Podcasts about Johan Galtung

What does it truly mean to build peace? In this episode, we move beyond the narrow definition of peace as merely the absence of war, and explore the transformative vision of positive peace — a concept rooted in justice, inclusion, and systemic resilience. Drawing on the work of the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), we unpack the Eight Pillars of Positive Peace and examine how they offer a data-driven roadmap for building societies that thrive, not just survive.We discuss the origins of positive peace in Johan Galtung's foundational work, and explore how the IEP operationalises this idea through its influential reports, including the Global Peace Index and Positive Peace Report. For changemakers working across sectors — from education and advocacy to public policy and social enterprise — this framework offers strategic insight into how to foster lasting stability and human flourishing.

Dagens gjest er Åse Marie Faldalen, spesialsykepleier innen kriser og traumer, fotograf og forfatter, bla av "Syv veier til lykke" med Johan Galtung. Vi snakker om: * Viktigheten av å stole på det du kjenner i deg * Hva gir vi vår autoritet til? * Erfaringsmuligheten er hellig * Gir vi bort det viktigsrte vi har? * Kvalme og glede * Medfølelse, tilgivelse, forsoning og forståelse * I vår kultur ligger kanskje dette litt dypere begravd * Medfølese vs selv - medfølelse * Autoriteten er deg! Punktum.

Empires come and go. They're sometimes long, sometimes short. But ultimately they fall. Hubris, incredible arrogance, is often the element that brings the mighty down. The U.S. is not immune from decline. With its ruinous wars, bloated Pentagon budget, military bases all over the earth, grotesque levels of inequality and an economy that spews red ink we are witnessing its diminishing power. Recall the words of President Eisenhower in his 1961 Farewell Address. He warned of the dangers posed by “the military-industrial-complex” and its “potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Recorded at the University of California.

 His Week That Was – Kevin Healy Sister Patricia Fox on why Ferdinand Marcos Jr. shouldn't have been invited to Australia Tribute to Norwegian Professor Johan Galtung by Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees Former diplomat, public servant, author (and much more) Richard Broinowski AO on the consequences of the secretive ADF deployments in the Middle East US anti-war activist Brian Terrell talks about his arrest and jailing in Israel in 1992 for participating in a peace march and his preparations for the 60k Nevada peace walk Head to www.3cr.org.au/hometime-tuesday for full access to links and previous podcasts 

El mundo perdió recientemente a dos ejemplares activistas contra la guerra, aunque en circunstancias drásticamente diferentes.

By Amy Goodman & Denis Moynihan The world recently lost two principled opponents of war, but under drastically different circumstances.

Vi snakker om det som er aktuelt - alt fra Ukraina - til Viktoria må dø - flott Barnefilm fra Bergen - og ikke minst minnes vi Johan Galtung

"多危機時代的轉變：從柏油運到積極的和平 面對Covid-19的大流行和烏克蘭戰爭，歐盟增強了其危機管理能力。但是，在“滲透性”時期，它也應解決我們當前DYSF的根本原因" "啟動AD- #TheMummichogBlogoFmalta Amazon Top和Flash Deals（會員鏈接 - 如果您通過以下鏈接購買，您將支持我們的翻譯）-https：//amzn.to/3feogyg 僅在一次搜索中比較所有頂級旅行網站，以在酒店庫存的最佳酒店交易中找到世界上最佳酒店價格比較網站。 （會員鏈接 - 如果您通過以下鏈接購買，您將支持我們的翻譯）-https：//www.hotelscombined.com/?a_aid=20558 “因此，無論您希望別人對您做什麼，也對他們做，因為這是法律和先知。”“ #Jesus #Catholic。 “從受孕的時刻，必須絕對尊重和保護人類的生活。從他生存的第一刻起，必須將一個人承認為擁有一個人的權利 - 其中每種無辜者都是無辜的權利。”天主教教堂的教理2270。 墮胎殺死了兩次。它殺死了嬰兒的身體，並殺死了母親的科學。墮胎是深刻的反婦女。它的受害者中有三個季節是女性：一半的嬰兒和所有母親。 流暢的馬耳他無線電是馬耳他的第一號數字廣播電台，演奏您的輕鬆最愛 - Smooth提供了“無混亂”的混音，吸引了35-59個核心觀眾，提供柔和的成人現代經典。我們操作一個流行曲目的播放列表，並定期更新。 https://smooth.com.mt/listen/ 馬耳他是一顆地中海寶石，等待被發現。馬耳他擁有文化和歷史，娛樂和放鬆，冒險和興奮的獨特結合，也是出國留學的理想之地。實際上，它擁有世界上最優秀的學習機構。 -https：//www.visitmalta.com/ 關注電報：https：//t.me/themummichogblogdotcom Tumblr：https：//www.tumblr.com/themummichogblogofmalta blogspot：https：//themummichogblogofmalta.blogspot.com/ 論壇：https：//groups.google.com/g/themummichogblog Facebook：https：//www.facebook.com/groups/chinesecommunitymalta 結束廣告" "非精神系統，撰寫一組歐盟政策顧問。 這篇文章是由Esir危機工作組的轉型撰寫的，Esir是一個高級專家小組，該小組為歐洲委員會提供了有關如何發展前瞻性和變革性研究的基於證據的政策建議。 自從Covid-19-19大流行的早期以來，ESIR集團提倡歐盟機構避免僅依靠短期主義，而採取“保護，準備和轉變”（PPT）（PPT）方法來恢復能力。 在緊急情況下通過迅速而協調的反應，“保護”，以及在危機襲來時不會留下任何人的政策。通過協調，遠見，社區參與和重新技能來為一系列未來的風險進行“準備”。 通過挑戰驅動的研究和創新方法“改變”經濟和社會，觸發了解決我們當前功能失調系統根本原因的變化。 只有這種方法才能使未來衝擊的真正彈性。缺少完整的Protect Prepare-Transform議程意味著要在控制損害控制和短期，膝蓋決策的時代。 這將使歐盟處於不斷的危機管理狀態，在這種情況下，危機永無止境，其影響必須不斷緩解。不會有一個和平的時間，也沒有“時間修理屋頂”。毫不奇怪，Neologism“ Permacrisis”被選為2022年的年度單詞。 在這種背景下，大流行時期使歐盟機構增強了他們的反應和危機管理能力。許多新的舉措和新興政策優先事項試圖減輕外部衝擊的後果；然而，僅僅以防止衝擊發生，首先要進行沖擊。 換句話說，歐盟非常注意“保護”和越來越警惕“準備”階段，但不足以適應轉型。當今的挑戰需要預期的治理，長期的系統思維和勇敢，適應性，敏捷的決策。 我們必須理解我們所處的主要危機的真實本質和根本原因，並意識到我們不再處於單危機模式：相反，我們生活在多危機時代，可能會演變為柏油素。 永久性危機狀態（管理）並不是歐盟的目標。相反，第二次世界大戰的灰燼中升起的歐洲一體化的觀念主要是一個和平項目，該項目創造了經濟繁榮，並為七十年的道路鋪平了道路而沒有衝突。 當今的多危機年齡呼籲歐盟重新考慮其使命和目標。從“消極的和平”（主要基於缺乏身體暴力），歐盟必須成為約翰·加頓（Johan Galtung）在1967年定義的“積極和平”的擁護者，這是建立在可持續發展和機構上的持久和平，重點是井井有條 - 促進和平的社會態度。 在多危機時代，擁抱這種願景意味著利用歐盟的多重為中心的治理來建立韌性；並利用歐洲在綠色技術方面的領導力，以及對以人為本數字化轉型的職業。 在戰爭的背景下，誘惑是承認不可抗力，促使聯盟重新思考其更雄心勃勃的計劃，並鞏固與當前依賴關係永久化的聯盟。 然而，真正的選擇不是在保護和轉型之間，而是在歐盟項目的實現或滅亡之間。 歐洲處於十字路口：遵循短期反應性道路，無論其對轉型的影響如何，從而有可能進一步鎖定社會和經濟到次優的結構；或將保護性和準備性措施嵌入深度變革的議程中。 Esir認為後一種選擇是歐洲唯一的成功道路。 這就需要製定一項行動計劃，將最先進的知識，技術，人類的創造力和領導力與新戰略和變革性政策相結合，以便使歐盟R＆I任務之類的倡議能夠應對人們，星球和星球和星球和行星，行星和繁榮。一項行動計劃，反映了從大流行和氣候和衝突的新興，複合影響中學到的經驗教訓。 但是，如何將當今的需求與呼籲增強的準備和系統性轉型調整呢？我們意識到，在緊急情況下，在短期需求的壓力變得更加明顯時，在緊急情況下堅持轉型的長期願景的極端困難。這種屈服於短期主義的誘惑將是強大的。 危機狀況，沒有系統的，以適應為導向的轉型，將永遠不會結束。在調整短期緊急情況的同時實現長期目標是具有挑戰性的，需要在各級政府採用決策的方式上進行重大變化。 決策者必須“學會準備”，即投資戰略遠見，敏捷性和所謂的“選擇性”，以增強準備；並在危機爆發時“準備學習”。儘管目前有很多重點放在敏捷治理上，但我們認為後者只是需要發生的變化的一小部分。 減少外部依賴性的情況非常有力。但是，同樣清楚的是，歐盟將無法通過實現過去的相同政策來實現其全球可持續性目標。 現在是時候讓歐洲投資真正的合作和團結，以應對全球挑戰，並從對資源競爭（自然資本，人力資本，知識分子資本和金融資本）的競爭中轉變為實施經濟模型增強再生和循環性的共同合作夥伴關係。 重要的是，這不僅是歐盟機構的一項任務：它們的作用是必不可少的和關鍵的，而且當然不足以進行全身轉型。相反，整個歐洲需要重新發現其分散的“多中心治理”的潛力，以實現韌性和可持續性。 多中心提供了許多優勢，例如自適應能力，適合其特定背景的機構，通過冗餘來緩解風險以及通過輔助性更加民主的過程。 對我們來說，很明顯，歐盟應該通過抓住當前緊急狀態提供的機會來進行深入的轉變，在這種情況下，無所作為根本不是一種選擇。 在不僅我們的星球而且民主，國際合作和基於規則的世界秩序受到嚴重威脅的時候，問題是歐洲領導人準備提起變革挑戰並在此採取“積極的和平”議程多危地的關鍵時間？ https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/opinion/transformation-in-the-poly-crisis-age-from-permacrisis-to-positive-peace/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=9722&pnespid=sL84GilNNbkFxPbOqiu7DZucuE_nTIopLvKmweAz8x9mMmFE7j5XEuM9gdQOErwkB5aw6RLGkQ "

