Pedagogy of Peace Education and the African American Experience

Peace Pedagogy and the African American Experience

1

Larry O. Doyle

University of Toledo

Foundations of Peace Pedagogy

TSOC 7600

Pedagogy of Peace Education and

the African American Experience

(revised)

January 8, 2014

Key Words: Peace Education, Peace Pedagogy, African American

violence, crime, Social Justice, Paulo Freire, Democratic

Education

There is a problem of excessive violence in Urban America

and a pedagogy of peace education would help decrease the level

of violence. Scholars have shown how violence has declined all

over the world in the last century, but a high level of violence

persists in many of our urban centers. Scholars like Steven

Pinker have given us the reasons for these historic declines and


2

point the way to help us understand why violence takes place and

how to reduce it. America can benefit from their scholarship and

help make this a more peaceful world. Peace education helps to

reduce crime at the international level but also at the local

level. Margus Haavelrud stated, “It is evident that proposals for

peace education content vary in relation to the macro-micro

dimension. For instance, some peace educators define the content

in terms of international and global problems whereas others

define the content in relation to the everyday life and the

context of the individual” (Haavelsrud, p. 2).

It has been shown statistically that there is a higher rate

of violence committed in urban America and African Americans are

often the perpetrators and victims of this violence. In using

peace education to help reduce violence in the ghettoes of

America, we must not forget peace and justice go hand in hand.

You cannot have peace without social justice. We must look at the

underlying causes of violence, and use what we know to help end

the causes. An interdisciplinary approach is called for. History

tells us that “Thomas Hobbes and Charles Darwin were nice men


3

whose names became nasty adjectives. No one wants to live in a

world that is Hobbesian or Darwinian. The two men were

immortalized in the lexicon for their cynical synopsis of life in

a state of nature, Darwin for “survival of the fittest”, Hobbes

for “the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”

(Pinker, 2011, p. 61). For most of man’s existence, the fact of

violence has been his experience. Man has always expressed a

desire to live in peace, but this desire has been elusive.

Man has always shaped his own existence and has the ability

to forge a future without violence and to live in peace. Betty

Reardon stated, “Peace, then, is possible when society agrees

that the overarching purpose of public policies is the

achievement and maintenance of mutually beneficial circumstances

that enhance the life possibilities of all. Such an agreement is

sometimes identified as universal respect for human rights. It is

also interpreted as an agreement to renounce the use of violence

within the society, and to develop nonviolent processes for

dispute settlement and decision making” (Reardon, 2000, p. 4). At

the heart of peace education is a universal respect for human


4

rights. Many African Americans believe there is very little

respect in America for their human rights.

Steven Pinker, in The Better Angels of Our Nature stated, “The logic of

violence as it applies to members of an intelligent species

facing other members of that species brings us to Hobbes. In a

remarkable passage in Leviathan (1651), he used fewer than a

hundred words to lay out an analysis of the incentives for

violence that is as good today, that in the nature of man, we

find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition;

secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory” (Pinker, 2011, p. 63).

Where there is violence you will find one of these principal

causes of violence. All three of these causes are found in urban

America where the level of violence has not gone down.

The United States finds itself with more violence than any

other advanced industrial society. Pinker stated, “Among Western

democracies, the United States leaps out of the homicide

statistics. Instead of clustering with kindred peoples like

Britain, the Netherlands, and Germany, it hangs out with toughs

like Albania and Uruguay. Not only has the homicide rate for the


5

United States not wafted down to the levels enjoyed by every

European and Commonwealth democracy, but it showed no overall

decline during the 20th century” (Pinker, 2011, p. 126). Steven

Pinker argues violence has declined in many parts of the world

but the United States has defied this trend. Looking at a map of

the United States he noticed certain contrasts. The cities of the

United States stand in stark contrast to the more rural and

suburban areas of the country He said, “A second contrast is less

visible on the map. Louisiana’s homicide rate is higher than

those of the other southern states, and the District of Columbia

(a barely visible black speck) is off the scale at 30.8, in the

range of the most dangerous Central American and southern African

countries. He goes on and makes the claim, “These jurisdictions

are outliers mainly because they have a high proportion of

African Americans. The current black-white difference in homicide

rates within the United States is stark” (Pinker, 2011, p. 128).

