“We shrink from change;
yet is there anything that can
come into being without it?”
Home on the Range
When I worked as a ranch hand in southeastern Montana, I heard the phrase “get a bigger hammer” used a number of times. Being an inexperienced and somewhat bewildered young man from the city, I had much to learn that first summer along the Powder River. I had to become skilled at maintenance work on the trucks, tractors, buck-rakes, combines, pick-ups, and other ranch machinery.
Left: The author as a
ranch hand in southeastern
Montana, circa 1964.
Sometimes, in trying to loosen a bolt, we’d hit the wrench with a hammer to break it free. If my boss saw me straining to turn the bolt the wrong way — thus tightening it further — he would smile and say, “Son: maybe what you need to do is get yourself a bigger hammer.” The point was, of course, that if something isn’t right, doing it in a bigger way or with more force won’t fix it.
So it is with how we see, describe, and respond to violence.
How’s it working?
By violence, I use the definition from the “Violence Integrative Prevention and Restoration (PAR) Model.” To wit: “Any action resulting from an intention to do harm or any action resulting from attempts to gain inappropriate power and control for self-serving gain which result in harm.” Such actions include war, genocide, child abuse, violent crime, torture, “honor killings” of women, rape, economic violence, bigotry, deprivation, slavery, neglect, and “ethnic cleansing.”
“How’s it working?” is, I think, a good question to ask when we want to know whether on not a technique, program, theory, approach, or process to reduce or end violence is effective. We could (and should) apply it to the application of the “punitive” approach — one humanity has commonly used for more than 10,000 years.
How is the “War on Terror” working? How is jailing 2.2 million people in the United States working? How is torture working? How is “three strikes you’re out” working? How is the concept of “enemies” working? How is building “Titan” prisons in the United Kingdom working? How is beating your kids to teach them to be better people working? How is political oppression in Burma, North Korea, and Zimbabwe working?
And violence costs us a fortune. In the United States alone, we spend more than US $1.2 trillion each year to deal with violence. There are clearly better things we could do with our financial treasure.
Terrorism and Success
For example, if terrorism really gets the results those engaged in terrorist acts want, then “get a bigger hammer” — do lots and lots more of it. Does it move the cause forward with a better quality of life for those whose lot it’s intended to improve, or does it make life even more miserable? Has “getting a bigger hammer worked?” If not, maybe all the parties to this absurd drama should try something else.
Time for a Change
It’s clear we need to make a change. The traditional punitive model rarely works and, when it does, it’s only over a short term. We need a better way — one that is evidence-based (thus successfully answering the question, “How’s it working?”) and free of political or religious bias. The PAR Model — built on a public health foundation — fits the bill. With preliminary results in, including startling results at a Level 5 (maximum security) prison, this approach is part of a revolution of promise and hope — one which rejects many conventional notions about violence. This new Model allows us to move from despair and powerlessness to effective restoration and healing.
0 comments:
Post a Comment