The violence must end!

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
I am listening to Tony Blair talk about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the BBC World Service. He is saying that the central thing of importance is that "the violence must end." I am not sure what I think about this idea, either in the specific case, or the general case. For example, cases of linguistic violence, rampaging trolls, and similar. It would be good if violence could end, but it won't end until the sources of violence are cut-off. But is this is even possible?
 

vimothy

yurp
There is a trade-off between stability and justice. There is a lot to be said for stability. Governments create positive externalities when they monopolise violence, but there is a cost with regards to justice.
 

vimothy

yurp
Can I answer your question with another question (ok, ok, that's two questions)? What are the sources of violence?
 

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
I don't know. This comes on at least two levels, viz:

1) The sources of violence in the Occupied Territories.

2) The (deeper) sources of violence which have generated these sources. Like drives, for example, or late capitalism, or the hardcore continuum.
 

vimothy

yurp
Hardcore will never die

Tier one revolves around achieving a negotiated settlement. Achieving a negotiated settlement revolves around Israel talking to HAMAS and ending the economic blockade of Gaza, and HAMAS making guarantees about Israel's security that Israel believes.

Tier two is more difficult.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Tier one revolves around achieving a negotiated settlement. Achieving a negotiated settlement revolves around Israel talking to HAMAS and ending the economic blockade of Gaza, and HAMAS making guarantees about Israel's security that Israel believes.

but the latter will never, never happen. what kind of overriding guarantee could Hamas ever give that Israel would take even half-seriously, let alone believe? a guarantee that Hamas itself would still be willing to live with.

though if that's merely incredibly unlikely #2 is flatly impossible. what scenario is it possible to envision, short a self-defeating one like a nuclear war, that removes the sources beyond of the sources of the violence (in the Middle East, not violence in the more general sense)?
 

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
What if the solution to tier one involves intervening in some way into tier 2? In other words, how do you end the drug war? By working to channel the various forces involved in narcotics, and twisting them into more manageable shapes.
 
D

droid

Guest
but the latter will never, never happen. what kind of overriding guarantee could Hamas ever give that Israel would take even half-seriously, let alone believe? a guarantee that Hamas itself would still be willing to live with.

though if that's merely incredibly unlikely #2 is flatly impossible. what scenario is it possible to envision, short a self-defeating one like a nuclear war, that removes the sources beyond of the sources of the violence (in the Middle East, not violence in the more general sense)?

Hamas' guarantees are basically irrelevant, as were the PLO's guarantees before them. Regardless of what Palestinians do, Israel consistently relies on force and subverts negotiations in order to pursue its strategic and political objectives. The Israelis have an overwhelming advantage in terms of force, and with no one to restrain them, they use violence as a reflexive means to achieve their aims.

Blair is, quite simply, a joke. Never mind the fact that he hasn't visited Gaza or the West Bank once in his term as 'peace envoy' - his very appointment to the post is an exercise in sublime satire.
 

scottdisco

rip this joint please
There is a trade-off between stability and justice.

absolutely crucial point, c.f. the energetic debate among humanitarian/Sudan analysts / policy people/aid workers affected individuals etc about Moreno-Ocampo's charging al-Bashir (a debate on which some very fine individuals, Sudanese and non-Sudanese alike, disagreed strongly on the pros and cons)
 
D

droid

Guest
But can there be stability without justice - or at least the perception of justice?
 

Mr BoShambles

jambiguous
But can there be stability without justice - or at least the perception of justice?

Stability and justice -- not absolute values.

Justice for who? Regimes which are found towards the authoritarian end of the spectrum may offer little in the way of legal equality. Application of the law may be pretty arbitrary. Justice serves the elite not the masses. Still the society in question may well be relatively stable given the likelihood of violence towards any who oppose the status quo.
 
Last edited:

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Hamas' guarantees are basically irrelevant, as were the PLO's guarantees before them. Regardless of what Palestinians do, Israel consistently relies on force and subverts negotiations in order to pursue its strategic and political objectives. The Israelis have an overwhelming advantage in terms of force, and with no one to restrain them, they use violence as a reflexive means to achieve their aims.

sure, but so do Palestinian leaders (if not Palestinians, a distinction that could also be made for Israelis) & every bit as cynically, not to mention other Arab leaders who are always willing to fight to the last Palestinian but could care less about them otherwise.

& the Israelis of course have an advantage in military force but the Palestinians aren't helpless victims & painting them as such does them no favors.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Stability and justice -- not absolute values.

Justice for who? Regimes which are found towards the authoritarian end of the spectrum may offer little in the way of legal equality. Application of the law may be pretty arbitrary. Justice serves the elite not the masses. Still the society in question may well be relatively stable given the likelihood of violence towards any who oppose the status quo.

but doesn't this often lead much greater resentment bubbling away unseen until it explodes into view? I mean, as anything police states end & usually not in a pretty fashion.

the general point about tradeoffs & absolute values is well taken though.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
The pendulum swings and there is justice at the price of stability.

so I guess the question is of trying to find the best possible balance? tho I dunno if it's quite as one or the other as all that, don't stability & justice sometimes go hand in hand?
 
Top