nature is aggressive” thesis in being more open. Maybe, under what conditions? The “human nature is aggressive” proponents do not even have that, their single factor assumption is a single point, with no variation built into it. Where is the unifying perspective offering insight at the intra-actor and inter-actor levels of discourse, into all the spaces of actors, possibly excluding nature space since we tend to assume that when the individual element enters everything becomes different? Two possible answers: culture and structure. Culture was the fifth space mentioned above. We cannot possibly discuss the entire human condition without the type of meaning that condition has in different parts of the world, to different types of people. One approach would certainly be civilization theory, which, in turn, would be meaningless without a relatively deep immersion in the world’s religions. That would be a key course together with world economic geographies/ecology and basic world history in order to understand better the key actors for the first year/ term/weeks. We should not be afraid of synoptic presentations. There are always details that can be acquired later; the problem is how to come to grips with essentials. For that purpose very wide ranging authors would be preferred to the single “area specialist” coming out of one particular tradition only. What should be avoided is reliance on one single perspective. Languages are certainly as important as religions in not only giving meaning, but also communicating meaning. Maybe peace studies should have built into it the study of at least one language from another civilization? English-speakers should not get away with studying brother and cousin languages like French, Spanish, German, Italian and Russian. Arabic, Chinese, Hindu, Japanese would be much more useful. Speakers of these languages tend to know the West better than the West knows them, due to Western linguistic imperialism. Let us then turn to structure. This has not come up so far as a major concept precisely because it cuts across world space, social space and human space. There is structure everywhere. But the language of structure is not religious nor ordinary language. The language of structure is essentially mathematical when this word is interpreted both in its geometric and algebraic meanings. Hence the students have to be exposed to a minimum of mathematical concepts such as graphs and matrices, how to use them to represent phenomena, and how to calculate with them. Not that difficult; a question of good pedagogy and good examples. Two types of persons who



actually might be useful as resource persons would be architects and urbanists; many of them are structuralists even without knowing it. One approach is to simplify this further by combining the deeper aspects of culture and structure, deep culture and deep structure, in the theory of social cosmology.8 The cosmology of a civilization is its hidden code. The unfolding of that code gives us insights in peace and development for civilizations have more, and some less, of both built into them as deep culture and deep structure. The code is revealed as it is unfolding in concrete history. What should be done is the archeological search for codes, for the deeper inclinations built into actors and their systems; not only their immediate and temporal behavioral manifestations. That leads us to another major point: peace studies will have that to develop peace research further. It should include some methodology, also as a counter-trend to naive mainstream methodology in international relations, IR, research, incapable of understanding the end of the Cold War.9 Peace studies have to be more structuralist, less atomistic; more global, less nationalist; and more holistic, less uni-disciplinary than IR. The world would not be seen as only consisting of governments and intergovernmental organizations, but international peoples’ organizations, transnational corporations, all kinds of intra-national actors such as associations and municipalities. Well above six billion human beings and other inhabitants of the biosphere, and the abiota in lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere and cosmosphere. Peace studies would try to come to grips with totality, even if at the expense of some detail. These details can always be explored somewhere; the deficit today is global/holistic approaches. The contribution of peace research to general 21st century culture lies in this direction. So much for the first year curriculum. For the second year a different approach is called for: the application of theory to concrete problems. The goal is peace, like health for medical studies. A subgoal is abolition of war as a social institution, nothing less. The second year could be more strategic and tactical, much more action-oriented; less general/theoretical, more casuistic/practical. Problems would be taken from the real life around us, from all corners of the world. And the student would be encouraged to discuss that good, pragmatic US question: What are we going to do about it? There is always something within our range of knowledge and of action that can be done. The task of peace studies is not to dictate the correct solution to all conflicts, but to understand actors, cultures and structures, the conflict-formations in order to make forecasts and to come up with proposals for remedies. Diagnosis, prognosis, therapy. The studies should be geared toward conflict resolution with reasonable levels of acceptability and sustainability, and the conflict process for achieving those goals, including designation of actors:


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

who should do what, where and when to whom, how; not only why someone, somewhere, sometime should do something. There is no assumption that the focus should be international conflict. That is a very classical approach to peace studies, long ago superseded. There are conflicts in all spaces, at all “levels”. Conflict resolution is an important approach everywhere: for inner peace of the person, for interpersonal relations in the family and all kinds of groups, at work, inside society, with the state. Given a reasonably general theory in conflict transformation, with good, cross-cutting concepts, MPCT graduates should have something meaningful to say about a wide variety of conflicts. A warning: conflict is not the only perspective linked to a system approach. The positive sum game, harmony of interests, cooperation, symbiosis, whatever, is an equally valid concept. Thus, there should not be the usually single-minded focus on conflict, destruction, war, hatred, but as much emphasis placed on the opposite. The dialectic between the two is what generates a fruitful process that can be guided towards more desirable states of affairs. Hence, conflict transformation. At no point in this teaching-learning process should there be any naiveté about the very concrete role of power in the entire struggle for peace and for the abolition of war. There is the power to instruct, as given to an institution for a major aspect of culture, the church. And there is the power to destruct built into a major institution: police and military. There is the power to construct, which is built into the structure of the economy. And there is the power to decide whether to instruct, destruct, or construct: political power. All of this is a part of modern society, often referred to euphemistically as nation-building, state-building, “modernization”. Both from data and from theory we know today that these three processes have been, by and large, disastrous in terms of increased belligerence. Governments are given the right to exchange citizen human rights implementation for citizen human duties, not only to pay taxes but also to be obedient to the government to the extent of defending the national interest as defined by the government, even with their own life (and money). The condition, of course, is that the killing is done in a modern way: in cold blood, not passion; professionally by the modern warrior caste, sometimes with a PhD (in war/security studies); and at a distance to make relations between killer and killed as alienated as possible. All of this touches the modern state directly, and peace studies puts a searchlight on it that would be resisted by many. Peace studies will get into conflict with the authorities, or make compromises so bland as hardly to be worth the effort. The intervening factor is the courage and tenacity of the initiators. The struggle is not hopeless. It was won, for instance, at the School of Peace Studies, University of Bradford in England.