This is a two-episode series exploring the legacy of Daisaku Ikeda and the practice of dialogue through interconnectedness and a human revolution of courage, wisdom, and compassion. In this episode, we explore the legacy and history of Johan Galtung, Ikeda, Toda, Makiguchi, and Oliver Urbain's groundbreaking work to explore music and peacebuilding. Exploring histories and models of violence, we come to a clearer, interdependent understanding of how direct, structural, and cultural violence are enacted within modern contexts.The Music & Peacebuilding Podcast is hosted by Kevin Shorner-Johnson at Elizabethtown College. Join our professional development network at www.musicpeacebuilding.com - thinking deeply we reclaim space for connection and care.

Susan Hayward, associate director of the Religious Literacy and the Professions Initiative at Harvard Divinity School, leads the conversation on religious literacy in international affairs.   FASKIANOS: Welcome to the final session of the Fall 2022 CFR Academic Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record, and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/Academic if you would like to share it with your classmates or colleagues. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Susan Hayward with us to discuss religious literacy in international affairs. Reverend Hayward is the associate director for the Religious Literacy and Professions Initiative at Harvard Divinity School. From 2007 to 2021, she worked for the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP), with focus on Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Columbia, and Iraq. And most recently serving as senior advisor for Religion and Inclusive Societies, and as a fellow in Religion and Public Life. During her tenure at USIP, Reverend Hayward also coordinated an initiative exploring the intersection of women, religion, conflict, and peacebuilding, partnership with the Berkley Center at Georgetown University and the World Faith Development Dialogue. And she coedited a book on the topic entitled Women, Religion and Peacebuilding: Illuminating the Unseen. Reverend Hayward has also taught at Georgetown and George Washington Universities and serves as a regular guest lecturer and trainer at the Foreign Service Institute. And she's also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. So, Susan, thank you very much for being with us today. Can you begin by explaining why religious literacy is so important for understanding international affairs? HAYWARD: Yeah, absolutely. Thank you, Irina. And thanks to the Council on Foreign Relations for inviting me to be a part of this webinar. And I really appreciate you and the invitation, and I appreciate all of you who have joined us today, taking time out of what I know is a busy time of year, as we hurdle towards final exams and cramming everything into these last weeks of the semester. So it's great to be with all of you. I am going to be—in answering that broad question that Irina offered, I'm going to be drawing on my work. As Irina said, I worked at the—I work now at Harvard Divinity School's Religion and Public Life Program. And what we seek to do here is to do here is to advance the public understanding of religion in service of a just world at peace. And we do that, in part, by working with professionals in governments and foreign policy, and in the humanitarian sector, as well as working with our students who are seeking to go into vocations in those professional spheres. And then my fourteen years with the Religion and Inclusive Societies Program at the U.S. Institute of Peace. So I'll say a little bit more about both of those as we go along, and those experiences, but I'm also happy to answer any questions about either of those programs when we turn to the Q&A. And I should say that I'm going to be focusing as well—given that a lot of you all who are joining us today are educators yourselves or are students—I'm going to be focusing in particular on how we teach religious literacy within international affairs. So I wanted to begin with the definition of religious literacy, because this is a term that is increasingly employed as part of a rallying cry that's based on a particular diagnosis. And the diagnosis is that there has been insufficient deep consideration of the multiple and complex dimensions of religion and culture that impact international affairs at all levels across the world. And that the result of that lack of a complex understanding of religion in this arena has been the—the hamstringing of the ability of the international system to operate in ways that are effective in bringing justice, peace, democracy, human rights, and development. So I'm going to circle back to that diagnosis in a bit. But first I want to jump to the prescription that's offered, which is to enhance religious literacy using various resources, trainings, courses, and ways that are relevant for foreign policymakers and those working across the international system, as well as those students who are in the schools of international affairs, or other schools and planning to go into this space, into this profession. So the definition that we use here at Harvard Divinity School—and this is one that has been adopted by the American Academy of Religion, which is the scholarly guild for religious studies—defines it in this way: Religious literacy is the—entails the ability to discern and analyze the fundamental intersections of religion and social, political, and cultural life through multiple lenses. So specifically, one who is religious literate will possess a basic understanding of different religious traditions, including sort of fundamental beliefs and practices and contemporary manifestation of different religious traditions, as well as how they arose out of and continue to be shaped by particular social, historical, and cultural contexts. And the ability to discern and explore the religious dimensions of political, social, and cultural expressions across time and space. So this gets broken down in two different ways—three, according to me. But that definition focuses on two in particular. One is often referred to as the confessional approach or the substantive approach. So that's looking at understanding different religious traditions and their manifestations in different places. That's understanding something fundamental about the difference between Theravada Buddhism and Vajrayana Buddhism, for example. Or how Islam is practiced, and dominantly practiced in Nigeria, versus in North America, for example. The second approach is the religious studies approach. Which is sometimes also called the functional approach. So that's the ability to be able to analyze the ways in which religions in complex ways are really intersecting with social, and political, and economic life, even if not explicitly so. But in implicit, embedded ways shaping different kinds of economic systems, social systems, and political systems, and being able to analyze and see that, and so ask particular questions and consider different kinds of policy solutions—diagnoses and solutions that can take that into account. And then finally, I add the religious engagement approach. That particularly comes out of my work when I was at USIP and working with foreign policymakers in the State Department and elsewhere. To some extent, overseas as well, those in the diplomatic sector. Which I understand is determining whether, when, and how to engage with specifically defined religious institutions, actors, and interests, including on issues related, for example, with religious freedom, in ways that are inclusive, just, strategic, and, importantly for the U.S. context, legal. So abiding by the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. Now, all three types of religious literacy defined here depend on three principles or ideas. So the first is that they understand religions as lived, as constituted by humans who are constantly interpreting and reinterpreting their religious traditions. This means that as a result they are internally diverse, sometimes very internally contradictory. They'll have different religious interpretations with respect to particular human rights issues, particular social issues, issues related to gender, and so on and so forth. That they change over time. That that sort of complex interpretive process that is going on within religious traditions also leads to kind of larger normative changes within religious traditions over history in different temporal contexts. And that they're culturally embedded. So as the question I was asking earlier, how is Islam, as it's understood and practiced in Nigeria, different from how it's understood and practiced in North America, for example. There are ways in which the particular religious interpretations and practices of a tradition are always going to be entangled with specific cultural contexts in ways that are near impossible to disentangle at times. And that means that they just manifest differently in different places. And this—these ideas of religion as lived pushes against an understanding of religions as being static or being monolithic. So that then leads us to ensure that there's never—that it's always going to be a problem to make sweeping claims about entire religious traditions because you'll always find somebody or some community within those religious traditions that don't believe or practice according to the claim that you just made about it. And that applies to situations of violent conflict and with respect to human rights, on global issues like climate and migration. This idea, the internal diversity in particular, is what is at play when you hear the phrase “Ambivalence of the Sacred” that was coined by Scott Appleby in his—in this very influential book by the same name. I'll throw in here a quote from Scott Appleby from that book, this idea that religions are always going to show up in ambivalent or contradictory ways across different places, but also sometimes in the very same contexts. So I think we can see that, for example, in the U.S. right now, and that there's no one, let's say, religious position with respect to reproductive rights, for example. There's a great deal of internal plurality and ambivalence that exists across religious traditions and interpretations within the Christian tradition and beyond about that specific issue. Moreover then, what religion is, what is considered religious, what is recognized as religious and what isn't, and how it manifests in different contexts depends on just a complex array of intersecting factors. I'm going to come back to—that's kind of meaty phrase just to throw out there, so I'm going to come back to that in a minute. So the second principle or idea of religious literacy that I want to highlight here is the idea of right-sizing religion. This is a phrase that Peter Mandaville used quite a bit when he was in the State Department's Religion and Global Affairs Office under the Obama administration and has written about. So I'll turn you to that article of his to understand more about it. But the central idea is that we don't want to over nor underemphasize religion's role in any given context. So just by way of a quick example, in looking at the Rohingya crisis or the ethnic cleansing of Rakhine State in Myanmar, one could not say it was all about religion, that it was about Buddhist nationalists who are anti-Muslim wanting to destroy a particular religious community. Nor could you say it had nothing to do with religion, because there were these religious dimensions that were at play in driving the violence towards the Rohingya and the larger communities' acceptance of that violence against the Rohingya community. But if you were to overemphasize the religious roles, the religious dimensions of that crisis, then your policy solutions—you might look at religious freedom tools and resources to be able to address the situation. And that would address the situation in part, but obviously there were other economic and political factors that were at play in leading to the Rohingya crisis. And including certain economic interests with oil pipelines that were being constructed across lands that the Rohingya were living on in Rakhine state, or the political conflict that was taking place between the military and the National League of Democracy, and so on. So addressing the crisis holistically and sustainably requires that we right-size the role that religion is playing in that particular crisis. And that goes across the board, in looking at conflicts and looking at the role of religion in climate, and addressing climate collapse, and so on and so forth. We need to always neither under nor overestimate the role that religion is playing in driving some of these issues and as a solution in addressing some of these issues. OK. So with that definition and principles of religious literacy in mind, I want to go back to the diagnosis that I gave at the—that I mentioned at the top, for which religious literacy is offered as a solution. The diagnosis, if you remember, was that there's been insufficient consideration given to the multiple and complex dimensions of religion and culture that impact international affairs. So I'm going to demonstrate what it means to apply the religious studies approach to religious literacy, or the functional approach to religious literacy, to help us understand why that might be. And remember, the religious studies approach is seeking to discern and explore the religious dimensions of political, social, and cultural expressions and understandings across time and place. So this approach, in trying to answer that question and consider that diagnosis, it would invite us to look historically at the development of the modern international legal and political systems in a particular time and place in Western Europe, during the European Enlightenment. As many of you may well know, this came about in the aftermath of the so-called confessional or religious wars. Those were largely understood to have pitted Protestants against Catholics, though it's more complicated in reality. But broadly, that's the story. And the modern state, on which the international system was built, sought to create a separation between religious and state authority. For the first time in European history, this separation between religious and state authority that became more rigid and enforced over time, in the belief that this was necessary in order to ensure peace and prosperity moving forward, to bring an end to these wars, and to ensure that the state would be better able to deal with the reality of increasing religious pluralism within Europe. So this was essentially the idea of secular political structures that was born in that time and place. And these secular political structures were considered to be areligious or neutral towards religion over time, again. In the process of legitimating this sort of revolutionary new model of the secular modern state, and in the process of creating this demarcated distinction that had not previously existed—at least, not a neat distinction of the secular or the political authority and the religious—the religious authority—there was an assertion as part of that ideologically legitimate and support that. There was an assertion of the secular as rational, ordered, and associated with all of the good stuff of modernity. Meanwhile, the religious was defined in counter-distinction as a threat to the secular. It was irrational, backwards, a threat to the emerging order. A not-subtle presumption in all of this is that the new modern state and the international system would serve as a bulwark against archaic, dangerous, religious, and other traditionally cultural, in particular, worldviews and practices in—it would be a bulwark against that, and a support for this neutral and considered universal international law and system—secular system. Now, I realize I'm making some, like, huge, broad historical sweeps here, given the short amount of time I have. But within that story I just told, there is a lot more complexity that one can dig into. But part of what I seek to do in offering religious literacy in international relations theory and practice to students, and to practitioners in this realm, is to help those operating in the system think through how that historically and contextually derived conception of religion and the co-constitutive conception of secularism continues to operate within and shape how we interpret and respond to global events within the system. And this occurs—I see this happening in two dominant ways. One is, first, in thinking about religion as a distinct sphere of life that can be disentangled entirely from the political, when in reality religion is deeply entangled with the political, and vice versa. And scholars like Talal Asad and Elizabeth Shakman Hurd have done really great work to show how even our understanding of the secular and secular norms and so on is shaped by Protestant Christian commitments and understandings. And saying within that, our understanding of what religion is—like, a focus on belief, for example, which has been codified in a lot of religious freedom law, as part of the international system—again, tends to emphasize Protestant Christian understandings of what religion is and