General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDepartment of Peace
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_PeaceRemember when Kucinich was mocked for proposing this during his campaign?
Now, had there been one, imagine the energy spent on searching for peaceful solutions to this latest crisis, as opposed to the energy spent trying to line up a military coalition and to determine which of various military options to implement.
When war is the only option, the only problem is articulating a rationale that is not utterly repellent.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)With nostalgia and regret.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)Hydra
(14,459 posts)Of course, Rule 34 is: War is good for business
I posit that peace is good for everyone's business, war is good for some people's business.
We're all about limiting happiness and prosperity for the non-"elite."
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)"Department of Peace", war is the only option that is ever considered?
That's a rhetorical question, BTW. I'm sure you actually do think that.
No doubt the Obama administration is lamenting the fact that peaceful solutions can never be considered, because there isn't an official department for dealing with them.
rug
(82,333 posts)Do you honestly think the resources spent on military options do not vastly outnumber the resources spent on peaceful options?
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)think that 'resources spent' precludes Obama from considering any option other than military options?
Do you think that anyone advising this president is barred from raising the topic of alternate options because this administration has to 'get their money's worth' from the military?
I don't think this comes down to official departments, or money spent.
It comes down to a POTUS having to make decisions that will impact not only his own citizens, but people the world over. I sincerely doubt that in making those decisions, he only considers the opinions of those whose department got more funding than another.
rug
(82,333 posts)If they advise against a strike it will be because it can't be pulled off successfully, not because it's the right thing to do.
There is an institutional mindset you ignore.
OTOH, maybe he gave the director of the Peace Corps a call.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)I do ignore the "institutional mindset", because that mindset changes with each new administration, and is impacted by the POTUS in office, as well as the party he represents.
But I won't bother pointing out that Obama's administration and W's administration are different. That will only upset the Obama = Bushco brigade, who have taken over this site.
rug
(82,333 posts)"Bureaucratic thought does not deny the possibility of the science of politics, but regards it as identical with the science of administration." - Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (1929)
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)Then there was no point in whining about how Kucinich's "Department of Peace" would have had any effect whatsoever, as the 'institutional mindset' would not have been changed in any event as a result thereof.
You walked right into that one. Nicely done.
rug
(82,333 posts)First, no one is whining, even if it makes you feel better to think that.
Second, you give yourself more credit than the evidence warrants. No one walked into anything.
Third, if you had the astuteness you think you have, you'd realize that one way to break the institutional mindset, is to restructure it. A new executive department with a purpose historically different from the ones that have existed for decades is a start in that direction.
One thing is clear. You have more interest in admiring what you think is a grand intellect than you do in political science, war, or peace.
I would add a smiley of my own but that is, after all, a particularly stupid way of expressing thought.
olddots
(10,237 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)I don't know how I will survive.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)a Department of Peace would address or attempt to address the continued pattern of which Afghanistan is the perfect example, nations invade, destroy then abandon them. No Peace department to assist with, you know, the peace.
And are you actually opposed to having a government agency that seeks to reduce violence here at home, domestic violence, petty crime, the Zimmerman type of shit, gang violence? This would be, in your view, a terrible thing to apply our energy toward? No one should learn mediation and we should not attempt to create a less violent culture?
I mean, your snark can be fun at times, but when you say you'd not like to see any work toward a less violent America and a more peaceful world, it becomes hard to fathom and lacks all entertainment value.
Earth_First
(14,910 posts)I spent two primary campaigns in New Hampshire working for the Kucinich campaign.
I'd do it a third, too...
brooklynite
(94,489 posts)...that will stop a dictator holding on to power from killing his own citizens.
I'm sure you don't need Government bureaucrats to do your work for you.
rug
(82,333 posts)Response to rug (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
rug
(82,333 posts)The DoS is not an instrument of peace; it is the instrument of advancing administration foreign policy goals. If those goals coincide with peace, it's a happy coincidence.
Response to rug (Reply #10)
Name removed Message auto-removed
rug
(82,333 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)who was awarded the peace prize on day one.
Not going to happen because the mic runs this gov't but, yes, if peace was where we put our energy and other resources, peace would stand a chance.
k&r
Kath1
(4,309 posts)I never even knew such a thing had been proposed until I saw a bumper sticker. Sadly, the military-industrial complex is still in control. There is a lot more money to be made in war than peace.
struggle4progress
(118,273 posts)of the citizenry, I don't think proposals like "Department of Peace" matter much
If everybody was required to do (say) two years of national service, with a regular reservist re-training for some years afterwards, and if military operations brought with them the possibility that many people could be called back into service, then there might be considerable public interest in policies emphasizing non-military resolutions
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)The focus of such a department would not be exclusively about foreign affairs and wars, but also about seeking to curtail violence in our own country, domestic violence, gun violence and to attempt to expand teaching of problem resolution and mediation techniques.
It is disheartening to see people who claim to care about such things as Trayvon being gunned down or a woman being beaten by her husband who mock the idea of attempting to bring nonviolence to the American cultural mindset. Fact is, such people do not give a fuck about people like Trayvon when they are not using them as rhetorical fodder. \
I guess it upsets them that Kucinich has advocated this. But he is far from alone.
9 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BILL TO ESTABLISH A CABINET LEVEL
DEPARTMENT OF PEACE and NONVIOLENCE
http://www.afdop.org/PDF/9ptsAFDOP.pdf