Finally, some words about the order in which all of this is taught. In general: in any order, being skeptical of those who try linear constructions of a curriculum. The first day could start with a case study of a very complex conflict, for instance the Middle East conflict formation. From there proceed in any direction, return to it, proceed again in different directions and then back again. Borges’ The Garden of Forking Paths suggests that only by proceeding along such paths can we ever arrive at a better garden for humankind, more capable of handling conflict. Let us then look at the curriculum in more detail. To start with a conclusion: the next step might be to make peace studies hard, with difficult exams to pass; for an MA, with focus on peace studies. Beyond that is MPCT, Master of Peace and Conflict Transformation; with career patterns and an emerging profession of peace specialists, with Hippocratic oaths of dedication to the promotion of life and reduction of violence. And all that all over the world, and as soon as possible. The world needs this. And badly. At the University of Hawai’i a concept like this was launched December 1987.10 The concept was refined many times, a core faculty had been defined, some funds were granted by the Hawai’i State Legislature. But the University of Hawai’i never gave the green light; not strange given Hawai’i’s military role. “Peace” was seen as a process of reduction of violence of all kinds, direct, structural and cultural; and “peace research” as the exploration of how this can be done, focusing on peaceful means. Research, then, is a time-honored way of gaining insight. Like all science peace research is intersubjective, publicly available and unhampered by the secrecy clauses, the sure trademark of unscientific, even rotten, pursuits—science being by its very nature public, open to challenge and dialogue. Let us summarize the key components of the MPCT program, which, of course, is a graduate program. Some knowledge and experience in the field might be a condition for enrolment; although teaching/seminar/courses open to all should certainly also be available. Others will have other lists for the same or similar purposes, but such lists may converge in the relatively near future: I.

TEACHING COMPONENTS 1. General Courses a. Conflict Theory b. Peace Theory c. Nonviolence 2. Specialized Courses a. Peace with military security (defense) b. Peace with economic well-being (development)


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

c. Peace with political freedom (human rights) d. Peace with cultural meaning (peace education) e. Peace with nature (environment) 3. All courses should focus on both: a. Knowledge, in the usual sense of concepts, definitions, philosophy; data; i. Theories and literature about all of this; and b. Skills, values and norms, roles and role-performance i. In different situations, professional ethics 4. Field trips, excursions related to the studies, a. Peace studies around the world, global/regional II. PRACTICE COMPONENTS 1. Internships, with such organizations as a. The United Nations Family of organizations b. Intergovernmental organizations, supra-state c. Transnational corporations d. International peoples’ organizations e. Governments, state-level i. Ministries of defense ii. Ministries of economic development iii. Ministries of foreign affairs iv. Ministries of education v. Ministries of environment f. Peoples’ organizations g. Educational organizations, schools h. Media i. Municipalities, sub-state levels 2. Supervised consultancies III. THESIS-EXAM-COMPONENTS 1. Writing a thesis on a concrete case based on personal participation, supervised by one university teacher and one practitioner 2. Exam, demonstrating a. Command of knowledge b. Command of skills c. Command of the student’s own case study 3. A professional oath component, a professional ethic There should be no confusion of this concept with, say, an MA in political science. The major differences are: • Skills, not only knowledge components in all courses • Internship/consultancies, practice in general



• A thesis based on the student’s own case study • Professional ethics, with an oath; a spiritual basis Not all components would be available immediately; time and experience are needed to build them, like for social work, public health, business administration, all three useful models. The goal is the creation of new skills and a new profession, the peace worker, not just an MA focusing on peace studies. That is also useful, but is something else. For this purpose there has to be a general paradigm shared by all three components. An approach that works well is the DPT Paradigm, for diagnosis-prognosis-therapy. Others may prefer “analysis” for diagnosis, “problem” for prognosis (with an implicit assumption that things will get worse unless there is some kind of intervention, and “remedies” for therapy. Obviously, the latter term covers both preventive therapy (prophylaxis) and curative therapy (intervention). The paradigm, like much else, is borrowed from the health professions. The idea that only diagnosis and analysis data and theory based is “scientific” and prognosis and therapy not since they are based on “speculation” (the future has not yet delivered data) and “politics” (intervention) would rule out not only medical science, but also engineering etc. Indispensable for any MPCT study is a field trip. Peace Studies Around the World (see Chapter 2.3), with 35 students from 10 countries circling the world, immersing themselves into major conflict situations (East-West, Middle East, North-South), organized by the Universität Witten/Herdecke,11 was ambitious. The rationale is simple. Of course one can never learn the human condition in any social setting even from the most imaginative paper-and-pencil, board-and-chalk, audio-visual pedagogy, even when it is participatory. Things have to be seen, experienced, participated in; there is no alternative. How this is done is another matter. Those who claim it is unnecessary should try to teach chemistry, botany or anatomy without laboratory experiments or excursions, or to have medical studies without ever seeing a patient, etc. When it comes to the concrete packaging of these components into a study program there are many possibilities. But the program should last at least two years; the participants should be graduates or equivalent. Component I should obviously come in the first year, and Components II and III in the second. A field travel to institutions and conflict parties could be built into Year I, for instance between the terms, as a part of the fundamental teaching the faculty can use. The trip should preferably be to a conflict “theater” and a conflict party, and the parties may be located far away from the theater.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

One way of organizing Year II would be by having general courses in the first term, and special courses in the second. The simple logic from the general to the special is typical for the organization of standard MA courses in general. However, the MPCT should in principle be steered by a different logic, more similar to the way medical studies are built. An alternative might be a focus on diagnosis and prognosis in the first semester and then therapies, what do we do about it in the second semester; of course with both in both. Thus, Conflict Theory could be divided into Conflict Genesis and Conflict Transformation; Peace Theory into Varieties of Violence and PeaceKeeping, -Making, -Building; Alternative Economics in Varieties of Exploitation and Eco-Human Economics. There might also be even better arguments for combining these approaches. After all, the general and the special should not be too distant, nor should problems and remedies. Component II for the second year, the internship, should not last less than, say, 6 months and should have been well prepared in advance, using the summer term to get to understand the organization, the fall term for the case study and then the early spring term at the university or in the host organization for the write-up. Then back to the university for a month or two where the soon-to-be graduates could also participate in the teaching process, critiquing what s/he learnt the year before, offering tutorials for the new students, etc. The project that comes closest in the world today is probably the World Peace Academy in Basel, Switzerland. The University of Uppsala, through its Department of Peace and Conflict Research, has for some years been running three month seminars for young Third world professionals, with production of a joint volume of research projects in the conflict-development interface as one of the outputs. The project is state-centered and somewhat positivistic. The University of Granada has launched a high level PhD program in peace studies. There is no DPT-paradigm focus, but that could be built into it. Universities tend to resist that and remain what they think is “value-free”, meaning unreflected. Other examples could be mentioned. There is the important PACS (Peace and Conflict Studies) program of the University of California, Berkeley, already in operation for some years. The focus tends, like in so much work in this field in the United States, to be on the sub-state level and to be too much actor-oriented, too little structure-oriented. There is also the program at Notre Dame University in Conflict Resolution, to a large extent financed from Mcdonald money. Being a Catholic university there is much too much concern with “just war”, a figure of speech that might profitably be likened to “just slavery” and “just colonialism.” And there is the work, in many regards very impressive, at George Mason University, origi-



nally inspired by nobody less than John Burton. And much more. Much has been done, but there is considerably more work ahead. Behind the medical professions, the social work professions, and now the emerging peace professions, there is the same desire to combine the compassion of the heart and the knowledge of the brain into a profession, putting knowledge behind the work for a better human condition. The risks are obvious: either heart or brain, neither heart nor brain. Thus, the peace movement may easily end up with strong compassion untainted by knowledge. Much more dangerous, however, are the people who just produce analyses without ever asking the two basic questions: what is the likely future of this process (prognosis), and what can be done about it (therapy)? Try to visit a physician who only examines you and thanks you for the data. How would you like that? International studies is a useful tributary to peace studies, but should not be confused with it. We go further. We are starting work that medical people did some centuries ago.