how it functions. So that's the first reason for doing that. And then second, in understanding religion to be a threat to modernity, and sometimes seeing and responding to it as such rather than taking into account its complexity, its ambivalence, the ways in which it has been a powerful force for good, and bad, and everything in between, and in ways that sometimes let the secular off the hook for ways that it has driven forms of violence, colonialism, gender injustice, global inequalities, the climate crisis, and so on. So those are the consequences of when we don't have that religious literacy, of those potential pitfalls. And, on that second point, of the ways in which religion continues to be defined in ways that can overemphasize its negative aspect at time within the international system, I commend the work of William Cavanaugh in particular and his book, The Myth of Religious Violence to dig into that a little bit more. So what we're seeking to do, in bringing that kind of religious literacy to even thinking about the international system and its norms and how it operates, is to raise the consciousness of what Donna Haraway calls the situatedness of the international system, the embedded agendas and assumptions that inevitably operate within it. And it invites students to be skeptical of any claims to the systems neutrality about religion, how it's defined, and how it's responded to. So I recognize that that approach is very deconstructionist work. It's informed by, post-colonial critical theory, which reflects where religious studies has been for the last couple decades. But importantly, it doesn't, nor shouldn't ideally, lead students to what is sometimes referred to as analysis paralysis, when there's sort of groundedness within hypercritical approaches, only looking at the complexity to a degree that it's hard to understand how to move forward then to respond constructively to these concerns. Rather, the purpose is to ensure that they're more conscious of these underlying embedded norms or assumptions so that they can better operate within the system in just ways, not reproducing forms of Eurocentrism, Christo-centrism, or forms of cultural harm. So the hope is that it helps students to be able to better critique the ways in in which religion and secularism is being—are being discussed, analyzed, or engaged within international affairs, and then be able to enter into those kinds of analysis, policymaking, program development, and so on, in ways that can help disrupt problematic assumptions and ensure that the work of religious literacy or religious engagement is just. So I'm just going to offer one example of how this kind of critical thinking and critical—the way of thinking complexly about religion in this space can be fruitful. And it speaks back to one of the things Irina noted about my biography, the work I had done looking at women and religion and peacebuilding. So while I was at USIP, in that program, we spent several years looking specifically and critically at forms of theory and practice, and this subfield that had emerged of religious peacebuilding. And we were looking at it through the lens of gender justice, asking how religion was being defined in the theory or engaged in the peacebuilding practice and policy in ways that unintentionally reinforced gender injustice. And what we found is that there were assumptions operating about certain authorities—often those at the top of institutions, which tended to be older, well-educated men—representing entire traditions. Assumptions made about their social and political power as well. When in reality, we knew that those of different genders, and ages, and socioeconomic locations were doing their own work of peacebuilding within these religious landscapes, and had different experiences of violence, and so different prescriptions for how to build peace. So we began to ask questions, like whose peace is being built in this field of religious peacebuilding that was emerging? And the work that USIP had been doing in this space of religious peacebuilding? Whose stories were being left out in the dominant analyses or narratives in the media about religious dimensions of certain conflicts, and what are the consequences of that? So these kinds of questions are grounded in the recognition of, again, the internal diversity, the change over time of religious traditions. And they help ensure that analysis and policy actions aren't unintentionally reproducing forms of harm or structural violence. I'm almost done. So please do bring your questions so that we can engage in a discussion with each other. But I wanted to end by offering a couple examples of resources that I think might be helpful to both enhancing your own religious literacy but also as potential pedagogical tools in this work. So first is Religious Peacebuilding Action Guides that were produced by the U.S. Institute of Peace, in partnership with Salam Institute for Peace and Justice, and the Network for Religious and Traditional Peacemakers. There's four guides. They're all available for free online. Once I close down my PowerPoint, I'm going to throw the links for all of these things I'm mentioning into the chat box so you can all see it. But one of the things—I'm just going to dive in a little bit to the analysis guide, because one of the things that I think is useful in helping, again, to help us think a little bit more complexly about religion, is that it takes you through this process of thinking about the different dimensions of religion as defined here—ideas, community, institutions, symbols and practices, and spirituality. So it's already moving beyond just an idea of religious institutions, for example. And it takes you through doing a conflict assessment, and asking the questions related to religion with respect to the drivers of the conflict and the geographic location and peacebuilding initiatives, to help you craft a peacebuilding—a religious peacebuilding initiative. I have used this framework as a means to help students think through the ambivalence of religion as it manifests in different places. So I have an example there of a question that I have sometimes used that has been fruitful in thinking about how these five different dimensions of religion have manifested in American history in ways that either have advanced forms of racialized violence and injustice or that have served as drivers of peace and justice. And there's lots of examples across all of those dimensions of the ways in which religion has shown up in ambivalent ways in that respect. There's also—USIP's team has produced a lot of amazing things. So I'll put some links to some of their other resources in there too, which includes they're doing religious landscape mappings of conflict-affected states. They have an online course on religious engagement in peacebuilding that's free to take. Another resource is from here, at Harvard Divinity School in the Religion in Public Life Program. And we provide a series of case studies that is for educators. It's primarily created educators in secondary schools and in community colleges, but I think could easily be adapted and used in other kinds of four-year universities or other kinds of professional settings, where you're doing trainings or workshops, or even just holding discussions on religious literacy. So there's a series of kind of short, concise, but dense, case studies that are looking at different religions as they intersect with a host of issues, including peace, climate, human rights, gender issues. And it says something about that case study here—the example that I have here is the conflict in Myanmar, pre-coup, the conflicts that were occurring between religious communities, and particularly between Buddhist communities and Muslim communities. And then there's a set of discussion questions there that really help to unearth some of those lessons about internal diversity and about the ways in which religious intersects with state policies and other kinds of power interests and agendas—political power interests and agendas. And then also, at our program, Religion and Public Life, we have a number of courses that are available online, one that's more on the substantive religious literacy side, looking at different religious traditions through their scriptures. Another course, it's on religion, conflict and peace, all of which are free and I'm going to throw them into the chat box in a moment. And we also have ongoing workshops for educators on religious literacy, a whole network with that. So you're welcome to join that network if you'd like. And then finally, we have a one-year master's of religion and public life program for people in professions—quote/unquote, “secular” professions—who want to come and think about—they're encountering religion in various ways in their work in public health, or in their work in journalism. And so they want to come here for a year and to think deeply about that, and bring something back into their profession. And then the final thing, and then I'm going to be done, and this one is short, is the Transatlantic Policy for Religion and Diplomacy, which brings together point people from—who work on religion across different foreign ministries in North America and Europe. And their website, religionanddiplomacy.org, has a lot of really great resources that—reports on various thematic issues, but also looking at religion in situ in a number of different geographic locations. They have these strategic notes, that's what I have the image of here, that talk about, at a particular time, what are some of the big stories related to religion and international affairs overseas. And they list a number of other religious literacy resources on their website as well. So I commend all of that to. And with that, let me stop share, throw some links into the chat box, and hear responses and questions from folks. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Thank you for that. That was terrific. And we are going to send out—as a follow-up, we'll send out a link to this webinar, maybe a link to your presentation, as well as the resources that you drop into the chat. So if you don't get it here, you will have another bite at the apple, so to speak. (Gives queuing instructions.) So I'm going to go first to the written question from Meredith Coon, who's an undergraduate student at Lewis University: What would be a solution for India to have many different religions live in peace with each other, especially since most religions share a lot of the same core values of how people should live? And how can society prevent the weaponization of religion, while still allowing broad religious freedom? HAYWARD: All right. Thank you for the question, Meredith. And one thing just to note, by way of housekeeping, I'm not sure I can actually share the links with all of the participants. So we'll make sure that you get all of those links in that follow-up note, as Irina said. So, Meredith, I think a couple things. One, I just want to note that one of the assumptions within your question itself is that folks of different religious persuasions are constantly at conflict with one another. And of course, there is a reality of there is increasing religious tensions around the world, communal tensions of many different sorts, ethnic, and religious, and racial, and so on, across the world. And the threat to democracy and increasing authoritarianism has sometimes exacerbated those kinds of tensions. But there's also a lot of examples presently and historically of religiously incredibly diverse communities living in ways that are harmonious, that are just, and so on. So I think it is important—there's a lot of work that supports forms of interfaith dialogue and intra-faith dialogue. And I think that that work is—will always be important, to be able to recognize shared values and shared commitments, and in order to acknowledge and develop respect and appreciation for differences as well on different topics—again, both within religious traditions and across them. But I think that dialogue alone, frankly, is not enough. Because so often these tensions and these conflicts are rooted in structural violence and discrimination and concerns, economic issues, and political issues, and so on. And so I think part of that work, it's not just about building relationships kind of on a horizontal level, but also about ensuring that state policies and practice, economic policies and practices, and so on, are not operating in ways that disadvantage some groups over others, on a religious side, on a gender side, on a racial side, and so on. So it's about ensuring as well inclusive societies and a sense as well of inclusive political systems and inclusive economic systems. And doing that work in kind of integrated ways is going to be critical for ensuring that we're able to address some of these rising forms of violations of religious freedom. Thanks again for the question. FASKIANOS: Thank you. Next question from Clemente Abrokwaa. Clemente, do you want to ask your question? Associate teaching professor of African studies at Pennsylvania State University? I'm going to give you a moment, so we can hear some voices. Q: OK. Thank you very much. Yeah, my question is I'm wondering how peacebuilding, in terms of religious literacy, how would you look at—or, how does it look at those that are termed fundamentalists? How their actions and beliefs, especially their beliefs, those of us—there are those outside who perceive them as being destructive. So then to that person, is their beliefs are good. So they fight for, just like anyone will fight for, what, a freedom fighter or something, or a religious fighter in this case. So I'm just wondering how does religious literacy perceive that in terms of peacebuilding? HAYWARD: Right. Thank you for the question, Professor Abrokwaa. I really appreciate it. So a couple things. One, first of all, with respect to—just going back, again, to the ambivalence of the sacred—recognizing that that exists. That there are particular religious ideas, commitments, groups, practices that are used in order to fuel and legitimate forms of violence. And I use violence in a capacious understanding of it, that includes both direct forms of violence but also structural and cultural forms of violence, to use the framework of Johan Galtung. And so that needs to be addressed as part of the work to build peace, is recognizing religious and nonreligious practices and ideas that are driving those forms of violence. But when it comes to religious literacy to understand that, a couple ways in which the principles apply. One is, first, not assuming that their—that that is the only or exclusive religious interpretation. And I think sometimes well-meaning folks end up reifying this idea that that is the exclusive religious interpretation or understanding when they're—when they're offering sometimes purely nonreligious responses to it. And what I mean by this, for example, let's look at Iran right now. I read some analyses where it's saying that, the Iranian authorities and the Ayatollahs who comprise the Supreme Council and so on, that they—that they define what Islamic law is. And there's not a qualification of that. And in the meantime, the protesters are sort of defined as, like, secular, or they're not—the idea that they could be driven by certain—their own Islamic interpretations that are just as authoritative to them, and motivating them, and shaping them is critical. So being able to recognize the internal plurality and not unintentionally reify that particular interpretation of a religious tradition as exclusive or authoritative. Rather, it's one interpretation of a religious tradition with particular consequences that are harmful for peace. And there are multiple other interpretations of that religious tradition that are operating within that context. And then a second way that the religious literacy would apply would also look at the ways in which sometimes the diagnoses of extremist groups that are operating within a religious frame doesn't right-size the role of religion in that. It sometimes overemphasizes the religious commitments, and drives, and so on. And so, again, we need to right-size. There are religious motivations. And we need to take those seriously. And we need to develop solutions for addressing that. And there are economic interests. And there are political interests. So there's a whole host of factors that are motivating and inspiring and legitimating those groups. And being able to take into account that more holistic picture and ensure that your responses to it are going to be holistic. And then one final thing I want to say that's not with respect to religious literacy as much—or, maybe it is—but it's more just about my experience of work at USIP, is that—and it kind of goes back to the question that Meredith asked before you about religious harmony between multireligious relations and harmony, is that I sometimes finds that engaging with groups that are defining themselves and motivating themselves with a primary grounding in religion, that they're not going to participate generally in interfaith initiatives, and so on, right? And so that's where some of that intra-faith work can be particularly important. I saw this, for example, in Myanmar, when their—when