He seems to speak to the seriousness of the matter and reaches

for plausible reasons to explain the difference. Between 1976 and

2005 the average homicide rate for white Americans was 4.8, while


6

the average rate for black Americans was 36.9” (Pinker, 2011, p.

128). Clearly, black Americans are engaged in violence at a

higher rate than their white counterparts. The urban areas of

America pay a high social and economic price for this real and

perceived violence and lack of peace.

There is positive and negative peace. Negative peace is the

lack of violence, whereas positive peace is more concerned with

the social injustice that effects the quality of our lives.

“Positive peace includes but transcends negative peace. It

entails not only the elimination of armed aggression but also the

positive establishment of justice. It constitutes a social order

free of all forms of violence, including structural violence, as

well as the establishment and sustainability of fundamental and

wide spread social fairness” (Snauwaert, 2012, p. 3). The problem

of violence in black America is a problem of negative violence

and positive violence and of an unjust social and economic order

which has continued since slavery, its historical roots. The

violence of many African Americans in the inner cities can only

be understood in its historical perspective and the community’s


7

understanding of justice or injustice in America. Peace education

must be considered in the nature of justice. Critical peace

education can only be considered in light of a theory of justice.

Dale Snauwaert, stated “A consideration of the nature of justice

is signi cant in at least two ways: educationally and in termsfi

of the problem of de ning peace (referred to as the ‘de nitionalfi fi

problem’). Taken together, these two considerations point to the

fundamental importance of a theory of justice for the theory and

practice of critical peace education” (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 3).

Critical peace education cannot be considered without a

consideration of justice and injustice.

In considering the nature of peace education, it is

imperative to understand the essential nature of education and

its purpose. Education can be for the acquisition of knowledge

and it also provides for a vocation in an ever-increasingly

complex world. “In reviewing the historical evolution and

practical development of the approaches, a common assumption

about the essential nature of education can also be discerned.

Given what all have attempted to do in introducing their


8

respective approaches, they have assumed that two primary related

functions of education are to provide knowledge about particular

subject matter and develop capacities for addressing the subject

in thought and action” (Reardon, 2000, p. 4). Martha Nussbaum and

Amartya Sen have written about what they call a “realization-

focused orientation to justice. It looks at the societal outcome

for the individual and their individual quality of life taken in

the context of the society they live in. “A realization-focused

orientation to justice, as articulated by Nussbaum and Sen, looks

to the actual quality of life of individuals as the focus of

justice. It is an outcome-based view that is oriented toward

individuals’ actual lives, in the sense that justice concerns the

individual’s capability of being and doing what they freely

choose” (Nussbaum 2000, p. 58). Nusbaum and Sen would look at the

individual lives of African Americans in our urban ghettoes and

compare their quality of life with that of the average American

citizen and would come to the conclusion many African American

citizens are not reaching their full human capacity.


9

Many Americans live without hope, with little intrinsic

value and little human dignity. “In keeping with this

perspective, Nussbaum and Sen both ground the foundation of

justice in the intrinsic value and dignity of our humanity.

Nussbaum refers to this foundation as ‘the principle of each

person as an end’ (Nussbaum 2000, 56). Justice demands that we

‘should treat each of them [human beings] as ends, as sources of

agency and worth in their own right, with their own plans to make

and their own lives to live” (Nussbaum, 2000, p. 58). Social

Reconstructionists believe that the education system is unjust

and serves the interests of social elites to the detriment of a

poor, exploited underclass. This poor underclass has not the

cultural resources or political power to make the political

system work in its behalf and that includes education.

Besides obvious violence, many African Americans must deal

with the threat of structural violence. Structural violence is

ever present in American society and it exploits, oppresses, and

dehumanizes.


10

“The recognition of structural violence introducesanother kind of injustice that threatens peace – theinjustice of unjust social orders that exploit, oppressand thereby dehumanize signi cant segments of thefipopulation. Structural violence can and does existindependently of political injustice. Structuralviolence is therefore an urgent matter of socialjustice, as distinct from (but interrelated with)political justice, and thus of peace” (Snauwaert,2011b, p. 316).