5.3. DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION: A CURRICULUM PROPOSAL The point of departure here is the contention of Vivekananda, a great Indian philosopher, that “education is not the amount of information that is put into your brain and runs riot there, undigested, all your life. We must have life-building, [hu]man-making, character-building assimilation of ideas.” Such an education connotes not the development of ‘life-style’ but the development of ‘life’ itself, the blooming of living beings and the flourishing of everything that makes our living possible. Seen this way, ‘development education’ incorporates every life-giving and life-promoting idea and activity that add to the enlightenment of the living beings and the betterment of our life on the Earth. The seemingly impossible task of providing a ‘curriculum proposal’ for such an all-encompassing concept becomes doable when we realize one thing. That we—the most powerful being on the planet, and hence most accountable for the world’s predicament—are the only species on the Earth who require a specially instituted education for this purpose! Everything said about the problematic relation between universities, and universities close to the centers of state and corporate power in particular, also holds for development studies. So we can go straight to content, for the form as above, and in the spirit of some deep reflection. Here are 25 theses about development and development assistance aiming at exactly that. They are all of them challengeable and should be challenged, but the reader will also find them useful as a way of organizing a development studies curriculum.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Thesis No. 1: First definition of development: Development is the unfolding of a culture; realizing the code or cosmology of that culture. As there are many cultures including civilizations or macro-cultures, spanning vast regions in space and time, there are many developments (in plural). Thesis No. 2: Second definition of development: Development is the progressive satisfaction of the basic needs of human and non-human nature starting with the most needy. Nature also has needs. The needs concept extends to all forms of sentient life, deeper than just ecological balance. The concept of sustainability or reproduction is contained in this definition; for human and non-human nature alike. Thesis No. 3: Third definition of development: Development is economic growth at nobody’s expense. This definition brings us closer to development as commonly conceived of, but with the important condition of the but-clause. The costs would appear in nature space as depletion and pollution, in human space as insults to human needs, in social space as deficits in diversity and symbiosis in individual interaction systems, in world space as deficits in diversity and symbiosis in collective interaction systems, in time or future as failing sustainability (reproduction) and in culture space as inadequatio relative to all these problems. Obviously these three definitions of development are contradictory; what is development according to one may not be so according to the other(s). A culture may have neither needs, nor growth on its hidden agenda, or one but not the other. Question: which cultures are true development cultures? Thesis No. 4: First grammatical thesis: The noun “development” can only be understood in plural as developments, not in singular. This follows from the first definition: several cultures, several developments. The thesis is fundamental and provides a background for a number of negative phenomena in our world. Thus, if the development of one culture is imposed upon another culture it will sooner or later be experienced as a straitjacket, even if it is liberating, providing some degrees of freedom in some new directions. For elites who already have internalized that foreign, even alien culture there will be no problem, except with their “backward masses”. But the people will react, partly by passive, subconscious sabotage or at least inefficiency within a socio-cultural matrix not experienced as theirs, partly as active resistance, including with violence, in other words what the dominant culture calls “terrorism”. Another term much favored by the dominant culture today is “fundamentalism”, referring to people who believe enough in their own culture to stand up for it, not giving in to a dominant culture coming in from the outside. Of course, that belief may also inspire passive and active resistance.



Thesis No. 5: Second grammatical thesis: The verb “develop” can only be understood as an intransitive or reflexive verb, not as a transitive verb. Development is essentially Self-development. Self cannot be the cause of development as an effect in Other without harming the autonomy of Other, itself a part of “development” according to all definitions. I develop, I develop myself. Try to raise your own children by never giving them the experience of self-causation. Perhaps the formula works the first ten years or so. But after that the parents will have on their hands a richly deserved puberty revolt. What then happens can also be formulated grammatically: to become oneSelf, one’s (own) Self, is to be the S in a standard Indo-European SPO-sentence, subject-predicate-object; not the perennial O. Try to raise a child with almost no challenges. The child masters nothing on his/her own, only doing some housework according to preset rules, like emptying garbage cans, making beds, some cleaning. Do this for 70 years, adding a little pocket money as the former child goes through what could have been a life-cycle. The result would be tragic. Do this with countries, and you have exactly what development assistance is about, an effort to develop somebody else. Development assistance becomes a covenant whereby the receiver gets some pocket money for basic services and the sender gets the inner growth deriving from all the challenges. Development means taking on the challenges, you yourself. Thesis No. 6: Western civilization understands itself as the universal civilization and universalizes its history as Development = Modernization = Growth = Economic growth = GNP growth. Doing so, trivialization is brought to a convenient and highly operational reductio ad absurdum point where a lot of projects can be undertaken in the name of development. All three definitions, and the semantic theses, presented above can be disregarded, with Western civilization as dominant, and even within that culture building on a very limited spectrum. Thesis No. 7: For economic growth there are three main conditions: hard work, saving/investment and inconsiderateness. The road to economic growth passes through three simple formulas: Q/P (highest possible quality at lowest possible price), C/N (highest amount of culture on the lowest amount of nature; in other words processing) and F/R (balance between finance economy and real economy). For all three hard work is necessary, especially, of course, in a competitive economy. But saving/investment, meaning not using all net income for consumption, is also necessary. In other words, there has to be some contradiction present in the culture: work hard, enjoy later. From this follows the pattern of vacations and retirement, presumably hard work/no joy most of the year/life, and no work/ much joy for some of the year/life. In all of this the focus has to be self-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

