structural violence = social injustice = indirect violence; absence of = positive peace
Jag har tydligen börjat på nån slags TOK-ig kurs om fred och utveckling och våld och dåliga ekonomer. Jag misstänker dock att TOK-grejen som är väldigt överhängande och närvarande ("that depends on what you MEAN by war") inte är karaktäristiskt för min kurs, utan för hela den akademiska världen.
Fuck.
Smaka bara på den här saftiga meningen:
"These important perspectives are regained if a person is seen as making his decision to act violently not only on the basis of in individual deliberations but (also) on the basis och expectations impinging on him as norms contained in roles contained in statuses through which he enacts his social self; and, if one sees a violent structure as something that is a mere abstraction unless upheld by the actions, expected from the social environment or not, of individuals."
Och såhär mysigt definierar Galtung våld:
"Violence is present when human beings are being influenced so that their actual somatic and mental realizations are below their potential realizations"
Liksom.
LIKSOM!
Anyway,
hur går det för er?
Fuck.
Smaka bara på den här saftiga meningen:
"These important perspectives are regained if a person is seen as making his decision to act violently not only on the basis of in individual deliberations but (also) on the basis och expectations impinging on him as norms contained in roles contained in statuses through which he enacts his social self; and, if one sees a violent structure as something that is a mere abstraction unless upheld by the actions, expected from the social environment or not, of individuals."
Och såhär mysigt definierar Galtung våld:
"Violence is present when human beings are being influenced so that their actual somatic and mental realizations are below their potential realizations"
Liksom.
LIKSOM!
Anyway,
hur går det för er?
