The Culture of Violence
Violence in schools has always been a concern to everyone involved: students, parents, teachers, administrators, and the entire public. One source of ongoing, ever-present violence in our schools that has been singled out, and rightly so, is bullying. This is where one student, or a group of students, forces their will on other students, often through violence. Those students being bullied often feel powerless, and, on occasion, have struck out against those bullying them and those who have allowed them to be bullied. Columbine is the best, and the most tragic, example.
Bullying can take many forms, from the stereotypical thug to the preppy students who simply believe they have a right to be at the front of the lunch line and dare anyone to tell them no. However, the results are the same. Students are denied their equality, and often their dignity, through an act of force, either threatened, implied, or actual, by others.
Many solutions to bullying have been proposed, such as having students discuss their concerns with peers as well as trusted adults, reporting bullying, staying in groups, or learning self-defense. Arming teachers has even been considered. All of these solutions may have merit, but ultimately, they will all fail. They will fail because they fail to address the real problem, and that is that we live in a violent society that ultimately rewards violence. America embraces a culture of violence, and in this culture violence, virtually any violence, can ultimately be justified.
Everywhere in our society violence is accepted, if not encouraged. This includes military incursions, the death penalty, handgun ownership (ostensibly for self-defense), spanking children, and corporal punishment in our schools. Indeed, there are those who argue that the problem with our society is that we are not violent enough. Children aren’t hit enough when they are young, prisons don’t kill enough prisoners, and our military is not willing to wipe out entire cultures if necessary.
The message is clear, or at least it should be. It is not violence that’s the problem; it’s the ways in which that violence is applied that is the problem. And for children, the finer nuances can be very difficult, if not completely impossible, to understand. For instance, it’s not acceptable to hit someone who cuts in front of you in line, but it is acceptable to hit someone who repeatedly says things you don’t like, but probably not right away. If you’ve put up with it for an unspecified amount of time, then it is acceptable. But what if a kid cuts in front of you while saying bad things? Maybe the child who strikes another for “mouthing” him or her will be punished by the school, but the violence will be justifiable to that child’s friends, and quite possibly her or his parents, and definitely to that child. In short, retaliation is acceptable. Preemptive strikes are even acceptable.
Until we find some other way of solving our problems than through violence, then somebody will always end up on the bottom. And that somebody will not like it. We shouldn’t be surprised when that somebody strikes back, even if we don’t deem it to be appropriate.
The solution is that we need to teach non-violence. We need to teach our children that violence is not acceptable and will not be tolerated in any form, ultimately not even in self-defense. This would be a radical shift from contemporary teaching. In history, for instance, we would need to teach that war is not something to be glorified, but to be studied as a way to prevent it. That war is the ultimate human failure. We would need to teach that chances of birth are not the basis for superiority. That greed is wrong. That nothing can justify harming someone else, or denying those things basic for survival, including the freedom from fear, to anybody. We would need to teach that everybody is imbued with a social responsibility that cannot be shirked. Admittedly, this will not be an easy task. And, perhaps the hardest of them all, if we don’t want our children to be violent, then we must not be violent, either, both in action and in thought.
There are many who will say that teaching non-violence in a violent world is naive. And certainly we cannot simply abandon all of our defenses on the hope that others will be non-violent, too. However, unless we go after the root of the problem, unless that is our ultimate goal, then all we are doing is teaching children to be appropriately violent, not to be non-violent. And not that violence is ultimately wrong. And if that is what we are teaching, then we shouldn’t be surprised when violence continues.
Bullying can take many forms, from the stereotypical thug to the preppy students who simply believe they have a right to be at the front of the lunch line and dare anyone to tell them no. However, the results are the same. Students are denied their equality, and often their dignity, through an act of force, either threatened, implied, or actual, by others.
Many solutions to bullying have been proposed, such as having students discuss their concerns with peers as well as trusted adults, reporting bullying, staying in groups, or learning self-defense. Arming teachers has even been considered. All of these solutions may have merit, but ultimately, they will all fail. They will fail because they fail to address the real problem, and that is that we live in a violent society that ultimately rewards violence. America embraces a culture of violence, and in this culture violence, virtually any violence, can ultimately be justified.
Everywhere in our society violence is accepted, if not encouraged. This includes military incursions, the death penalty, handgun ownership (ostensibly for self-defense), spanking children, and corporal punishment in our schools. Indeed, there are those who argue that the problem with our society is that we are not violent enough. Children aren’t hit enough when they are young, prisons don’t kill enough prisoners, and our military is not willing to wipe out entire cultures if necessary.
The message is clear, or at least it should be. It is not violence that’s the problem; it’s the ways in which that violence is applied that is the problem. And for children, the finer nuances can be very difficult, if not completely impossible, to understand. For instance, it’s not acceptable to hit someone who cuts in front of you in line, but it is acceptable to hit someone who repeatedly says things you don’t like, but probably not right away. If you’ve put up with it for an unspecified amount of time, then it is acceptable. But what if a kid cuts in front of you while saying bad things? Maybe the child who strikes another for “mouthing” him or her will be punished by the school, but the violence will be justifiable to that child’s friends, and quite possibly her or his parents, and definitely to that child. In short, retaliation is acceptable. Preemptive strikes are even acceptable.
Until we find some other way of solving our problems than through violence, then somebody will always end up on the bottom. And that somebody will not like it. We shouldn’t be surprised when that somebody strikes back, even if we don’t deem it to be appropriate.
The solution is that we need to teach non-violence. We need to teach our children that violence is not acceptable and will not be tolerated in any form, ultimately not even in self-defense. This would be a radical shift from contemporary teaching. In history, for instance, we would need to teach that war is not something to be glorified, but to be studied as a way to prevent it. That war is the ultimate human failure. We would need to teach that chances of birth are not the basis for superiority. That greed is wrong. That nothing can justify harming someone else, or denying those things basic for survival, including the freedom from fear, to anybody. We would need to teach that everybody is imbued with a social responsibility that cannot be shirked. Admittedly, this will not be an easy task. And, perhaps the hardest of them all, if we don’t want our children to be violent, then we must not be violent, either, both in action and in thought.
There are many who will say that teaching non-violence in a violent world is naive. And certainly we cannot simply abandon all of our defenses on the hope that others will be non-violent, too. However, unless we go after the root of the problem, unless that is our ultimate goal, then all we are doing is teaching children to be appropriately violent, not to be non-violent. And not that violence is ultimately wrong. And if that is what we are teaching, then we shouldn’t be surprised when violence continues.
posted by The Holy Grail Press at 7:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home