centered. Paying much attention to negative consequences of this growthoriented activity for others (and self) would deflect energy away from the major pursuit. After all, the key theme is simple: greed. Thesis No. 8: The major carriers of inconsideration are Protestants, men and economists, particularly combined. To explore this fully would bring us deep into theology, biology/culture/structure and economics as a science. Only some points will be touched upon here. First, Protestants. Much has been said about their reasons for working hard and for saving, or postponement of gratification in general, in the Weberian (himself a Protestant) tradition. Why should they also be less considerate? Two factors seem particularly important. Thus, one of the basic features of the Lutheran theoscape was the construction of Paradise as a scarce good. Access should not be seen as guaranteed by any formula controlled by human beings themselves. To the contrary, with God being His own cause, humans have little or no leverage. This means uncertainty, but also standing in line in front of Paradise. Given the super-individualization of the Protestant soul standing in line would mean competition, to get into Paradise. And then comes the second feature: Protestantism as de-Maria-ized Christianity; a truncation of the usual Christian quadrangle with God-theFather, Mary-the-Mother, the Holy Spirit and Christ-the-Son, with Maria excised. With Maria goes the compassion and mercy, more profound than the divine grace bestowed upon humans by God, generally virtues held to be feminine. Left is a triangle with two males and one of rather dubious gender. Second, men. With 95–98% of the direct violence in the world committed by males, for whatever reason, there is already a solid basis for inconsiderateness. But possibly even more important are the violent ways in which males try to come to grips with their violence: by trying to substitute for direct violence structural and cultural violence. Men build themselves into hierarchies to control the exercise of direct violence, in the sense of limiting it to violence from high to low and from inside to outside; not against the high. The army is the archetype. And then they make deductive systems like the Christian and Islamic systems of just war and peace, rather than spontaneous acts of human compassion. An example. In 1974, as observer in the Norwegian delegation to the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLoS) in Caracas, Venezuela. There were about 150 states and about 150 issues, meaning that the total agenda had a very high level of complexity. Merely to come to grips intellectually with the issues, leaving alone finding solutions, went far above the capacity of most participants or even delegations. There were many sessions devoted just to the reduction of complexity.



One day one of us was invited to a session of secretaries. They had been typing the whole thing; almost all made by men, and typed by women. One basic problem was the minerals on and below the ocean floor. The men discussed how to exploit them, these secretaries wanted to discuss who should benefit from them. And their answers went in the direction of women and children suffering in the Third world. Compassion for the needy. But the men, meaning almost all the delegates, had other perspectives. Their first problem was how one could fit these possible ocean floor resources, such as the famous nodules, seamlessly into the edifice of international law. For that much research would be needed, in other words new institutes, possibly new degrees, at least more people trained in adequate intellectual constructions. In addition there was the problem of how national interests, those of their own nations, not other nations, and not human beings in any direct sense, could be served. In other words, verbal and social hierarchies of law and interest, as mentioned above, not compassion. Third, economists. We see economics, like any science, as an effort to make certain aspects of reality visible and amenable to processing by the human mind in general, and the faculties for abstraction and generalization in particular, but at the cost of making some other aspects of reality invisible. Peculiar to economics is that the aspects made invisible are within the very field of economics themselves, the direct, but non-monetized, not accounted for positive and negative consequences of economic activity. In other words, the externalities, so named because they are not brought into the focus of intellectual scrutiny but kept in the shadows or beyond, in the sub- or unconscious of the economic mind. These are the holes in the economic mind, and seven can be identified using the logic of spaces indicated in thesis No. 3: • Nature space, not seen in its own right but only as a resource and possible dumping place for pollutants; • Human space, seen mainly as production factors at various levels and as consumers; • Social space, seen mainly as a locus for production-distribution-consumption cycles and as a market place; • World space, seen as an international social space; • Time, only visible for the shorter run; • Culture, made to serve economics as constructed by economists rather than vice versa, e.g., by relativizing all values and making them comparable through monetization so as to permit interpersonal and inter-value cost-benefit analyses. • Philosophy, the missing capacity to develop awareness of the loopholes in one’s own reasoning, e.g. the other six holes.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

Thesis No. 9: There are two major economic growth regions in the world, the Judeo-Christian (JC) Northwest and the Buddhist-Confucian (BC) Southeast. If the conditions are hard work, saving/investment and inconsiderateness there can be no doubt that the world Northwest qualifies, with the Protestant part at its center, somewhat softer in the Judaic and Muslim parts with their focus on social justice, and in the Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, with the female goddess intact. But the world Southeast, meaning Japan-China-Korea-Vietnam also qualifies. Hard work and a certain frugality are deeply embedded in the Confucian ethic, considerateness and solidarity in the Buddhist ethic, particularly the mahayana Buddhist ethic with its strong emphasis on the greater context. However, this greater context is not universal. Only the Occidental projects, particularly Christianity and Islam claim to be universally valid. One consequence of this is cultural imperialism, another is exploitation all over, of nature, humans, classes and other social groups, other countries, the future and their own cultural resources. The world Southeast might focus the exploitation on the rest of the world, the world outside their own, treating their own part better. The net result may be about the same: economic growth, and not development in the sense of Thesis No. 3, at nobody’s expense, but with more equality in the BC-region. The major country in the JC region is Germany with the European Community/Union, and Eastern Europe/ex-Soviet Union as Hinterland; and in the BC region Japan with East/Southeast Asia as Hinterland. How will Germany and Japan/China behave in the longer run towards the United States? Thesis No. 10: The rest of the world is for the time being condemned to periphery status in the world capitalist system. It is not impossible to get out of this the major of all structural impediments. But it certainly takes hard work, much saving and investment and possibly also some “countervailing inconsiderateness”, even when done completely nonviolently. Gandhi organized boycott of British goods, particularly textiles, in order to pave the way for economic self-reliance, and even collected money not to hurt British merchants. But there was no escape from the fact that they were hurt in having their expansionism checked. In today’s world the two Cold War superpowers are remarkably similar. Inconsiderateness is no problem, they have excellent credentials in that field. But hard work and saving are problematic for both, under the present circumstances. It is hard to tell the future, however; both Americans and Russians have hidden strengths that may come out when they are tested under conditions of real hardship. While this profile also applies to other areas of the world system Periphery there are also regions with the opposite profile: hard work, saving as a hedge against harder times and considerateness to Nature, Self and Other.



Most indigenous peoples are like that, that is the reason why they have survived for so long. Slowly, they are eliminated. Exacerbating the situation: the general homogenization of world elites around the theme of economic growth, at which they are more or less successful, but never manage to come to terms with their own inconsideration and collision courses. Thesis No. 11: With market (capital) and plan (state) as basic dimensions we get five, not only two economic systems: market, not plan (Blue, capitalist); plan, not market (Red, socialist); half-half (Pink, social democrat); both-and (Yellow-Golden, Japanese) and neither-nor (Green, traditional, local). Only when market and plan are seen as opposites and the typology becomes one-dimensional does it make sense to talk about only two systems (or three if the pink social democrat compromise is located in the middle). If one is excluded, then there is very little left, making some people believe that the residual, the Blue system, is the “natural” system. But, as shown above, the condition for arriving at that conclusion is onedimensional thinking. Of course, much more complex typologies than the one given in Thesis No. 11 can be imagined, but the present typology has the advantage of accommodating relatively well the systems existing in the present world. The Blue system, the market system, comes in two versions, Center (high on degree of processing of raw materials, but not always on quality and stability; high on communication-transportation centrality; not too high on equality; and not so high on misery at the bottom of society), and a Periphery version with the opposite profile. Thesis No. 12: Rather than an ideological dedication to one system only an eclectic use of all five in time, space and functional space could release positive development synergies. Basic is the transition from monotheistic faith in one economic god to polytheistic betting on several. The systems may be activated one after the other, in different places or for different functions; or any combination of the three. Thesis No. 13: A necessary condition for development is decentralized distribution of production factors to all, making everybody a potential participant in production. The basic point is decentralization, meaningful within all systems; also the Red system. The basic point about decentralization from an economic point of view is the mobilization of resources, not only human, but also the other four by maximizing the number of sites of creation and production. Everybody should produce something! More concretely, this used to mean access to land and water, and to communal forests and lakes, seas, oceans (the “commons”). Today equal or more emphasis would be on improving the quality of labor through health and education (particularly by labor doing this themselves); easy access to credit; creation of technologies appropriate to the people using them and


