The Psychology of Human Rights Violators and Courageous Resistors Using a vocabulary based on the work of social psychologist Ervin Staub, it is clear that many researchers have found elements of the human psyche and the human experience that contribute both to acts of courageous resistance in the face of horrific human rights abuses as well as contributing to the perpetration of the acts themselves. Certain categories emerge while assessing the actions of an individual in either of these circumstances: environmental or circumstantial pressure and support; concept of self in relation to others, and specific learning experiences that coalesce into paradigms from which actions are taken. In his analysis of human rights violations, Staub discusses “difficult life conditions,” “in-group/ out-group” distinctions, and “learning by doing.” Various other scholars of human rights have a vocabulary that will enhance the meaning of this terminology in the context of both human rights violators, and courageous resistors of that violence. Staub's assessment of “difficult life conditions” and how people behave under threat to safety and security is supported and expanded upon by Kristen Renwick Monroe, who posits that, though ethnic difference and tensions are not a sufficient to explain human rights abuses, they will be magnified by economic struggle or other stresses, and can explode into acts of extreme violence. She draws in the concept of dehumanization, addressed by Staub and many others, positing that the cognitive perceptions of a people under strain can be manipulated to scapegoat a group of people in an attempt to release the frustration of powerlessness in hard times. The idea that one can distance oneself from one's victi... ... middle of paper ... ...ing the path of “learning by doing” towards courageous resistance. Those raised in authoritarian cultures according to various theorists, including Staub, often don't have the internal locus of control that allows them to make the connection between seeing oppression and choosing not to participate in it. So, this is another place where theories of pro-social actions and human rights violation are converse to one another. A synthesis of all of these theories leads me to believe the following: if one can use the similar pathways of “learning by doing” and “authorization” within a pro-social, inclusive world view and create a society where authoritative child rearing need not become authoritarian child rearing, it is possible to say that there may one day be a world where there will be no violations of human rights that will require others to courageously resist.
In the pursuit of safety, acceptance, and the public good, many atrocities have been committed in places such as Abu Ghraib and My Lai, where simple, generally harmless people became the wiling torturers and murderers of innocent people. Many claim to have just been following orders, which illustrates a disturbing trend in both the modern military and modern societies as a whole; when forced into an obedient mindset, many normal and everyday people can become tools of destruction and sorrow, uncaringly inflicting pain and death upon the innocent.
In “Four Human Rights Myths” Susan Marks discusses several conceptions (or misconceptions according to her) about human rights. She begins her paper with a case study of the 2011 London riots and how distinctively different is their coverage by the British prime minister and two scholars.
The attitudes toward Muslims today have not changed significantly since September 11, 2001. Any Muslim person; man, woman, or child is automatically suspect to instigate pandemonium, based strictly on their appearance and faith. Regardless of any evidence, reasoning, or perspective to the contrary, Muslims are seen as an enemy to United States citizens. The events of 9/11 left Muslim Americans unceremoniously lacking any respect from U.S. citizens regardless of any affiliation with Al-Qaida. We assess Muslim people with a common image of terror. We see the turban or hijab and assume a terrorist is hidden within its folds. Our mentalities inevitably come to a paralyzing halt, and we can never see through the fabric of the religious garments. When we see any one of these people, one person comes to mind, and that is the person who attacked our country. Today, in our nations cities and towns these arrogances still exist forcefully. Muslim people are still profoundly victimized and discriminated against by the means of assumption and negative mental sets. In the novel Zeitoun, author Dave Eggers takes time to assess the spitefulness encountered by Kathy and Abdulrahman Zeitoun, along with narrating the family’s endeavors with hurricane Katrina. Zeitoun presents racial differences in America, primarily in New Orleans, by discussing how they are created and the ways in which they exist today.
