Are we or are we not going through a historical phase of growing dangers for the survival of mankind? Dangers of both an environmental and war nature?
It continues today, in disputes between individuals, ethnicities, peoples, nations, and geopolitical and economic areas, to privilege, allow, justify, subsidize, and supply weapons to violent conflicts.
Does it mean continuing to adapt or not?
How was it from the origins to the historic and still dominant “Primacy of violence in inter-human relationships”?
A record of violence that led humanity to the invention and production of weapons of planetary destruction; weapons owned and produced by many countries and nations.
A record represented first and foremost by the weapons just mentioned but also by all the others which, in decreasing order, reach up to the daggers.
I read what is happening as an existential path of the human race that has led it to the crossroads between ‘global self-destruction or renunciation of violence’.
I don’t see intermediate solutions that aren’t a tiring and ultra-expensive (war, environmental and in any case suicidal) continuation of the primacy of every form of violence.
I do not rule out the possibility that some government will and may sooner or later act to bring the notion of nonviolence to the forefront of global politics and economics!
If it happens and if it happens in time to avoid unspeakable and never-seen conflicts, not only but mainly warlike ones, it will mean thaxt the majority part of humanity has always devoted itself to peace and non-violence; it will have managed to conquer just enough economic and political power necessary to overturn the priorities that have always forced it to suffer the primacy of violence.
A record that has made “Violence” the main means of determining and managing the quality and quantity of interhuman relationships since the times of Adam and Eve.
Bruno Stefani, Pressenza editorial team of Bologna) Categories: Culture and Media, Nonviolence, Original content