previously the movement that was known as Ma Ba Tha, which was defined by some as a Buddhist nationalist anti-Muslim kind of Buddhist supremacist group. The folks who were most successful in being able to engage in a values-grounded conversation with members of the organization were other Buddhist monks, who were able to speak within the language of meaning and to draw attention to, like, different understandings of religious teachings or religious principles with respect to responding to minority groups, and so on. So I think that's in particular, with addressing those groups, that's where that intra-religious work or intra-communal work can be really critical, in addition to some of that cross-communal work. FASKIANOS: Thank you. So we've seen, obviously, the war in Ukraine and how Christian Orthodoxy is being—or, Greek Orthodoxy in Ukraine, and the division. Can you talk a little bit about that and how it's playing out with Russian identity? HAYWARD: Yeah, absolutely. There's been some really good analysis and work out there of the religious dimensions of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. So again, the sort of dominant story that you see, which reflects a reality, is that there are ways in which political and religious actors and interests are aligning on the Russian side in order to advance particular narratives and that legitimate the invasion of Ukraine that—that are about sort of fighting back against an understanding of the West as being counter to traditional and religious values. Those are some of the religious understandings. And then that concern gets linked then to the establishment of an independent or autocephalous Orthodox Church within the Ukraine context. And you see—in particular, what's pointed to often is the relationship between Patriarch Kirill in the Russian Orthodox Church, and Putin, and the ways in which they've sort of reinforced each other's narrative and offered support to it. And there's really great analysis out there and stories that have been done about that. And that needs to be taken into account in responding to the situation and, I would say, that some of the religious literacy principles would then ask us to think about other ways in which religion is showing up within that, that go beyond the institution too. So a lot of the news stories that I've seen, for example, have focused exclusively on—sometimes—exclusively on the clerics within the Orthodox Church and their positions, either in support of or in opposition to the war. But in reality, on the ground there's a lot more complexity that's taken place, and a lot more of the ways in which different individuals and communities on both the Russia and the Ukraine side are responding to the violence, to the displacements, and so on. It paints a more complex and, I think, fascinating story, frankly. And sort of illuminates ways forward in support of peacebuilding. For example, there's ways in which different kinds of ritual practices within Orthodoxy have served as a source of support and constancy to folks who are living in this situation of insecurity and displacement, in ways that have been helpful. There are, of course, other religious traditions that exist within both Ukraine and Russia that are operating and responding in different ways. Like, the Jewish community in Ukraine and the Catholic—the Greek Catholic Church in Ukraine. So looking at those complexities both within Orthodoxy, but there's many different ways that Orthodox Christians are responding in both countries. There's not one story of Orthodox Christianity and the invasion of Ukraine. But also looking at some of the religious diversity within it. And that helps to ensure, like I said, one, that we're developing solutions that are also recognizing the ways in which religion at a very ground level is serving as a source of support, humanitarian relief, social, psychological support to people on the ground, as well as the ways in which it's sort of manifesting ambivalently and complexly in ways that are driving some of the violence as well. And it also helps to push back against any sort of a narrative that this is about a Russian religion—on the Russian side—this is about a religious war against a secular, non-religious West or Ukraine, right? That that goes back to what I was talking about with the historical sort of contingencies that are baked into this system a little bit. And in defining it in that way, Russia's religious and its motivations are religious, Ukraine's not religious, that's both not true—(laughs)—because there's many religious folks within the Ukraine and within the West generally, but also feeds—it feeds the very narrative that Putin and Kirill are giving of a secular West that is anti-religion, that is in opposition to Russian traditional values. FASKIANOS: It seems like there needs to be some training of journalists too to have religious literacy, in the same way that we're talking about media literacy. HAYWARD: Yeah. FASKIANOS: Probably should be introduced as well. (Laughs.) HAYWARD: Yeah, Irina, it's funny, we did—one of my students actually did a kind of mapping and analysis of stories about the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the religious dimensions of it. And she noted that there was—for example, it was—almost always it was male clerics who were being quoted. So there was very little that was coming from other gendered perspectives and experiences on the ground, lay folks and so on. And again, for that—for that very reason it's sort of—because we know so many policymakers and international analysis are depending on these kinds of media stories, I worry that it creates a blinder to potential opportunities for different kinds of ways of addressing needs and partners for addressing needs on the ground. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. I'm going to go next to Liam Wall, an undergraduate student at Loyola Marymount University: With so much diversity within religions itself, how can we avoid the analysis paralysis you mentioned and take in as many unique perspectives as possible, without letting that stand in the way of progress? How does one know that they have enough religious literacy and can now become an effective practitioner? HAYWARD: Well, OK, the bad news is that you will never have enough religious literacy. (Laughs.) This is a process, not an end. There are scholars here at Harvard who have been studying one particular sect of a particular religious tradition for their entire adult lives, and they would still say that they are students of those traditions, because they're so complex. Because so many of these traditions are composed of a billion people or just—just 500 million people. But that means that there's going to be an incredible diversity to explore. And so that's the bad news. But the good news is, one, like, first take the burden off of your shoulders of having to be an expert on any one particular religious tradition, in order to be able to help to develop and enhance your own religious literacy, and those of others, and to operate in ways that reflect the principles of religious literacy, is the good news. As well as there are many different kinds of resources that you can turn to in order to understand, for example if you're going to be working in a particular geographic location, scholarship, people you can speak to in order to begin to understand at least some of the specific manifestations and practices, and some of the disputes and diversity that exists within that particular country or geographic location across religious traditions. But, secondly, I would say, it's almost more important than—like, the substance is important. But what's just as important, if not more important, is understanding what kinds of questions to be asking, and to be curious about these religious questions and their intersection with the political and social. So we sometimes say that religious literacy is about developing habits of mind in how we think about these religious questions, and what kinds of questions we ask about religion. So it's about developing that kind of a reflex to be able to kind of see what's underneath some of the analysis that you're seeing that might be relevant to religion or that might be advancing particularly problematic understandings of religion, or reinforcing binaries like the secular and the religious and so on. And that's just as—just as important. So the extent to which you're continuing to, like, hone those—that way of thinking, and those habits of mind, that will set you up well for then going into this space and being able to ask those particular questions with respect to whatever issues you're focusing on, or whatever geographic location you're looking at. FASKIANOS: Great. I'm going to go next to Mohamed Bilal, a postgraduate student at the Postgraduate Institute of Management in Sri Lanka. HAYWARD: Yay! FASKIANOS: Yes. How does sectarianism influence our literacy? In turn, if we are influenced by sectarianism, then would we be illiterate of the religion but literate of the sect? Thus, wouldn't such a religious literacy perpetuate sectarianism? HAYWARD: Thank you for the question, Mohamed. It's—I miss Sri Lanka. I have not been there in too long, and I look forward to going back at some point. So I would say sectarianism, in the sense of—so, there's both religious sects, right? There's the existence of different kinds of religious traditions, interpretive bodies, jurisprudential bodies in the case of Islam. And then broader, different schools or denominations. The term that's used depends on the different religious tradition. And that reflects internal diversity. Sectarianism, with the -ism on the end of it, gets back to the same kinds of questions that I think Professor Clemente was asking with respect to fundamentalism. That's about being sort of entrenched in an idea that your particular religious understanding and practice is the normative, authentic, and pure practice, and that all others are false in some ways. That is a devotional claim or—what I mean by a devotional claim, is that is a knowledge claim that is rooted within a particular religious commitment and understanding. And so religious literacy in this case would—again, it's the principles of internal diversity, recognizing that different sects and different bodies of thought and practice are going to exist within religious traditions, but then also ensuring that any claim to be normative or to be orthodox by any of these different interpretive bodies is always a claim that is rooted within that religious tradition that we sometimes say is authentic. It's authentic to those communities and what they believe. But it's not exclusive. It's not the only claim that exists within that religious tradition more broadly. And the concern is about—sects are fine. Different denominations, different interpretative bodies are fine and a good and sort of natural thing, given the breadth and the depth of these religious traditions. The problem is that -ism part of it, when it becomes a source of competition or even potentially violence between groups. And so that's what needs to be interrogated and understood. FASKIANOS: So another question from John Francis, who's the senior associate vice president for academic affairs at the University of Utah: If you were training new diplomats in other countries to be stationed in the United States, where a wide range of religious traditions thrive, how would you prepare them for dealing with such religious variation? HAYWARD: The same way I would—and thank you, again, for the question. The same way that I would with any other diplomats going to any other—the same way I do with foreign service officers at the Foreign Service Institute, who are going to work overseas. I would—I would invite them to think about their own assumptions and their own worldviews and their own understandings of what religion is, based on their own contexts that they grew up in. So how that shapes how they understand what religion is, in the ways I was speaking to before. So for example, in Protestant Christianity, we tend to emphasize belief as the sort of core principle of religious traditions. But other religious traditions might emphasize different forms of practice or community as sort of the central or principal factor. So recognizing your own situatedness and the ways in which you understand and respond to different religious traditions. I would invite those who are coming to work here to read up on the historical developments and reality of different religious communities and nonreligious communities in the U.S. and encourage them to look not just at some of the—what we call the world religions, or the major religions, but also at indigenous traditions and different practices within different immigrant communities. And I would have them look at the historical relationship between the state and different religious communities as well, including the Mormon tradition there in Utah, and how the experience of, for example, the Mormon community has shaped its own relationship with the state, with other religious communities on a whole host of issues as well. And then I would encourage—just as I was saying earlier—no diplomat going to the U.S. is going to become an expert on the religious context in the U.S., because it's incredibly complex, just like anywhere else in the world. But to be able to have sort of a basic understanding to be able to then continue to ask the kinds of questions that are going to help to understand how any political action is taken or response to any policy issues kind of inevitably bumps up against particular religious or cultural commitments and values. FASKIANOS: Great. I'm going to take the next question from Will Carpenter, director of private equity principal investments at the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, and also taking a course at the Harvard Extension School. HAYWARD: Hey! FASKIANOS: I'm going to ask the second part of Will's question. How will the current polarized domestic debate regarding U.S. history, which is often colored by the extremes—as a force for good only versus tainted by a foundation of injustice—impact America's capacity to lead internationally? HAYWARD: Hmm, a lot. (Laughter.) Thank you for the question. I mean, I think the fact of polarization in the U.S. and the increasing difficulty that we're facing in being able to have really deep conversations and frank conversations about historical experiences and perceptions of different communities, not just religiously, not just racially even, but across different—urban-rural, across socioeconomic divides, across educational divides and, of course, across political divides, and so on. I think that—I think that absolutely hampers our ability to engage within the global stage effectively. One, just because of the image that it gives to the rest of the world. So how can we—how can we have an authentic moral voice when we ourselves are having such a hard time engaging with one other in ways that reflect those values and that are grounded within those values? But also because I think get concern—with respect to religion questions in particular—I get concern about the increasing polarization and partisanization of religion in foreign policy and issues of religious freedom, and so on. Which means that we're going to constantly have this sort of swinging back and forth then between Republican and Democratic administrations on how we understand and engage issues related to religion and foreign policy, different religious communities in particular, like Muslim communities worldwide, or on issues of religious freedom. So I think it's incredibly critical—always has been, but is particularly right now at this historical moment—for us to be in the U.S. doing this hard work of having these conversations, and hearing, and listening to one another, and centering and being open about our values and having these conversations on that level of values. To be able to politically here in the U.S., much less overseas, to be able to work in ways that are effective. Irina, you're muted. FASKIANOS: Thank you. (Laughs.) With that, we are at the end of our time. Thank you so much for this. This has been a really important hour of discussion. Again, we will send out the link to the webinar, as well as all the resources that you mentioned, Susan. Sorry we didn't have the chat open so that we could focus on what you were saying and all the questions and comments that came forward. So we appreciate it. And thank you so much, again, for your time, Susan Hayward. And I just want to remind everybody that this is the last webinar of the semester, but we will be announcing the Winter/Spring Academic Webinar lineup in our Academic bulletin. And if you're not already subscribed to that, you can email us at cfracademic@cfr.org. Just as a reminder, you can learn about CFR paid internships for students and fellowships for professors at CFR.org/careers. Follow @CFR_Academic on Twitter and visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. Good luck with your exams. (Laughs.) Grading, taking them, et cetera. Wishing you all a happy Thanksgiving. And we look forward to seeing you again next semester. So, again, thank you to Susan Hayward. HAYWARD: Thank you, everybody. Take care.