Chenoweth seeks to explain why “nonviolent resistance often succeeds compared to violent resistance, and under what conditions nonviolence succeeds or fails”. In recent years, organized groups conducting civil disobedience have been successful using nonviolent tactics such as, “boycotts, strikes, protests, and organized noncooperation”, in order to challenge the current power they were facing.1 Some successful examples of regimes that have been removed from power in recent years are, “Serbia (2000), Madagascar (2002), Georgia (2003), Ukraine (2004-2005), Lebanon (2005), and Nepal (2006)”.1 More recently in 2011 there were major uprising in both Egypt and Tunisia that were able to remove regimes that had been in power for decades, showing that nonviolence can work even if the regime has been in power for years.1
There have been many humanitarians that strive to help countries suffering with human right abuses. People think that the help from IGOs and NGOs will be enough to stop human rights violations. However, it hasn’t been effective. Every day, more and more human rights violations happen. The problem is escalating. People, including children, are still being forced to work to death, innocent civilians are still suffering the consequences of war, and families are struggling to stay firm together. Despite the efforts from the people, IGOs, and NGOs, In the year 2100, human rights abuse will not end.
The debate between silently obeying the law and loudly resisting in the face of injustice is one that has existed since the birth of this country. Those who resist see the obedient citizens as ignorant of what goes on around them. On the other hand, those that are obedient see resistors as radicals. I believe that resistance, whether it be peaceful or violent, is justified. In this paper, I will refer to works by Frederick Douglass, Stephanie Camp, and Deborah Gray White to show that resistance is important to challenge injustices, whether it be slavery in the 1800s or inaction against racism at colleges in 2015.
This kind of social issue is more evident when episodes with violence are trending topics. For example, during and after the September 11th’s attack in New York, many Arabs, Muslims, and South Asians, were subject to revisions and detentions because authorities had no clue about how those mentioned attacks were perpetrated and who did them. It was not just a matter concerning authorities, society in general condemned hardly to the entire eastern community, even though many of that people stopped, detained, and questioned, did not have any linkage with this terrorist event.
Throughout time, various groups of people have been subject to some form of tyranny; forced into lives that are not their own. They have been and are stripped of basic rights and the unique qualities that they may possess. One will do just about anything to acquire freedom, once they have become the victim of this type of control. They will fight a higher authority; they will find an escape from themselves and social criticism. Whatever it may be that holds them back, they will resist.
types of nonviolent actions from not just the leaders, but the ones who follow them, show a true
Not all rules are always agreed on by every individual. Oftentimes people tend to keep to themselves about their differentiating views, but others fight for what they believe in. In order to make any type of progress for a specific cause, effort and determination needs to be put into a person’s every attempt towards a positive development. Individuals who rebel against an authoritarian society are often faced with the challenges to fight for what they believe in in order to make a change.
Lyon, A., & Olson, L. C. (2011). Special Issue on Human Rights Rhetoric: Traditions of Testifying and Witnessing. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 41(3), 203-212.
Witkin, Gordon, and Jeannye Thornton. "Pride and Prejudice." U.S. News & World Report 15 Jul.1996. Rpt. in Ethnic Violence. Ed. Myra H. Immell. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2000. 74.
Our struggle is not easy, and we must not think of nonviolence as a safe way to fight oppression, the strength of nonviolence comes from your willingness to take personal risks in Kohlberg’s moral stage 5 moral rights and social contract is explained in this political analysis on governmental power and the antiapartheid and central America work when they led protest on campuses with hundreds being arrested and 130 campus withdrawals.
Political prisoners and criminals alike were subject to brutal conditions in the Soviet gulags at Kolyma in the 20th century. In Varlam Shalamov’s Kolyma Tales, the stories of many different prisoners are told and much is revealed about how humans react under these pressures, both naturally and socially. Being in an extreme environment not only takes a toll on one’s physical well-being, but on one’s mental and emotional state as well. The stories show that humans can be reduced to a fragile, animalistic state while in the Kolyma work camps because the extreme conditions force many men to focus solely on self-preservation.
While using violence to counteract violence may seem like a contradiction of sorts it is possibly the only recourse for the oppressed. It is impossible to create a formula of what works and doesn’t work in terms of emancipation because it is highly dependent on the particular situation but it is quite apparent that counterviolence is a necessary tool in this struggle. As we have seen, violence is not the only tool in liberation; the reconstruction of human ethics and perceptions is as, or more, important. Furthermore, it has been shown that sometimes nonviolence can create systemic change and that violence is not always applicable. Other times, violence is the only means to achieve true human emancipation.