Commenting on the Brussels meetings where the European Union members are discussing the Emigration Energency phenomena, Prof. Marek Halter said:
“Coming out of a church, how many persons would stop to offer alms (charity) to the poor? Very few, though all religions have prescribed it.. In the same way governments retire from their moral responsibilities.. In 1938 the Evian Conference was held to figure out which nation would receive and accommodate the Jews; only the Dominican Republic came forward offering its welcome.. Now, the same is happening again, and Europe is refusing to host and shelter frightened and horrified refugees desperately escaping from ethnic cleansing and civil wars.. Human beings looking for safety and serenity through a dignifying working life.. The urgent need today is being able to figure out a global solution for Africa.. We have for long allowed misery to devastate that continent, and now we have to face the consequences and pay the price”.
What Prof. Halter have just said, drove me to think.. What is the the core of the problem? How and where to look for its original cause? The one before Colonialism, Racism, Corruption or Apartheid.. The true one causing all of them.. And, like an Archeologist digging out history from underneath the ground and clearing it from dirt; I think I may have found it.. Buried under heavy layers of human lies and intentional distortion of facts.
So, bear with me for a moment.. Allow me to explain:
Sociological, Anthropological, Ethological and Psychoanalytical scientific vernaculars have all clearly drawn the line separating “Aggressiveness” from “Violence”.. Yet, the modern use of the two terms is so confused; and even mixes them up to the point of rendering them synonyms.
While Aggressiveness means the instinct to identify and defend our own physical, psychic or social territory in its many diverse forms, in short our identity; Violence instead is the thriving instinct to entre others territories and to violate them, by words or facts, in personal or collective lives.
In poor words: if I’m hungry and succeed to procure myself a chunk of bread, then my aggressive instinct would drive me to eat it all and alone.. Only the intervention of a cultural code could induce me towards a mediation as to share it with another person equally famished. But violence become verifiable when I rip off the chunk of bread from someone else’s hands to keep it to myself and eat all and alone.
Similarly, if searching for energy resources would drive a population into the initiative of looking for new lands that are well provisioned by such resources, then we are talking about Aggressive Instinct; that would quickly mutate into Aggression/Violence if those lands were inhabited by antique populations whom are opposed and/or in disagreement to such initiative.
Since humanity, for long unmemorable time, used to mediate instinct by Moral Conscience; then the use of aggressiveness or the sorting to violence have always depended upon: a) the quality of the subject, b) its conscience, c) its sub-conscience and d) the social status in which it lives.
So, why then to mix up such two different terms?
Because today Human Aggressiveness is very much ill and clumsily swings between two poles completely opposed and as much destructive:
1) either we feel unable to identify and defend our own territory; or
2) we are incapable of identifying and respecting the territory(ies) of the others.
As a result, and for various reasons, we have come to simplify the complexity of the two instincts, to the point of ignoring – or even denying - the difference between Violence and Self-Defence.
The consequences, whether on personal or collective levels, are a juicy matter of daily chronicle on newspapers and TV talk shows.
Pass On The Word.
· Le Idee of Anais Ginori.
· Inégalité: Notre création by Marek Halter.
· TamTam of Marina Valcarenghi.