America has eliminated most of the state-sponsored overt

violence against African-Americans, but the structural violence

remains. Paulo Freire stated, “Violence is initiated by those who

oppress, who exploit, who fail to recognize others as persons –

not by those who are oppressed, exploited, and unrecognized”

(Freire, 1970, p. 55). Much of the violence observed in the

African American community is a direct response to this

oppression and is predictable. “Thus, the behavior of the

oppressed is a prescribed behavior, following as it does the

guidelines of the oppressor” (Freire, 1970, p. 47). Thus the

violence of African Americans in urban ghettoes and its nature

can be traced to the particular oppression they have and continue

to experience.


11

Johan Galtung went on to explain the link between structural

and direct violence. The connection between direct and structural

violence as explained by Galtung can be applied to the African

American experience. First came the direct violence of slavery,

later slave codes, then extrajudicial beatings and murder by

lynching. After slavery, there were Jim Crow laws and the always

veiled threat of physical violence, and then a codification of

social injustice by structural violence. Johan Galtung stated:

“After some time, direct violence isforgotten, slavery is forgotten, and only twolabels show up, pale enough for college textbooks:‘discrimination’ for massive structural violenceand ‘prejudice’ for massive cultural violence.Sanitation of language: itself cultural violence”(Galtung, 1990, p. 295).

African Americans know too well just below the surface of

structural violence lies the power of the state to weld

violence in the name of the state.

Steven Pinker has identified two processes which have led to

a reduction of violence. He has identified the Leviathan and also

what he calls gentle commerce. Government has extended its


12

jurisdiction of the people and has monopolized violence and

individuals find cooperation more to their benefit than violence.

Pinker stated, “The two triggers of the Civilizing Process – the

Leviathan and gentle commerce – are related. The positive-sum

cooperation of commerce flourishes best inside a big tent

presided over by a Leviathan” (Pinker, 2011, p. 111). The lack of

government services and lack of commerce, i.e. jobs, contribute

to the factors that lead to violent behavior. The historic

reduction in violence, according to Pinker, was aided by

industrialization and an increasingly democratic political

process. He said, “They were domesticated not by the royal court,

of course, but by other civilizing forces. Employment in

factories and businesses forced employees to acquire habits of

decorum. An increasingly democratic political process allowed

them to identify with the institutions of government and society,

and it opened up the court system as a way to pursue their

grievances” (Pinker, 2011, p. 117). Many African Americans in our

urban ghettoes are without the civilizing influence of commerce

and for all practical purposes are stateless and do not identify


13

with the government and many are unemployed with no job

prospects.

Many see guns and violence as part of the American culture.

It has been said, “In America, the people took over the state

before it had forced them to lay down their arms. In other words

Americans, and especially Americans in the South and West, never

fully signed on to a social contract that would vest the

government with a monopoly on the legitimate use of force”

(Pinker, 2011, p. 132). Many Americans, not only never signed on

to the social contract giving the state a monopoly on violence,

but many believe it is their right to take justice into their own

hands even if that means violence. It is important for our

discussion that African Americans for the most part are from the

South and identify with its culture of self-help justice. “The

South’s reliance on self-help justice has long been a part of its

mythology” (Pinker, 2011, p. 133). “Self-help justice depends on

the credibility of one’s prowess and resolve, and to this day the

American South is marked by an obsession with credible

deterrence, otherwise known as a culture of honor” (Pinker, 2011,


14

p. 133). This culture of self-help-justice and culture of honor

are part of the African American tradition with its negative

consequences. Pinker stated, “Most homicides, are really

instances of capital punishment, with a private citizen as the

judge, jury, and executioner” (Pinker, 2011, p. 117). This

private citizen has little regard for the state.