นายชินโซ อาเบะ อดีตนายกรัฐมนตรีญี่ปุ่นที่ดำรงตำแหน่งนานที่สุดของญี่ปุ่น ได้ถูกลอบสังหาร โดยที่ผู้ลงมือ ได้ให้เหตุผลว่าเป็นเรื่องที่ไม่เกี่ยวข้องกับการเมือง หากแต่เป็นเรื่องส่วนตัวที่มีผลกระทบต่อตัวเขาและครอบครัว สิ่งนี้จึงเกี่ยวข้องกับความรุนแรงที่เขาอ้างว่าถูกกระทำผ่านโครงสร้าง ซึ่งก็คือลัทธิหนึ่ง ในแง่นี้ตัวของอาเบะเอง อาจไม่ได้เป็นผู้กระทำความรุนแรงนั้นโดยตรงกับผู้ก่อเหตุ แต่อาจเป็นความรุนแรงทางโครงสร้าง ที่ได้ถูกล่าวไว้ใน Triangle of Violence โดย Johan Galtung หรือไม่? ทั้งนี้ญี่ปุ่น ซึ่งเป็นประเทศที่ถูกมองว่าสมบูรณ์แบบในทุก ๆ ด้านนั้น แต่อย่างหนึ่งที่ญี่ปุ่นเองก็ต้องยอมรับว่าเป็นปัญหานั่นก็คือปัญหาของสภาพจิตใจที่ย่ำแย่ของประชาชน การที่ประชาชนเองนั้นต้องเผชิญกับความเครียดจากการทำงาน และชีวิตประจำวันในระดับที่มาก จนถึงขั้นอัตราการฆ่าตัวตายสูงถือว่าเป็นปัญหาหรือไม่ หรือเราจะสามารถกล่าวได้หรือไม่ว่า ผลผลิตของความรุนแรงเชิงโครงสร้างในญี่ปุ่นนั้นมีมากกว่าแค่ผลลัพธ์ของเหตุการณ์ที่เราเห็นได้ SoundCloud: https://bit.ly/3gFv2JZ Blockdit: https://bit.ly/2Bi4tuj Podbean: https://bit.ly/36QsT9V Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2TQtROk Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2XJqvgX #TheInfinity #InfinityPodcast #DemocracyXInnovations #สำนักนวัตกรรมเพื่อประชาธิปไตย

