Kamehameha

Dear Followers,

Positive Peace Theory And Me

History is loaded with individuals who have shaped it. From the upholder of justice named Martin Luther King Jr. to the symbol of tyranny and oppression named Hitler, there are thousands of individuals whose actions have changed the world. Even today, contemporary figures like Barack Obama are changing the modern world, deconstructing traditional modes of thought. When asked the question about whom I would choose have a conversation with, my choice would be Chris Cuomo, the Professor of Philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In her book, “The Philosopher Queen: Feminist Essays on War, Love & Knowledge,” Cuomo lays out the framework for the theory of “positive peace.” Cuomo has changed the way I view the world, acting as a springboard sending me into the world of philosophy.

The way Cuomo structures her argument is through a criticism of the traditional framework in which we place large scale, state-sponsored violence or war. In the modern world, we view war as an event with a definite start and end. When we isolate war outside of the events of everyday life, we no longer understand the reasons for why conflict starts in the first place because we assume that the conflict was produced in a vacuum. This view of war is known as “negative peace,” and this view prioritizes war over the structural problems that recreate war, masking the real problem. Only when we recognize the constant nature of militarism and how militarism permeates all aspects of society can we refocus on the systemic problems like poverty, environmental destruction, the oppression of women, and the “otherization” of marginalized groups. We can then understand the context into which wars are produced and find new ways to approach and fix the problems that produce them.

In debate, we evaluate policy through two modes of thought, one more pragmatic and one more abstract. The materialization of the abstract mode of thought is known as the “kritik,” relying on the ontological, epistemological, and methodological value of action to weigh arguments against the other team. Cuomo’s theory was the first that I understood as debater. Reading and understanding the arguments that Cuomo made helped give me the confidence to delve into the philosophic work of Nietzsche, Zizek, Freud, and Derrida. While Cuomo only discusses her theory in context of state-sponsored military action, her theory has allowed me to develop a new mode of thought for the ways in which I view other aspects of the world. I can now understand that we cannot isolate anything in terms of an event, because doing so undermines the causes and reasons for why the event happens in the first place. For example, in history class I now do not separate the events that happened in each of the original British colonies, but instead understand that similar forces were involved in each.

Overall, Cuomo has been a pivotal source of knowledge in my lifetime. Not only has her theory of “positive peace” allowed me to reshape my own thought process, but the knowledge she has given me has served as a starting point for my journey into the world of philosophy. I have so many questions to ask Cuomo. From asking about the origins of her argument to discussing the relevance of viewing militarism as a constant in the context of modern day wars would be invigorating. What she would have to say about our conception of the War on Terror would be particularly interesting to hear. I would need to choose my words with care however, because Cuomo does not appreciate how her theory is used in modern debate. A conversation with Cuomo would be an opportunity to give my thanks, and spend a day with my favorite political philosopher.

Team Rocket Is Blasting Off Again,
Noel