In exploring justice one must understand the nature of

citizenship and political community. Dale Snauwaert said that one

way to look at justice is through the idea of citizenship. He

said, “A point of departure for exploring the foundation of

justice is the idea of citizenship: an individual is a subject of

justice, and thereby due moral consideration as an urgent matter

of justice, because he or she is a citizen; she has been born

into or has undergone a process of naturalization into the

political community (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 318). A fair and

equitable distribution of rights and obligations would be the one

whereby all would have equal access to the stated social goods

and which education is but one. Without a proper education one

cannot develop their capabilities. Nussbaum recognizes the fact


15

that there are environmental conditions that work against people

developing their full capabilities. “Social, political, familial,

and economic conditions may prevent people from being able to

function in accordance with a developed internal capability: this

sort of thwarting is comparable to imprisonment. Bad conditions

can, however, cut deeper, stunting the development of internal

capabilities or warping their development” (Nussbaum, 2011, p.

30). Poor education certainly stunts the development of internal

capabilities and limits one’s ontological vocation to be fully

human.

Many African Americans are the victims of structural

violence along with community violence. The institutions of the

society itself are unjust or operate in a manner which do not

allow individuals to develop to their full capacity. “The

recognition of structural violence introduces another kind of

injustice that threatens peace – the injustice of unjust social

orders that exploit, oppress and thereby dehumanize signi cantfi

segments of the population. Structural violence can and does

exist independently of political injustice. Structural violence


16

is therefore an urgent matter of social justice, as distinct from

(but interrelated with) political justice, and thus of peace”

(Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 316). It is incumbent upon the government

to not only operate in a just way towards the citizens, but must

also act affirmatively where institutional injustice is found to

remove injustice. “The Capabilities Approach, by contrast,

insists that all entitlements involve an affirmative task for

government: it must actively support people’s capabilities, not

just fail to set up obstacles” (Nussbaum, 2011, p. 65, 67).

Walzer makes the case even stronger when he said in Spheres of

Justice, “We can think of educational equality as a form of welfare

provision, where all children, conceived as future citizens, have

the same need to know, and where the ideal of membership is best

served if they are all taught the same thing” (Walzer, 1983,

p.203). All children as future citizens are entitled to an

equivalent educational experience with the same epistemology and

teaching of critical thinking skills. Structural violence is

found to be the grounds for a conception of peace education and

according to Monisha Bajaj and Edward Brantmeier, and they


17

express a need to educate teachers as transformative agents. “In

their important re ections on critical peace education, Monisha Bajajfl

(2008) and Edward Brantmeier (2010) ground a conception of critical

peace education on the existence of structural violence, its inherent

injustice, and the need to educate teachers and students to become

transformative agents in order to socially reconstruct unjust social

orders. From this perspective, a just peace is the basic organizing

principle of peace education” (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 2). If we are to

consider peace education, its implementation must include a just peace

along with social justice.

As in Europe, there has been a decline in elite violence in the

United States. . “The European decline of violence was spearheaded by

a decline in elite violence. Today statistics from every Western

country show that the overwhelming majority of homicides are committed

by people in the lowest socioeconomic classes” (Pinker, 2011, p. 117).

These numbers would include African American citizens living in the

ghettoes. “In an article inspired by Black called “The Decline of

Elite Homicide,” the criminologist Mark Cooney shows that many lower-

status people – the poor, the uneducated, the unmarried, and members

of minority groups – are effectively stateless” (Pinker, 2011, p.


18

119). It is easy to make the analogy that that is the condition of

many African Americans in the worst slums of America. Pinker stated,

“But another reason for the statelessness is that lower-status people

and the legal system often live in a condition of mutual hostility”

(Pinker, 2011, p. 119). The animosity between the police and many

African Americans is well documented. The black community could always

depend on neighbors to watch for questionable behavior. As Pinker

said, “Shopkeeper and citizens with a stake in the neighborhood, who

otherwise would have kept an eye out for local misbehavior, eventually

surrendered to the vandals, panhandlers, and muggers and retreated to

the suburbs” (Pinker, 2011, p. 151). This retreat to the suburbs were

for better schools, better services, better housing and above all,

less violence and crime. At the same time there was a breakdown in

traditional families, higher rates of unmarried parenthood, and drug

addiction, all had a de-civilizing effect on the African American

community. These societal changes hit all, but had a particularly

devastating effect on the African American community. “The de-

civilizing effects hit African American communities particularly hard.