Johan Galtung, uno studioso della pace norvegese, suggerisce e lo cito che il mondo sia “precisamente un processo basato sulla diversità in una interazione simbiotica complessa”. La pace, quindi, non può essere qualcosa di stabile, non può essere uno stato definitivo, ma piuttosto un processo interattivo dialettico tra le nostre azioni e il mondo.

On this episode we speak with Sudhir Selvaraj of King's College London about his research study looking at religious freedoms for minorities in India. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution provides for the 'Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion'. However, in the recent past there has been an increase of violence against religious minorities. Sudhir's study adopts Norwegian political scientist Johan Galtung's framework which advocates for a broad conception of violence which includes direct, structural and cultural factors. Galtung also suggests a causal flow of violence from its cultural forms to its structural forms and finally to its direct forms. Sudhir's study argues that both structural and physical violence are rooted in and justified using the Hindutva ideology which portrays Christians as "foreigners" intent on destroying the integrity of the Hindu nation through religious conversions. Mainly, conversions are portrayed as a threat to the "Hindu State" in two ways. The first is its role in targeting "vulnerable" Hindu populations, particularly Dalits and Tribals. Secondly, conversions are presented as a tool of "foreigners" to influence India's politics. This broader conception of violence facilitates a challenge to existing notions that violence against Christians in the country began its proliferation in the late 1990s. Follow Sudhir's work on Twitter @SudhirSelvaraj and also @ https://www.sudhirselvaraj.com/. Programming note: The Episode was recorded under available internet connection --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/suren-ladd/message

Hoy publicamos el quinto capítulo del programa «Escenario internacional», donde se sostiene que, aunque el racismo se ve manipulado y sirve de pretexto para la construcción ideológica en EEUU, marcos teóricos como el triángulo de la violencia de Johan Galtung ofrecen una referencia plausible para su análisis. Frente a los que abogan por la homogeneidad del sujeto constituyente, García-Trevijano aporta la unidad de dicho sujeto, sobre el pilar fundamental de la libertad política colectiva como única solución para alcanzar la democracia formal. Han intervenido en el programa Fulgencio del Hierro y Fabián Moreno. ------------ ¡APÓYANOS! - Vía iVoox: haz clic en APOYAR (botón de color azul). - Vía Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=Y4WYL3BBYVVY4 - Vía Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/MCRC_es ------------ mcrc.es diariorc.com yonovoto.info

«Aldri har jeg holdt en så mektig bok i min hånd. Mektig, ikke bare på grunn av sitt omfang, og ikke bare fordi det dreier seg om makt, men fordi den forklarer den onde maktens vesen», skriver Johan Galtung i forordet til «Maktens historie» av Truls Øhra. Her prøver forfatteren å nyskrive vår sivilisasjons historie, en enorm oppgave som Øhra har gjort til sitt livsverk. Det er en overveldende kunnskapsmengde han legger til grunn når vi får presentert styresmaktenes overgrep og misbruk gjennom årtusener. Truls Øhra er Jens Bjørneboes svigersønn. Gjennom deres møter har etter hvert boka «Maktens historie» blitt hans fullendelse av Bjørneboes «Bestialitetens Historie». Truls Øhra møter forfatteren Terje Dragseth i samtalen.

Amerika'nın hayalini 2006 yılında Oslo'da arabuluculuk yapan bir profesör net ortaya koymuştu. Ünlü Prof. Johan Galtung 3 aşamalı Kürdistan modelinin aşamalarını şöyle açıklamıştı: Birinci aşamaya İNSAN HAKLARI adını vermişti. İnsan hakları aktivizminin tavana çıkarıldığı ilk aşamada Kürtlerin yaşadığı dört ülke Türkiye, Irak, İran ve Suriye'de insan hakları mücadeleleri hız kazanmalıydı! İkinci aşama Özerk eyaletler aşamasıydı. Türkiye, Suriye, Irak ve İran'da özerk otonom Kürt bölgeleri yaratılacaktı. Son aşamada ise dört Kürt özerk eyaleti bir araya gelerek Kürdistan Konfederasyonunu oluşturacaktı. Meraklısı incelesin: http://www.calpeacepower.org/0201/galtung_transcend.htm Kısacası 'Kürt Konfederasyonu' için özerk parçalar oluşturulması düşünülen 4 ülkeden Irak, Türkiye'nin emperyalizme verdiği eşsiz destekle parçalanmış ve bir Kürt özerk bölgesi, Türkmen, işbirliği yapmayan Kürt ve Arap aşiretlerin kanı pahasına kurulmuştu. 1991'deki Körfez savaşı, İncirlik'e Çekiç Güç'ün yerleşmesiyle sonuçlanmıştır! İsrail istihbaratı CIA ve bunların maşaları PKK, Barzani ve ilintili 'iş' adamları ve siyasiler bir dizi katliama imza atmışlardır. Çekiç Güç'e karşı çıkan asker, sivil, aydın birçok kişi faili meçhul cinayetlerle yok edilmiştir. Güneydoğuda Jandarma Bölge Asayiş Komutanları Hulusi Sayın, İbrahim Selen Çekiç Güç'e karşı çıkan iki korgeneraldir. Eşref Bitlis gibi onlar da öldürülmüşlerdir. Cem Ersever ve Mustafa Deniz ve Tuğgeneral Bahtiyar Aydın da katledilmiştir. Ortak özellikleri Çekiç Güç'e karşı olmaları ve emperyalist hedefi açıklamış olmalarıdır.