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

to the consumers; and management structures compatible with local culture and social structure. Thesis No. 14: First production priority is for the basic needs for those most in need; best done in a green economy. What is the purpose of the whole economic exercise, as argued above, if not to satisfy basic needs? But the point about local production is important. Even if centralized production can solve the task better with higher quantity at lower prices (higher quality might be more difficult), local production may be less supply and distribution vulnerable and more sensitive to local traditions. Externalities become more important the more basic the needs; for non-basic needs risks are incurred with less penalty. In practice this means decentralized production of food, clothing, housing and health. Thesis No. 15: Second production priority is for simple production and consumption tools related to basic needs (pink). These would the pots and pans for food consumption, and the basic tools for the production of food (picks and shovels, walking tractors, stoves); for clothing spinning and weaving tools and for housing manufacture of bricks and other building materials. Basic medicines certainly also enter the picture. This may go beyond what the local level can manage in many cases, and yet is so close to basic needs that exposure to the cycles and pressures operating in international trade would be counter-productive. Thesis No. 16: Third production priority is for export; at ever higher C/N (processing) levels (golden economics). The basic rule is, of course, never to export raw materials, but always to imprint on nature (N) some form, in other words culture (C), always aiming at higher C/N ratios. Export integrated circuits, silicon chips, computers etc., never raw metals, ores. But this requires cooperation researchers- technicians for high C/N and workers for good quality of the products at reasonable prices (high Q/P). Management-worker relations have to be good within the companies, and state-capital cooperation would bring in all the resources of the society for the export drive, not for all possible products, but for niches of pride and proven quality. This reasoning also holds for nonmaterial processing, where the end product would be highly educated professionals (processing of raw brains) and highly sophisticated culture (literature, science, art) Trade in C, not in N; N is limited, C is not. Keep high saving ratios and invest in better production factors. Thesis No. 17: To get rich increase Q/P (quality over price) levels maintaining or increasing C/N, watching the finance-real economies balance, F/R (blue, red, pink, golden). This is a never-ending endeavor, a slip at one point only for a short time can have detrimental consequences. Essentially this is a question of how workers are treated since they are closest to the actual job of finishing the products. Treat workers like junk and they will do junk work, turning out junk products. Do that and the punishment will



come and fairly quickly, as the U.S. economy is now experiencing (although this is only one of many factors behind the decline into a state of depression of that particular economic system). Thesis No. 18: To remain rich improve production factor quality: nature, labor, capital, technology, management (golden). Help nature with eco-balance; work for ever higher levels of health and education to achieve higher C/N and Q/P, never forgetting that the level of education and health of the bottom 50% is as important as the level of the top 5%; watch the finance economy/real economy synchrony; invest in technical creativity and capability of everybody and strive for management structures where everybody is at home, perhaps by accommodating people in smaller groups, horizontal beta-structures, inside larger, more hierarchical alpha-structures. All of this is actually very Japanese, some of it from Kaname Akamatsu, perhaps the best development economist of the century (and for that reason unknown in the West). But why not learn from Japan? Why could not others do some of the same, reducing the disproportionate weight carried in the world economy today by that one country? Thesis No. 19: To remain developed internalize externalities in the nature, person, social, world, culture spaces, making all spaces reproducible (sustainable) over time. Concretely this means keeping and building as many local cycles as possible so that the link between cause and consequence can be clearly seen and acted upon when something goes wrong. Also, give some challenge to everybody. This has been the strength of Western entrepreneurialism as long as it was sufficiently decentralized. In the First World, the world Northwest, the tendency was for the individual to keep the challenge as private property the individual could carry as enrichment, experience into a new job. In the former Second World of socialist countries challenges were vested in maybe as few as 400 planners for 400 million in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, who were then obviously overchallenged people in an ocean of the underchallenged. In the Fourth World of development, Japan and similar countries, the challenge remains in the company because the challenged person remains in the company. Moreover, because of the countless discussions the challenge is better distributed. And in the Third World the challenge is given to the expert from the First or Fourth Worlds who return fully enriched, leaving some recipes behind. Then: watch social and world structures for new conflicts! Thesis No. 20: And when/if it fails start again where it went wrong, even from the beginning. And if it succeeds also start again, e.g., with nonmaterial products. Or simply say, this is it, let us enjoy, watching that the economy does not degenerate but remains dynamic and sustainable. Thesis No. 21: Development assistance is the legitimate child of a Western Imperialist father and a Christian missionary mother. The child carries the


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

code of both. Development assistance is a way of ensuring the reproduction all over the world of Western culture with accompanying structure, by planting the socio-cultural seeds of that particular culture all over, making use of poverty, even misery for legitimation. This does not lead to reduction of misery but rather to its reproduction, giving more occasion to continue the development assistance exercise. The “father” seizes the opportunity and the “mother” feels reasonably good dispensing so much charity. The recipients are blamed for poor results. Thesis No. 22: Development assistance is very competitive among donor nations and is done under any slogan (pre-investment, infrastructure, community development, participation, import substitution, export substitution, basic needs, for women, for the environment, sustainable development); presence in the development assistance market is what matters. So there they are, the development agencies, one on each hill-top, one in each valley, sometimes cooperating and “coordinating”, sometimes competing, overbidding each other, making deals with local elites to make the projects “succeed”, the local elites being very aware of their power in this regard and of the importance for the agencies of having something to show. Then there are, often from UN bodies, a new slogan that may open for new projects. But competing agencies will sense the danger and immediately adopt the same slogan, even “decade”, to be run by the same people who the year before had the opposite slogan. Thesis No. 23: The road to development assistance will have to pass through the removal of the major structural impediment, center-periphery structures; and through challenging demands. This follows from what has been said above. If the road to a minimum of material wealth passes through C/N, then the LDCs will have to do exactly that, processing, and not remain content with the roles of producing semi- or unprocessed products, at high levels of Q/P, assigned to them by the devastating doctrine of “comparative advantages”. The MDCs will probably not remove that impediment, knowing that it holds the key to so much of their dominant role in the world economy. The LDCs will have to do this themselves, and the best approach is probably indicated by the South Commission (once chaired by Julius Nyerere): by means of South-South cooperation. But if the MDCs nevertheless would like to be really helpful, then they should follow up by placing orders with the LDCs for sophisticated products, with much built-in challenge (as argued above). Thesis No. 24: Reciprocity is a necessary condition for development: I help you, you help me; for instance by asking LDCs to become donors of development advice to MDCs. The usual question in this connection is how LDCs can help at all, being by definition so poor. The answer, often unreflected in the MDCs, is nonmaterial help. And the best help could be what the MDCs dispense so willingly, solicited and unsolicited expert advice. The