They started out with the historical disadvantages of second-class

citizenship, which left many young people teetering between

respectable and underclass lifestyles just when the new


19

antiestablishment forces were pushing in the wrong direction” (Pinker,

2011, p. 152). The answers to many of the problems in the African

American community can be solved by embracing and advancing critical

peace education.

Most of the violence in the African American community is black

on black crime. Most of the victims are known to the assailants.

Pinker states the three causes of violence are competition, diffidence

and glory (Pinker, 2011, p.63). Where there is violence you will find

one of these principal causes and this is not different in the Black

community. Where violence has been reduced the citizens have a reason

to believe his neighbor is worth more to him alive than dead.

Especially where there are few jobs, society needs to find ways to

increase commerce with its civilizing nature, increase education and

increase the teaching of cosmopolitanism, which would include the

teaching of the principal of unity.

Through peace education, life becomes a positive-sum game. “A

positive-sum game is a scenario in which agents have choices that can

improve the lots of both of them at the same time” (Pinker, 2011, p.

109). A classic positive-sum game in everyday life is the exchange of

favors, where each person can confer a large benefit to another at a

small cost to himself or herself. Positive sum games also change the


20

incentives for violence. If you’re trading favors or surpluses with

someone, your trading partner suddenly becomes more valuable to you

alive than dead” (Pinker, 2011, p. 110). American cities need critical

peace education to help citizens understand how to reduce violence and

transform lives from violence to peace. Betty Reardon calls this a

critical, transformational approach. “The critical, transformational

approach aims at the rejection of all forms of violence, including

structural violence and injustice” (Reardon 1988, 1999). It calls for

an understanding of violence including its causes and the forces which

lead to its reduction.

Two approaches to peace education are reform and reconstruction,

and the transformational approach.

“While the reform and reconstructive approachesgenerally employ an instructional pedagogy that emphasizesthe need to inform, to transmit information and to developskills needed for reform and reconstruction, thetransformational approach employs a pedagogy that elicitslearning and develops the capacity of critical, ethical, andcontemplative re ective inquiry. This philosophy of peacefleducation posits a pedagogy that is process-oriented,inquiry-based, re ective, experiential,fldialogical/conversational, value-based, imaginative,critical, liberating, and empowering. It is critical peaceeducation” (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 329).


21

Both of these approaches to peace education are worth exploring.

Danesh has also added an Integrative Theory of Peace that is based on

the principal of unity and four main sub-theories.

Danesh said, “Based on these and other important insights, I have

put forward the Integrative Theory of Peace (ITP) and formulated the

Education for Peace Integrative Curriculum founded on its main

principles. Integrative Theory of Peace consists of four sub-theories:

• Peace is a psychosocial and political as well as moral and

spiritual condition;

• Peace is the main expression of a unity-based worldview;

• Comprehensive, integrated, lifelong education is the most

effective approach for developing a unity-based worldview;

• A unity-based worldview is the prerequisite for creating both a

culture of peace and a culture of healing” (Danesh, 2002, p. 83).

Danesh stated, “Unity is a conscious and purposeful condition of

convergence of two or more unique entities in a state of harmony,

integration, and cooperation to create a new evolving entity(s),

usually, of a same or a higher level of integration and complexity.


22

The animating force of unity is love, which is expressed variably in

different conditions of existence” (Danesh, 2002, p. 84).

It is obvious African Americans in the ghetto feel alienated and

stateless. American society must find a way to bring these African

Americans a sense of belonging and a way to become full participants

as full citizens. “The Unity-Based (Integrative) Worldview considers

unity rather than conflict to be the primary law operating in human

life and relationships. It perceives conflict to be simply a symptom

of the absence of unity” (Danesh, 2002, p. 86). According then to

Danesh, the violence in some parts of urban America can be contributed

to a lack of unity which contributes to conflict and the unusually

high rate of violence.