Diane Perlman and Marilyn Langlois – Vexxed!How Do We Separate Truth From Propaganda Regarding COVID and Vaccines?Aired Tuesday, January 5, 2021 at 2:00 PM PST / 5:00 PM ESTAn Interview with Political Psychologist Diane Perlman and Peace and Justice Activist Marilyn LangloisSwami’s Dictionary“Irony Curtain: The invisible wall of impropaganda that separates we the people from the truth.” — Swami BeyondanandaYou may have heard of that controversial documentary called “Vaxxed” that caused quite a stir a few years ago. Well, I am calling the first show of this New Year “vexxed” because so many people are vexed and confounded by conflicting narratives around COVID, vaccinations, Bill Gates and the so-called new world order.I can tell you in advance we may not get to any definitive answers, but we WILL address some definitive questions to help you navigate the confusion, obfuscation, and the real and true information seeking to get heard. My guests today are not medical professionals, and so will not be offering any medical perspective on COVID and its treatments.Both of our guests are, however, are experts on propaganda and communication and will offer us a “meta-view” of what is being communicated, how it is being communicated and to what end.Both psychologist and conflict analyst Diane Perlman and progressive activist Marilyn Langlois are associated with Transcend International, a solutions-oriented peace project based on the work of Johan Galtung, that seeks to move beyond win-lose and even compromise, to achieve breakthrough solutions.Diane Perlman, PhD, is a clinical and political psychologist, conflict analyst, interdisciplinary social scientist, author, educator, mediator, lifelong human rights advocate, environmentalist, and patent holder. She is interested in psychological dynamics of conflict and reconciliation, and strategies of win-win conflict transformation capable of producing enduring security. Previously she had a clinical practice in individual, couple and family therapy, psychoneuroimmunology and Jungian oriented psychotherapy.Marilyn Langlois is a convener of TRANSCEND USA West Coast. She is a volunteer community organizer and international solidarity activist based in Richmond, California. A co-founder of the Richmond Progressive Alliance, she is retired from previous employment as a teacher, secretary, administrator, mediator and community advocate.After focusing many years on being a single mother, she has become a self-taught advocate for peace and justice in the last 20 years, having witnessed in her home town of Richmond, California and on travels to Haiti, El Salvador, Vietnam, North Korea, Uganda and former Yugoslavia some of the violence and poverty resulting from US imperialism and cut-throat capitalism.If you’ve had your fill of heated discussions, and would like an enlightening one for a change, please join us this Tuesday, January 5th at 2 pm PT / 5 pm ET.To find out more about Diane Perlman and her work, please go to Conscious Politics https://www.consciouspolitics.org/. To find out more about Transcend and Marilyn’s work, please go here: https://www.transcend.org/tms/2020/12/its-2020-what-would-you-do/Support Wiki Politiki — A Clear Voice In the “Bewilderness”If you LOVE what you hear, and appreciate the mission of Wiki Politiki, “put your money where your mouse is” … Join the “upwising” — join the conversation, and become a Wiki Politiki supporter: http://wikipolitiki.com/join-the-upwising/Make a contribution in any amount via PayPal (https://tinyurl.com/y8fe9dks)Go ahead, PATRONIZE me! Support Wiki Politiki monthly through Patreon!Visit the Wiki Politiki Show page https://omtimes.com/iom/shows/wiki-politiki-radio-show/Connect with Steve Bhaerman at https://wakeuplaughing.com/#DianePerlman #MarilynLanglois #Vexxed #SteveBhaerman #WikiPolitiki

The pandemic has exposed structural inequities that have existed long before 2020 and illuminated the reality of human beings' interdependence and the multilayered ecologies that bind us to one another. For Professors Diane Moore and Terry Tempest Williams of Harvard Divinity School it meant conceiving a course called “The Climate of Unknowing: A Portal into Beauty, Terror and the Moral Imagination.” On this episode, I am joined by fellow HDS classmate, Amy Greulich, and we discuss why humans are not neutral bodies, the implications of the hypervisibility of Black death, and what creating intimacy and being in community virtually meant for us. LESEDI GRAVELINE - (She/hers) Host, Producer, and Editor, Harvard Divinity School AMY GREULICH - (She/hers) Guest speaker, Harvard Divinity School, Master of Divinity 2021 degree candidate. Living on Noepe (Martha’s Vineyard), Wampanoag land. Music By: Mozado Graphic By: Olivia Vernon, University of Virginia Sources Referenced: Professors Diane Moore and Terry Tempest Williams. Teaching Fellow Sage Moses. Course: Climate of Unknowing: A Portal Into Beauty, Terror, and the Moral Imagination; Pendle Hill Retreat Center in Wallingford, PA; Cultural Violence by Johan Galtung; Ricardo Levins Morales Art Studio; MPD150: A People’s Project Evaluating Policing; Dr. Kim Tallbear’s “A Sharpening of the Already Present: An Indigenous Materialist Reading of Settler Apocalypse 2020;” Dr. Sarah Lewis “How Definitive Image of Pandemic Could Help Explain Tragedy”; Resmaa Menakem’s “My Grandmother’s Hands;” Maine Wabanaki-State Child Welfare Truth and Reconciliation Commission Final Report; Central Park birdwatching incident; Elaine Scarry’s “Thinking in an Emergency.”

Hoy comenzamos hablando sobre el brote de coronavirus y la amenaza de pandemia global. La Organización Mundial de la Salud ha declarado la alerta mundial sanitaria y aún hay bastantes incógnitas. Hay varias teorías sobre el origen de este virus, una carrera farmacéutica por la creación de una vacuna y un potencial para extenderse bastante elevado. ¿Hay motivos para la preocupación? ¿Se está explicando el verdadero motivo por el que se dedican tantos recursos a su contención? También hablamos hoy sobre el fracking. El principal responsable del aumento de producción de petróleo en los últimos años dobla la rodilla. Asistimos a bancarrotas masivas, que abundan en la financiación delicada de la que llevamos años avisando. Por último, hablamos sobre la ¿decadencia? de Estados Unidos. Hace veinte años, Johan Galtung predecía su caída como líder mundial para estos años. ¿Acertó o aún hay Estados Unidos para rato? Con David de Historia-Filosofía-Economía y Rafael Íñiguez. Conduce Juan Carlos Barba.

Hoy comenzamos hablando sobre el brote de coronavirus y la amenaza de pandemia global. La Organización Mundial de la Salud ha declarado la alerta mundial sanitaria y aún hay bastantes incógnitas. Hay varias teorías sobre el origen de este virus, una carrera farmacéutica por la creación de una vacuna y un potencial para extenderse bastante elevado. ¿Hay motivos para la preocupación? ¿Se está explicando el verdadero motivo por el que se dedican tantos recursos a su contención? También hablamos hoy sobre el fracking. El principal responsable del aumento de producción de petróleo en los últimos años dobla la rodilla. Asistimos a bancarrotas masivas, que abundan en la financiación delicada de la que llevamos años avisando. Por último, hablamos sobre la ¿decadencia? de Estados Unidos. Hace veinte años, Johan Galtung predecía su caída como líder mundial para estos años. ¿Acertó o aún hay Estados Unidos para rato? Con David de Historia-Filosofía-Economía y Rafael Íñiguez. Conduce Juan Carlos Barba.

Dr. Johan Galtung discusses his view of the future of the world and U.S. empire. He believes we’re moving into a peaceful multipolar world composed of regional civilizations, but not quite attaining “one world”. He sees Islam returning with a vengeance and the U.S. possibly splitting or dividing into two parts. *Support/Donate to Geopolitics & […]

Dr. Johan Galtung discusses his view of the future of the world and U.S. empire. He believes we’re moving into a peaceful multipolar world composed of regional civilizations, but not quite attaining “one world”. He sees Islam returning with a vengeance and the U.S. possibly splitting or dividing into two parts. *Support/Donate to Geopolitics & […]

In Episode 054 of A Medicinal Mind, Wisdom and Wellbeing, I welcome a visionary in the field of mindfulness and deliberate, non-violent communication Oren Sofer.   Oren's background is beyond fascinating. As you will hear in the podcast, he brings years of training in meditation from the Buddhist spiritual tradition as well training seeking to transform the way we communicate and interact with others.   Formally speaking, he has a degree in Comparative Religion from Columbia University, and spent two and a half years of living as an (renunciate) at various branch monasteries. Today, his teaching combines classical Buddhist training with the accessible language of secular mindfulness.   In this conversation, we begin the exploration with a look at Oren's early childhood, its spiritual roots and his earliest experiences delving into the world of intimate awareness. Getting rather personal, Oren shares one of his most powerful experiences early in his life beginning his push to wanting to further understand the depth of emotion and what it really means to be human.   Oren offers his perspective on the power of loss and sorrow, letting us all see the universal nature of this experience and the beautiful acts of compassion and connection that can happen my allowing ourselves to fully experience it.   Beginning our deepening discussion of violence and non-violence Oren outlines how human beings seek both consciously and unconsciously to meet various needs and that this pursuit often times can lead to needs not being met and interpersonal conflict.   Defining violence as “any avoidable impairment of human needs,” Oren shares insight from Johan Galtung as to what perhaps really underlies an act of violence and how as a society we may be committing more acts of violence than we really know.   Stepping into the practical. Oren provides us with a framework for seeking understanding as well as collaborative clarification in order to address others needs and our own in a unified and non-violent manner.   Drawing from his just released book: Say What You Mean: A Mindful Approach to Nonviolent Communication, Oren provides some of the most essential practices, techniques and tools for achieving more constructive clarity in our relationships, and ultimately meet your needs.   As you will hear throughout the conversation, Oren's passion and expertise for the craft of mindful and non-violent communication and I cannot urge you enough to order Oren's book: Say What You Mean. I have yet to find another book that practically addresses the most challenging aspects of cultivating nourishing relationships and engaging in the sticky, difficult conversations like Oren's. Check out the show notes for a link to Oren's page as well as links to order his book!   Oren's Webpage: https://www.orenjaysofer.com/about/ Get Oren's Book: https://more.orenjaysofer.com/book/?_ga=2.171256357.424896732.1544539567-371234106.1544539567   Disclaimer: The content at A Medicinal Mind and the content of our podcast are educational and informational in nature. They are not intended to be medical advice, spiritual counsel or a substitute for working with a health professional or a trained spiritual counselor. We cannot guarantee the outcome of any of the recommendations provided on our page or by the guests on our podcast and any statements written or made about any potential outcomes are expressions of opinion only.     And with that let's dig into the show