LDCs have become objects to be studied and helped. The moment this is a two-way street a dialogue between two subjects can emerge, e.g., over the relation to children, the aged and the sick and alienation in modern society. Thesis No. 25: The best providers of development assistance are probably voluntary people’s organizations engaging in people-people rather than expert-expert dialogues, providing assistance closer to basic needs and being more ready to accept reciprocity. Particularly helpful are probably women’s voluntary organizations. A reflection based on observations by many, including this author. One reason is very simple: People’s organizations (by governments dubbed “nongovernmental” as if people exist only as negations of governments; like calling governments “nonpeople”) may promote own interests in a development assistance setting. But these interests are likely to be relatively innocuous, even positive for receivers. When governments give aid national interests as seen by the governments will generally be involved, and they can be heavy: trade promotion for national products, political reciprocity in the form of support, even votes in intergovernmental organizations, military rights to bases, joint defense arrangements etc. All of this will color, even transform, the development aspect in the sense of the basic needs of humans and nature; even the economic growth aspect. Added to this comes the difference between governmental and nongovernmental experts. The former are experts on something in their own country, and as a consequence the production of this something in an LDC will usually be for export. The road from expert to export is very short. Voluntary organizations can transmit human level experiences from MDCs to LDCs and back again, even in direct cooperation with LDC volunteers. And they can better remain faithful to the primacy of basic needs, out of human solidarity. So, here is a totally different approach coming out of years and years of experience in development education. Start with these 25 theses, or others, and develop the concepts and the theories in the light of these theses. The theses span over the whole field of social sciences and will give the teacher an interesting challenge in mastering a corresponding span. One guiding question: how does this thesis work for me, my family, my community, my country, my region? Interesting discussion topics would include the definition of such concepts as “basic needs”, “culture”, “structure”, “economy”; all the time with examples. Internships and theses can be organized; there are hundreds, thousands of development organizations (in the first world often referred to as “social work”, “war against poverty”, etc.) Of course, knowledge of the institutions, governmental and non-governmental, profit and non-profit belong to the picture and good thesis topics could be their development concepts. At the same time this could open for cooperation between critical/constructive students and the practitioners.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

The step from such theses to a curriculum may be short, long or none at all. The purpose of these 25 theses is only to indicate topics that sooner or laster will come up in any education for development. Maybe the list can serve as a check list. But then, added to that would the concrete how-to, how do we concretely develop a sustainable basis for such basic needs as food, health and education. Development is a rich field - and itself in need of development.


Reader: If all education is for peace and development, as some people claim, I don’t particularly see the necessity for peace education, or the justifications for this special focus. Galtung: Not all education is for peace and development—the two terms often mean almost the same—and one way of affirming it is to look at it in terms of basic needs. I think that peace action and peace education should always enhance human lives and ecological balance, in other words, human needs and the needs of the animals, the plants, the environment. These are the basic values. In terms of human needs, education for peace would be education for the maintenance, and development, of the needs to survive, the need for well-being, the need for freedom and the need for identity. Non-peace or anti-peace education is education for the opposite. So, I think there is no particular difficulty to justify the need for the special focus. Only that I would certainly have environment in it, and if one wants a term for it, one may use the expression “peace with nature” in addition to the inner peace with oneself and the peace with others. Udayakumar: If peace is considered as a sustainable crop, the farming techniques will differ as the soil, water availability, weather conditions, quality of seeds and other such factors change. One cannot argue that we need to do the same basic farming things around the world and leave things at that. We even need different types of food in different parts of the world; if a Sri Lankan craves for rice, an Ethiopian longs for teff, a completely different food-grain. Likewise, with the varying needs of different societies, we definitely have to change the focus of education. For instance, we may have to emphasize nuclear peace in certain societies, religious peace in others, and food peace in yet others. So we do need special focus in education for peace.



Reader: The role of peace education in the light of changed superpowers relationship, what happened to the Gorbachevian dream of a “Common European Home,” and the steadily deteriorating NorthSouth chasm is not very clear for me. Galtung: I think there is a big misunderstanding here, especially, in the US press. It is true that there is a change of relationship between the former Cold War superpowers with a new Cold War coming up. Some of that is to the good. On the other hand, the status, in sociological terms, of being superpower in the world system has not disappeared. The United States is aspiring for a super-superpower relationship to the rest of the world. But at the same time, there are the European Union, Japan, Russia, China and India aspiring to be at least regional superpowers, which means that the problem is even more acute than before. Gorbachev was dreaming of a Common European Home from the Atlantic to the Pacific, but he seems, unfortunately, to be the only one dreaming about it. The rest are dreaming about building the European Union in the West and then establishing client relations to it in the East. Steadily deteriorating North-South chasm, and within both the rich-poor chasm, is justifying the need for peace education as ever before. There is one hopeful sign and that is some increase in South-South cooperation, for instance as promoted by the South Center in Geneva. In my view, it is the only way out. If they could also cooperate with the ex-Socialist countries so much the better—that is our new Third World, Third World II. Udayakumar: I see the end of Cold War as an opportunity to ease the preoccupation with Eurocentric politics and disarmament education. We can in principle divert our attention to agricultural societies in Asia, Africa and South America and pay more attention to hunger education without giving up on disarmament education. The united-North plan of Gorbachev remains the dream of an individual but the growing North-South chasm requires a peace education. Both groups of peoples do not know much about each other. The North patronizingly sees the South as “undeveloped” or “underdeveloped” or the “Third World.” The South, on the other hand, sees the North with distrust, apprehension and even dislike as the former colonialist, present imperialist, and potential future enemy. We need peace education activities to break out of this. Reader: I am puzzled how peace education should handle the muchacclaimed Capitalism’s triumph over the world system, especially when the competition-based, profit-oriented, risk-taking ‘survival of the fittest’ functioning of “free trade” promoted by the International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization and others seems