Studies have been done to track the rise and fall of violence,

and seem to project a decrease or increase in violence. “A famous

study that tracked a thousand low-income Boston teenagers for forty-

five years discovered that two factors predicted whether a delinquent

would go on to avoid a life of crime: getting a stable job, and

marrying a woman he cared about and supporting her and her children”

(Pinker, 2011, p. 140). Providing steady jobs, getting married, and

supporting one’s children are strong factors in insuring a sense of


23

unity and reducing violence. Living in the middle of everyday violence

is inhuman and a detriment to the human spirit.

Pinker Stated, “The research gives teeth to thespeculation that humanitarian reforms are driven in part byan enhanced sensitivity to the experiences of living thingsand a genuine desire to relieve their suffering. And assuch, the cognitive process of perspective-taking and theemotion of sympathy must figure in the explanation for manyhistorical reductions in violence. They includeinstitutionalized violence such as cruel punishments,slavery, and frivolous executions; the everyday abuse ofvulnerable populations such as women, children, homosexuals,racial minorities, and animals; and the waging of wars,conquests, and ethnic cleansing with a callousness to theirhuman costs” (Pinker, 2011, p. 703).

African Americans are not only subject to community violence but

also structural violence as stated above and are aware of these

injustices.

Schools are but one of the institutions where the powerless are

subjected to cultural and structural violence. Educators must be aware

of the fact that education today is taking place inside and outside of

the school environment, therefore schools must play a larger and more

decisive role in educating for peace. “Whether or not education for

peace is attempted within or outside the school, however, it seems

that unless it becomes part of the overall process of non-violent

social change, it will not succeed in contributing to the creation of


24

peace and social justice” (Haavelsrud, p. 5). Education for peace must

become part of the overall process of non-violent social change if it

is to become part of the creation of peace and social change. Because

of the nature of the condition, schools must play an even more

energetic role in educating for peace.

There is an intimate relationship between education and society.

Reardon recognized the intimate relationship between the two.

Reardon’s basic premise, upon which she builds her approach to peace

education, is the recognition that there exists an intimate

relationship between education and society. She said, “From this

perspective, education is a social institution and practice that is

driven by social values. It has long been recognized that education is

contingent upon the specific social and political organization of the

society within which it is situated” (Snauwaert, 2012, p. 2). The

educational system must recognize this important social role and

accept some of the responsibility for the creation of a more peaceful

and just United States.

Many philosophers have stated that education is not neutral, but

have a built in bias towards the elite class. “The critical peace

education approach discussed here assumes that schools are not

politically and culturally neutral enterprises. Rather, schools are


25

arenas of contestation and struggle—conflicted cultural terrain

characterized by asymmetrical hierarchies, dominant- subordinate

relationships, unequal distribution of resources, access, and

opportunity” (Brantmeier, 2010, p. 6).

The educational system has operated to the advantage of an elite

class to the detriment of the underclass. Much of the research that

would point to a more egalitarian system has been ignored. The system

has operated to perpetuate and maintain a system of inequality to the

detriment of the poor underclass which has some historic racial

aspects but more recently has become more class driven. Dale Snauwaert

said,

“. . . the general purpose of peace education, as Iunderstand it, is to promote the development of anauthentic planetary consciousness that will enable us tofunction as global citizens and to transform the presenthuman condition by changing the social structures and thepatterns of thought that have created it. Thistransformational imperative must, in my view, be at thecenter of peace education. It is important to emphasizethat transformation, in this context, means a profoundglobal cultural change that affects ways of thinking,world views, values, behaviors, relationships, and thestructures that make up our public order” (Reardon, 1988,p. ix).