Sebastian und Jessica haben sich in dieser Vorlesung einen echten Klassiker der Kommunikationswissenschaft - genau genommen aus dem Bereich der Kommunikatorforschung - vorgeknöpft: Die Nachrichtenwerttheorie. Seit bald 100 Jahren forscht man daran, wie Ereignisse zur Nachricht werden und weshalb sie auf die ein oder die andere Art medial dargestellt werden. Mittlerweile ist man sich einig, dass bestimmte Nachrichtenfaktoren - wie Reichweite oder Prominenz - eine Rolle spielen. Allerdings, so richtig gut gealtert ist die Theorie nicht, weil sie, ähnlich wie Opa mit dem Smartphone, mit der Digitalisierung nicht so gut zurecht zu kommen scheint. Die Hobby-Whistleblower gehen der Sache auf den Grund und geben euch neben der Theorie auch gleich noch die Kritik mit an die Hand. Ihr wisst ja bereits: Wissen ist dynamisch. Hier bekommt iht den aktuellen Stand. Und ganz zum Schluss haben die Beiden fürs nächste Mal noch eine kleine Überraschung (Nachrichtenfaktor!) - für eure Ohren - zu verkünden. Viel Spaß beim Hören!Eure Lieblings-WhistleblowerFür die Nacharbeit:- Begriffe googeln: Gatekeeper und Konstruktivismus- Namen googeln: Walter Lippmann, Einar Östgaard, Johan Galtung und Marie Holmboe Ruge, Winfried Schulz, Friedrich Staab, Christiane Eilders, Hans Mathias Keppling - Nachrichtenwert vs. Nachrichtenfaktor von Hans M. Kepplinger:- Nachrichtenfaktoren - Entwicklung und Katalog - auf S. 13 (Ruhrmann/Göbbel): - Michael Meyens Kritik an der NachrichtenwerttheorieHaben wir was vergessen oder habt ihr etwas nicht verstanden? Meldet euch! hoersaalleaks@gmail.com

Hvordan vi kan slutte fred med aldrings­prosessen og leve meningsfulle liv? Jeg nærmer meg 87, og med hånden på hjertet: Etter et langt og rikt liv befinner jeg meg ved høydepunktet – aldringen, skriver Johan Galtung i Ny Tid. Hans referat fra alderdommen kan få noen og enhver til å lengte etter livets høst. Og det er ikke i mangel av et fattig liv: Johan Galtung regnes som grunnlegger av freds og konfliktsforskningen, og ble verdens første professor på feltet. Med en slik bakgrunn har han mye klokt å si om hvordan vi kan slutte fred med aldringsprosessen og leve meningsfulle liv. Journalist Anne Synnevåg intervjuer Galtung på scenen.

Hvordan oppnår man egentlig fred, enten det er i et ekteskap eller mellom to stater? Og hva vil Johan Galtung når han trekker rasebegrep, hudfarge og hodeform inn i foredragene sine? Ragnhild og Jørgen får kilt inn noen spørsmål, og får lange svar når professor Galtung (87) for en sjelden gangs skyld gjester Norge – og Salongen – før han fyker videre rundt i verden. I studio Ragnhild Laukholm Sandvik og Jørgen Strickert

The founder of peace and conflict studies, Dr. Johan Galtung, discusses his predictions of the US Empire collapsing and becoming a dictatorship, before eventually rebuilding its democracy. Show Notes USA–Where Are You Heading? Pentagon Study Declares American Empire Is Collapsing DOD Risk Assessment in a Post-Primacy World US Power Will Decline Under Trump Says Futurist […]

The founder of peace and conflict studies, Dr. Johan Galtung, discusses his predictions of the US Empire collapsing and becoming a dictatorship, before eventually rebuilding its democracy. Show Notes USA–Where Are You Heading? Pentagon Study Declares American Empire Is Collapsing DOD Risk Assessment in a Post-Primacy World US Power Will Decline Under Trump Says Futurist […]

Johan Galtung is the founder of the discipline of peace studies. He founded the International Peace Research Institute in Oslo in 1959 and the Journal of Peace Research in 1964, and has helped found dozens of peace centers. He has taught peace studies at universities all over the world, and mediated hundreds of conflicts. He is author or coauthor of over 160 books, and is cited and discussed in many thousands. He is the founder of Transcend Peace University and Transcend International. See http://transcend.org

Date of Dialogue: Jan. 2013 Description: We spoke with Dr. Galtung about many of the deep rooted processes from a global perspective that inform in one way or another the “lens” and approach of restorative justice that is growing in the U.S. and beyond. We looked at Huna traditions and other powerful examples that point […] The post Johan Galtung appeared first on Restorative Justice On The Rise.

** Fredsprisen til OPCW. - Et klart signal til hele verden, sier Thorbjørn Jagland. - En manøver for å unngå å gi den til Putin, som fikk Syria på rett spor, sier fredsprofessor Johan Galtung. ** - Bevar høyblokka i regjeringskvartalet, mener riksantikvaren i ny rapport. - Riv det akitektoniske virvaret, svarer tidligere departementsråd. og ** I kveld er VM-kvallik mot Slovenia uten Drillo: - Skanadaløst og grunnleggende råttent, mener Arild Rønsen og møter Fotballforbundet til debatt

Conferencia magistral impartida por Johan Galtung, mediador noruego con más de 50 años de experiencia en la intervención y conciliación de más de 80 conflictos internacionales. Galtung comparte sus ideas sobre la paz y recursos eficaces para lograrlo, así como algunas propuestas específicas para el caso mexicano en materia de relaciones bilaterales, violencia estructural resultado del crimen organizado y el narcotráfico.

Taller impartido por el sociólogo noruego Johan Galtung, con más de 50 años de experiencia en mediación de conflictos internacionales. Exposición de su esquema de trabajo. Descripción de ejemplos exitosos y no exitosos a los talleristas sobre diagnóstico y pronóstico de conflictos de toda índole, y recomendaciones para conseguir soluciones a través del consenso, la conciliación y la negociación.

Sesión de seminario en la que el Maestro en Sociología y en Estudios de paz y transformación de conflictos por la Universidad de Suiza, Fernando Montiel, aborda aspectos del sistema de mediación de conflictos creado por Johan Galtung, especialista en conflictos internacionales desde hace casi medio siglo.

Primera sesión del seminario en la que Fernando Montiel explica el método Transcend de mediación, técnica desarrollada por el sociólogo noruego Johan Galtung, basada en más de medio siglo de experiencia en mediación en conflictos internacionales, regionales y locales. Se explican definiciones básicas de conflicto, paz, violencia; se describen formas de intervención y componentes de dicho método, entre otros aspectos.

Johan Galtung, Global Pioneer of the Modern Peacebuilding Movement and Founder of TRANSCEND Mr. Galtung is one of the leading and founding pioneers of Peace and Conflict Resolution Academic programs worldwide. He is referenced and honored across the board in Peace Studies and the ensuing movements over the past 5 decades. He will join us […] The post Johan Galtung appeared first on Restorative Justice On The Rise.

Gruvedrift på asteorider og det faktum at fredsforskningens far, Johan Galtung, har blitt gæærn er to av temaene for denne sendingen. I tillegg gir vi deg dårlige nyheter om du liker kokain og gode nyheter om du ikke liker migrene.

Revista Campus Cultural / Núm. 13 Noviembre 1, 2011

Una charla especial con el Dr. Johan Galtung, fundador de los estudios de la Paz y Premio Nobel Alternativo de la Paz.

Revista Campus Cultural / Núm. 12 octubre 17, 2011

Johan Galtung mener Norge må legge om utenrikspolitikken radikalt i en ikke-voldelig retning dersom vi skal ta ledelsen i det internasjonale arbeidet for fred. Er dette realistisk og ønskelig?

Frykten for et samfunn uten Downs: Det er ikke lenger snakk OM det vil bli født mennesker med Downs i framtida, men NÅR mennesker med Downs ikke lenger er blant oss. Det frykter mange. Hvorfor det? Krigen i Libya – et resultat av mentale og sosiale prosesser i våre vestlige samfunn? Men hva ville være en ikke-voldelig løsning i Libya i en verden der selv Johan Galtung fornekter pasifismen.. Korstog: Både Gaddafi og Putin har kalt angrepene på Libya for et korstog. Det er et så kraftig skjellsord at Medvedev kalte det for ”uakseptabelt ”: Men hva er sant og hva er myte i vår oppfatning av korstogene?

Johan Galtung, War, IPCR, Peace, Conflict, US, US Empire, Afganistan, The Fall of the US Empire - And Then What?.