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

to be the only way in the world economy right now, the only “game in town.” The peace educator or educatee should be given an alternative such as cooperation as the basis for economic welfare. Galtung: It is in the US that there is much acclaim that Capitalism has triumphed over the world system. In the rest of the world, you have, for instance, still the remnants of Japanese economics, which is completely different and much more focused on even distribution. Social democratic economics, which you still can find a lot of in Europe, is also very different. And you have Green Economics which is not found in the textbooks but is the way humanity has always lived. There is, of course, the rather basic point that Capitalism in the center and much of the Capitalism in the periphery are two very different things. The former is a command economy and the latter a client economy. Again I think that the peace educator should just simply relate these systems to the catalogue of human needs and the needs of the environment. Tick off the interfaces in the relationships and then see which systems are the better ones. Personally, I think, an eclectic combination of the economic systems I mentioned, the Green, the social democratic and the Japanese for an export sector, is the best one. Udayakumar: The macho, mechanistic, profiteering “free trade” assumes an unproblematic unanimous representation of all humanity, and a singular vision and voice. The new “rich man’s burden” wipes out the sporadic sustainable development models and imperils two-thirds of humanity who live in about two million villages. No capitalistic miracle is going to turn all these villages into New Yorks and Londons. So what we need now is economic plurality and ‘parallel markets’ where there will be many more, new and old, bright and bold, indigenous visions of compassionate, sustainable development thriving along with dominant systems. Peace education, being a living ideology and not just a bookish indoctrination, should educate people for economic plurality rather than purity. Reader: We should devise ways and means by which peace education can come out of the classrooms and reach for the mansions and manors, for the slums and huts, and the whole society can be reschooled with peace education. Galtung: Illich’s view that education has mainly to be done outside the schools is largely my view too. The Kerala Science Movement, for instance, is interesting because it works outside the school. So I see it in terms of voluntary organizations reaching the mansions and manors, and the slums and the huts. I am sure that media ways of doing it - maybe, more than television actually—is the way it is



operating today: from above creating envy and greed. There must be better ways! Udayakumar: I came across a good example recently. A Bangladeshi journalist runs a paper in his locality, and he prints articles of rural women either written by them or transcribed from tapes. He prints them verbatim without editing or correcting grammar and other ‘inaccuracies.’ By similar creative initiatives, we can bring the media to ‘ordinary people’; we can revive the traditional story-telling practices such as puppet shows, street plays, dance-theaters and so forth. If catching the people’s attention and imagination is the idea, we have to be creative, get out of the classrooms and lecture halls, and go beyond print media. Reader: Thinking globally in such peace education efforts, I think one could act locally, or globally. There is also a need for identifying a middle way between the two. Galtung: One should both think and act globally, nationally and locally. That means downgrade the nation-state, the carrier of arms. Fortunately, that is possible today because of the many international people’s organizations. In other words, not necessarily by becoming Prime Minister, or Foreign Minister or whatever, but by joining various types of international, national and local volunteer organizations. Civil society, national or international, has a much better outreach than the state system. Udayakumar: Like a tree, we can stand on the local and particular and spread all over and reach for the unknown and universal. Not having deep roots or being wrapped up in the roots will make a tree fall down or perish. Likewise, failing to grow and stretch out will make a tree look deformed. Growing on both sides makes a tree develop a healthy and huge stem which is a sign of maturity and strength. We are nothing but walking trees. Reader: On the one hand, we see nation-states trying to form supra- and super-nation-states; on the other hand, multi-national states are disintegrating. These contradictory trends leave me wondering if nation-states or regional arrangements are more useful for globalminded peace education efforts. Galtung: The best arrangement, from the peace point of view, is usually a confederation, which would generally be a loose regional arrangement. Imagine a continuum where on the extreme right you have the centralized, unitary nation-state, and as you move toward the left, you first come to the federations, then the confederations. Then comes an associative, cooperative arrangement, and then a dissociative, anarchic system. The two extremes are bad; they can be very belligerent. The anarchic system easily develops direct vio-


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

lence, and the unitary state adds to this structural violence. That also goes, very often, for federations. Moreover, even if federations are peaceful within, they often go to war against each other. They have the capability. A confederation is strong enough to maintain direct and structural peace inside, and weak enough not to become an actor that goes to war itself, or starts exploiting. Examples are the European Community before Maastricht, the Nordic Community before some of them joined the European Union, and the ASEAN Community. All of them are regional arrangements. The problem is how to expand it to the world. Udayakumar: What we need now is both disintegration and integration of the world society: disintegration of nation-states and integration of nationality groups. Having been emancipated by the disintegration process, the “10,000 societies” can integrate into a single world through regional confederations along the lines you have just delineated. The bottom-level people’s-movement-type regional arrangement, not the top-level regional organizations, should be established with emphasis on cultural understanding, economic collaboration, and political cooperation. These loose regional arrangements can make an effective use of peace education as the rigid nation-states do with the present-day war education. Reader: There must be ways by which school kids, or society at large for that matter, can be really turned into global citizens from the present “nation-state subjects” position, easily and swiftly. Galtung: I think so. But it can be done only if they get concrete tasks to do. One way of doing so, not necessarily the best, is through municipalities cooperating across the various types of divisions of the world, and then having their schools cooperate. A sensible way would be teachers-exchange, students-exchange and so on. In other words, do it from the local to the local level and try to by-pass the center of the nation-state as much as possible. The state system has been tested for its peacefulness and has, in my view, largely failed. Too many armies, too much state egotism! Too many “national interests” outside their own borders! Too much patriarchy, too much secrecy! Udayakumar: There is no question that the prevailing state- oriented identity construction is evil. But the idea of turning people into global citizens without any foundation sounds like building castles in the air. People do need something local and concrete to build upon. Nationalism as such is not always a bad idea, and has proved to be vital in the fights against colonialism, imperialism and for other such political struggles. We need to invent the concept of “humanitarian nationalism,” a soft nationalism that builds on the



positive sides of it, and also cares for the larger humanity in solidarity against the hard nationalisms. Such an identity discourse will be based on both the ‘self’ and the ‘larger self.’ Individuals, families, teachers, and the media can and should do that. Easing up travel restrictions, enhancing educational programs and audiovisual exchanges, making the internet accessible to all, and promoting people-to-people contact could help. Reader: In case it proves to be a difficult thing to do, we might want to adopt the view of “regional links into global chain approach” in our peace education approach. Galtung: Partly, yes. I think the regional level does not in any way exclude the global level. Keep working at all levels. At the same time. When I said above that we have global, national, local levels, the regional level can certainly be filled in between the global and the national. So I agree with you. But don’t try to make one an alternative to each other. Rather explore all the ways in which they can be combined. Imagine that you have twinned the municipalities. You have a municipality in India and twin it with one municipality in the same region, for instance, indeed, in Pakistan. Then you twin it with one in the West, with one in the former Socialist countries and with one in what I call the Fourth World, the Japanese-Chinese, Confucian-Buddhist world. Should you do that, you would have the local, national, regional and global levels. A very interesting combination. Udayakumar: I would agree. If we take South Asia, for example, the regional countries have had a common history and heritage, similar problems and predicaments, shared hopes and dreams. As S. K. Chatterji points out the cultural milieu of these South Asian countries have the same basic character also: emphasis on melody in music, traditional and stylized form in dance, free variations in painting, monumentalism in sculpture, lyricism in poems, and realism in stories. Despite these commonalities and similarities, there has been no attempt at achieving any regional understanding by linking the cultural contiguity and educational endeavors. The interaction with and appreciation of other regional cultures will provide the people of the region with a strong base to launch out into the larger world. Reader: I wonder what would be its focus and concentration, and what kind of activities we may undertake? Galtung: I think peace education should focus on the conflicts in the world. Of course not only among states, all kinds. Try to list them, understand the conflict formations, and try to mobilize students in coming up with solutions. In other words, be realistic in terms