Paulo Freire added to this perspective. Leslie Bartlett stated in

regard to Freire, “Freire’s philosophy thoroughly informs peace

education pedagogy and practice. His complicated concept of


26

conscientization provides the foundation of peace education’s hope for

a link between education and social transformation. His insistence on

dialogue and his discussions of egalitarian teacher-student relations

provide the basis for peace education pedagogy. Despite his death a

decade ago, Freire’s ideas continue to resound throughout the field”

(Bartlett, 2008, p. 6). Freire recognized the connection between

education and transformation and the need for teacher education to

enable this transformation. E.J Brantmeier said, “Critical peace education

approaches in U.S. teacher education offer a potential for multiplying

the attitudes, dispositions, behaviors, broader social conditions and

structures, and the effects of peace. In turn, people and institutions

can move away from perpetuating a culture of violence and move toward

nurturing a sustainable, renewable culture of peace” (Brantmeier,

2010, p. 5). Brantmeier showed his understanding of this connection by

stating, “Understanding the relationship of power structures,

institutional and societal racism, sexism, and classism all seem to

open an understanding of structural violence—the social, political,

economic, environmental arrangements that privilege some at the

exclusion of others” (Brantmeier, 2010, p. 9). Not only do these

arrangements privilege some at the exclusion of others, but the others


27

are at the same time subjected to ideological hegemony wherefore their

voices and objections are never heard and they eventually lose hope.

Paulo Freire’s philosophy of critical pedagogy has had and

continues to have a profound in uence on the theory and practice offl

peace education. For example, Betty Reardon (2009) states, “Critical

pedagogy is the methodology most consistent with the transformative

goals of peace education and human rights learning... I have argued

that the theories and practices we have learned from Paulo Freire are

the conceptual and methodological heart of the most effective peace

learning and peace politics” (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 327). The

experience of many in poor urban America would benefit greatly from

the application of his principals of critical pedagogy. Some would

call these principals liberation education.

The urban poor in America have been deprived of their ontological

purpose as self-reflexive being and their humanism. Dale Snauwaert

stated, “In these statements Freire expressed his radical humanism.

From his perspective, it is our ontological purpose as self-re ectivefl

beings to dialogically liberate and actualize the full range of our

human capacities. Oppressive social orders impede this vocation; they

alienate us from our humanity, and this renders them unjust”

(Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 327).


28

Too many theorist treat the urban poor as a subset of Americans

to be treated as second class citizens who are unfortunate and deserve

condescension. Freire stated, “No pedagogy which is truly liberating

can remain distant from the oppressed by treating them as unfortunates

and by presenting for their emulation models from among the

oppressors” (Freire, 1970, p. 54). It is most difficult for the

oppressor to examine his position of privilege and concede that he or

she cannot be the model for the oppressed. This is true even in

education. Especially when the educational system itself is part of

the system of oppression.

At the core of the problem is the social reality of domination

and oppression. Snauwaert stated, “At the core of Freire’s critical

philosophy are the social realities of domination and oppression. A

critical pedagogy is an educational response to the existence of

injustice manifested in the multiple forms of social domination and

oppression” (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 327). As stated, the objective of

critical peace pedagogy is social justice and the elimination of

oppression. Paulo Freire stated in Pedagogy of the Oppressed,

“Any situation in which “A” objectively exploits “B”or hinders his and her pursuit of self-affirmation as aresponsible person is one of oppression. Such a situation initself constitutes violence, even when sweetened by falsegenerosity, because it interferes with the individual’s


29

ontological and historical vocation to be more fully human.With the establishment of a relationship of oppression,violence has already begun” (Freire, 1993, p. 55). He goes onto state “Never in history has violence been initiated bythe oppressed”.

Much of the violence in urban America is a response to

the conditions of injustice and oppression.

Paulo Freire says there are two distinct stages to his pedagogy;

commitment to transformation and then, the pedagogy becomes a pedagogy

of all. There they will find the unity which binds us all. Unity in

America is still a work in progress. “The pedagogy of the oppressed,

as a humanist and libertarian pedagogy, has two distinct stages. In

the first, the oppressed unveil the world of oppression and through

the praxis, commit themselves to its transformation. In the second

stage, in which the reality of oppression has already been

transformed, this pedagogy ceases to belong to the oppressed and

becomes a pedagogy of all people in the process of permanent

liberation” (Freire, 1970, p. 54). For it is only after this

transformation that the oppressed will find permanent liberation. Many

Americans are not truly liberated and free in the true sense of the

words. Many Americans are not receiving the quality education they

deserve that will give them the kind of critical thinking skills


30

needed for full citizenship in a democracy, which includes debate and

deliberation. These Americans would benefit from a critical peace

pedagogy.

In a democracy citizens must accept certain values that allow for

public debate of the fundamental issues. Snauwaert said, “As free and

equal, democratic citizens have a civic duty to each other, what John

Rawls refers to as the duty of civility, to explain and justify their

political preferences and opinions to one another in the terms of the

publicly recognized and accepted values and principles of the

political ethic” (Snauwaert, 2011b, p. 19). Public reason does not

demand that we be right, only that our decisions are based on the

principles we agree on within a democratic framework. Rawls said,

“While a well-ordered democratic society is not an association, it is

not a community either, if we mean by a community a society governed

by a shared comprehensive religious, philosophical, or moral doctrine.

This fact is crucial for a well-ordered society’s idea of public

reason” (Rawls, 2005, p. 42).

There can only be true public debate if the oppressed are allowed

their voice in their liberation and the oppressor is willing to give

up his privileged position of domination and ideological hegemony so

there is true and equal dialogue between equals. Snauwaert stated,


31

“So construed, public deliberation employs a form of reasoning that is

public reason. Public policy requires justification in order to

achieve legitimacy. Justification is achieved through deliberation and

the exercise of public reason” (Snauwaert, 2011a, p. 2). Critical

thinking requires reasoning skills which are desperately needed in

America’s urban environments. Teaching and learning to think become

valuable commodities. Snauwaert said, “(1) Learning how to think

concerns conceptual clarity, thinking within conceptual frameworks,

posing questions, rationality, and most importantly reflective

inquiry. Peace education is thus closely aligned with democratic

education grounded in the ideas of public reason and deliberation”

(Snauwaert, 2011a, p. 1).

Peace education is genuinely connected to educating for future

citizens. All citizens need to become participant citizens. Dale

Snauwaert stated, “Peace education, as Betty Reardon suggests, should

be fundamentally concerned with the development of the political

efficacy of future citizens. Political efficacy is dependent upon

“sound political thinking,” “for inquiry into obstacles and

possibilities for transformation should form the core of peace

pedagogy, so as to provide learning in how to think and to act for

political efficacy in peace politics” (Snauwaert, 2011a, p. 1). Urban


32

America and the African American community would benefit greatly from

a “Pedagogy of Peace Education founded in the principals of the

democratic ethic and social justice.

References

Bartlett, Lesley. 2008. "Paulo Freire and Peace Education." InEncyclopedia of Peace

Education, edited by Monisha Bafa. Charlotte, NC: Information AgePublishing,

Inc.

Brantmeier, E.J., 2010. "Toward mainstreaming critical peaceeducation in U.S. teacher

Education." In Critical pedagogy in the 21st century: A newgeneration of scholars, edited by C.S. Malott and B. Porfilio.Greenwich, Ct: Information Age Publishing.

Danesh & Danesh. 2002, Education for Peace Reader


33

Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York:Continuum

Haavelsrud, Magnus. Conceptual Perspectives in Peace Education,Columbia University

Nussbaum, Martha C. 2011. Creating Capabilities. The BelknapPress of Harvard University Press

Pinker, Steven. 2011. The Better Angels of our Nature, PenguinGroup, London, England

Rawls, John. 2005. Political Liberalism, pg. 39, 42, 134,Columbia University Press

Reardon, Betty. 1998. Comprehensive Peace Education, Teacher’sCollege, Columbia University

Reardon, Betty. 2000. Peace Education: A Review and Projection,Columbia University, N.Y.

Snauwaert, 2012. Betty Reardon’s Conception of “Peace”,University of Toledo

Snauwaert, Dale T. 2011b. "Social justice and the philosophicalfoundations of critical peace education: Exploring Nussbaum, Sen,and Freire." Journal of Peace Education no. 8 (3):315-331.

Snauwaert, Dale T. 2011a. "Democracy, Public Reason, and PeaceEducation." Global

Campaign for Peace Education Newsletter (88):1-5.


34

Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of justice: a defense of pluralismand equality. New York: Basic Books

Pedagogy of Peace Education and the African American Experience

Documents

Transcript of Pedagogy of Peace Education and the African American Experience