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

of trying to understand what the conflicts are about; and idealistic in projecting creative solutions. I try to say that the Cold War has disappeared but we have gotten something even worse instead, the so-called New World Order, with a second Cold War against Russia and China coming. A recipe for violence from above. We should mobilize people against such formations and in favor of solutions. Udayakumar: Besides the focus on conflicts and conflict resolution, there could also be courses or programs on regional cultures focussing on various themes such as different philosophies, vernaculars and dialects, literature, theater, music, dances, painting, sculpture, architecture, and even minor arts such as wood-carving, copper and cloisonne work, carpet making, earthenware etc. We could produce cultural kits on popular regional themes such as religions, festivals, customs and rites, oral traditions and folklore, or traditional handicrafts with emphasis on stylistic similarities of the region and local variations. This kind of explorations may open up the storehouse of the region’s cultural heritage and act as a portico to the larger world. Reader: That is exciting. But it makes me wonder about the possible problems and shortcomings we may encounter in such an approach to study the conflicts and cultures. Galtung: Well, one problem is, of course, lack of knowledge and very often, lack of imagination. We have to start with the analysis of conflict and conflict resolution very early in kindergarten for that matter. Take, for instance, the classical problems like two kids having one orange; I often start my conflict courses with that one. You will be amazed by how few ideas people have for such simple cases. How, then, about the bigger problems? Many of these big problems look so insurmountable, like the Cold War, for instance. People thought that these problems could only be solved by Presidents or a General Secretary. Not at all! Common people often solved many of these problems, like the people of Poland and East Germany. So the very basic point is that people feel ‘I can do something about it’. The 10–12 cases of nonviolence with large popular participation in the second half of the twentieth century have changed world history. Such cases should be highlighted in popular education. Udayakumar: As regards culture, we need to be very clear that acquiring a cultural equanimity is the goal of peace education activities. The purpose of these activities is neither cultural displacement nor cultural chauvinism but increased cultural awareness and open-mindedness. Mahatma Gandhi sums up very succinctly: “I do not want my house to be walled on all sides and my windows to be stuffed. I



want the cultures of all lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible. But I refuse to be blown off my feet by any of them.” Reader: Peace education is highly political. We need to be angry about things in the world, be on alert not to let those things happen again, and still be peace-minded without succumbing to anger, hatred, narrow-mindedness, or political indifference. It is a very tricky task. Galtung: A basic problem. The motivation has to be based on something much broader and better than anger alone. Peace education is certainly highly political. And the same applies to our present lack of peace education; it is also highly political. There are substantial peace-blockers out there. But we don’t have to be angry; we don’t have to harbor hatred. We should rather approach it as a task, like a physician, and out of compassion, love for those who suffer. That’s why I often invoke the medical metaphor and the sickness metaphor. You are not angry at bacteria; you may be sad, but you rather see them as a problem crying for solutions without dangerous sideeffects. People feel empowered the moment there are things that can be done. Not only problems, but some solutions. Then they start exercising pressure on governments: why don’t you do this, why don’t you do that? And that seems to be the way things happen. That’s the way Europe Fall 1989, the end of the Cold War, happened. All the leaders of governments and the heads of states had nothing to say but that “nobody could have predicted it.” Let them talk for themselves; it certainly applied to them. Whereas all the people, I must say all we people working down at the grassroots level, people to people, knew that things were happening. We knew it was loosening up above all because of people’s action. So for that reason, let us remain optimistic. Udayakumar: I personally don’t see any problems with anger. What is important is that we should transform the anger, or inner fire, into constructive action. We also need to dream and strive to realize them. This ‘anger-action-ambition’ combine will make us what Martin Luther King, Jr. called “creative extremists.” This creative extremism is the basis of nonviolent revolutions that change people and institutions for the better. NOTES 1.

Galtung, J. (1988). Forms of presentation as development. In Copenhagen, E. (Ed.), Methodology and development (pp. 176–232). Particularly 5.2, World and social transformation—and the theater?”; 5.3, Three TV programs on imperialism; and 5.4. Six dramas in search of an author.


2. 3.

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9.


More Than a Curriculum: Education for Peace and Development

New York, Knopf, 1984, pp. 4–33. The AGIL system, adaption-goal attainment-integration-latency model of group processes; G and I being more active, A and G being more....HABERWORD (I and L more expressive). Literally ”without breath,” foreigner, today mainly used about whites living in Hawai’i. Here is a list of typical redneck problems, defined by one of them in Honolulu, and used by the class to organize their thinking on the themes (slightly shortened and edited): 1. What currency will be used and who will issue and guarantee it? 2. Will Hawaii be a creditless society? No bonds for either revenue or capital improvements. No money except sharks’ teeth? Will we revert to a primitive state of barter? 3. What about the pensions now being paid and those now being credited to thousands and thousands of government employees ? Down the toilet? 4. What about health care costs? Are we going to romanticize pain and chance it with nostrums of non-science? 5. What about the costs of K-12 education? Forget school lunch, programs, computers, science labs, textbooks? No one will rebel at a curriculum of rite and theology? Royal family, chief. See Galtung, J. (1995). Peace by peaceful means, London, Sage, (forthcoming). PBPM for short. See PBPM, Part IV. Two points for illustration: obviously people’s movements (dissident and peace movements) played a major role, so did nonviolence of many kinds (mass migration, demonstrations, setting up what in fact was alternative government; all of this mainly in Poland and East Germany. What happened in Czechoslovakia was of minor significance even if some courageous people, like Vaclav Havel, the author who later become president and was selected by the West as the symbol of resistance. But then Western, and particularly US international studies are steeped in a focus on states rather the movements, politicians rather than people, outstanding individuals rather than small, anonymous people. A social science like that is not only morally biased in its obvious feudal, even fascist orientation toward the strong and the outstanding, but also intellectual simply second or third rate. Galtung, J. (1990). Commencement address, University of Hawai’i graduation ceremony (December 1987). In Speeches on war and peace (pp. 222–226), Oslo: PRIO.




More particularly, by Claus Otto Scharmer and Katrin Käufer, economists and organization specialists assistants in business administration (in the very special conceptualization of that field characteristic of the UWH). The University of Hawai’i sponsored that major experiment by permitting concentrated teaching of a course in peace theory, for credit, during the month of stay in Hawai’i, but developed no further interest in the concept. The UWH, on the other hand, a very entrepreneurial university in the best sense of that word, has since then had three field travels to Eastern Europe and the World Bank/IMF in Washington, and in addition a Health Studies Around the World, 1991/92.