Zlo nasilja u etničkim sukobima

ZLO NASILJA u etničkim sukobima Poraz

moralno-povijesnog imperativa: nikad više

Zorica MAROS / Darko TOMAŠEVIĆ (ur.)

ZLO NASILJA u etničkim sukobima

Zorica MAROS / Darko TOMAŠEVIĆ (ur.)

ISBN 978-953-241-517-9

Sarajevo: Katolički bogoslovni fakultet, 2016.

Zagreb: Glas Koncila, 2016.

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA. PORAZ MORALNO-POVIJESNOG IMPERATIVA: NIKAD VIŠE

Niz: Urednik niza: Urednici: Lektura: Korektura: Priprema za tisak: Tisak: Naklada: Izdavač: Suizdavač

Teološke teme - 5 Darko Tomašević Zorica Maros, Darko Tomašević Marija Znika Oliver Jerković Denis Dobrovoljski CPU Printing company d.o.o., Sarajevo 300 komada Katolički bogoslovni fakultet Univerziteta u Sarajevu

Glas Koncila, Kaptol 8, Zagreb Tel.: 01/4874 315; faks: 4874 319; e-pošta: prodaja@ glas-koncila.hr; www.glas-koncila.hr Za suizdavača: Ivan Miklenić ISBN 978-953-241-517-9 CIP zapis dostupan u računalnom katalogu Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu pod brojem 000945574

CIP - Katalogizacija u publikaciji Nacionalna i univerzitetska biblioteka Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo 316.482:323.1(063)(082) 2-67(063)(082)

SIMPOZIJ Zlo nasilja u etničkim sukobima. Poraz moralno-povijesnog imperativa: Nikad više (2015 ; Sarajevo) Zbornik radova / Simpozij Zlo nasilja u etničkim sukobima. Poraz moralno-povijesnog imperativa: Nikad više, Sarajevo, 1. listopada 2015. ; uredili Zorica Maros, Darko Tomašević. - Sarajevo : Katolički bogoslovni fakultet ; Zagreb : Glas Koncila, 2016. - 208 str. ; 21 cm. - (Niz Teološke teme ; 5) Bibliografija i bilješke uz tekst.

ISBN 978-9958-747-50-2 (Katolički bogoslovni fakultet) 1. Maros, Zorica COBISS.BH-ID 23392006

Zbornik radova Simpozij

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA. PORAZ MORALNO-POVIJESNOG IMPERATIVA: NIKAD VIŠE Sarajevo, 1. listopada 2015.

Uredili: Zorica Maros Darko Tomašević Sarajevo: Katolički bogoslovni fakultet Zagreb: Glas Koncila

2016.

SADRŽAJ Program i sažeci sa simpozija ...................................................................... 7

Predgovor (Darko Tomašević) .................................................................. 11

Uvod (Zorica Maros) ..................................................................................... 13

James KEENAN Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom ....................................................................................... 17 Mario BERNADIĆ Između dramatične sadašnjosti i optimistične budućnosti.

Društveni sukobi u širem kontekstu teorije evolucije .......... 29

Robert PETKOVŠEK Hermeneutika moralno-povijesnog imperativa: Nikada više zla nasilja! ........................................................................... 45

Pavle MIJOVIĆ Moderni identitet i perceptivna patologija: Uvjet mogućosti moći ............................................................................. 71

George R. WILKES Interreligious dialogue and the memory of atrocity ................. 91 Fahira FEJZIĆ ČENGIĆ Od predrasuda i nasilja do inteligencije zla pomoću medija ....113

Ivan ŠTUHEC Sekularno društvo i država kao jamci ili razaratelji religioznosti ... 143

Ivan ŠARČEVIĆ Intelektualac između fanatizma i cinizma ................................... 167 Pogovor (Zorica Maros) ............................................................................. 201 5

6

Program i sažeci sa simpozija Radi preglednijeg uvida i dobivanja jasnije ideje kako se znanstveni skup odvijao, donosimo program održanog skupa.

1. listopada 2015., četvrtak

16,00 – 17,30 – Registracija

17,30 – 17,50 – Otvaranje: Pozdravi

17,50 – 18,15 – Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom – dr. sc. James Keenan (Boston College, SAD) 18,15 – 18,45 – Diskusija 19,00

– Večera

2. listopada, petak

9,00 – 9,20

9,20 – 9,40 9,40 – 10,00

– Misliti zlo? Simone Weil i Hannah Arendt – dr. sc.

Ante Vučković (Katolički bogoslovni fakultet, Split)

– Između dramatične sadašnjosti i optimistične budućnosti. Društveni konflikti u širem kontekstu teorije evolucije – dr. sc. Mario Bernadić (Katolički bogoslovni fakultet, Sarajevo) – Hermeneutics of the imperative „Never again!“ – dr. sc. Robert Petkovšek (Teološki fakultet, Ljubljana)

10,00 – 10,30 – Pauza

7

10,30 – 10,50 – The Violent Logic of the Successful Secessionist Ethno-National State – dr. sc. Robert M. Hayden (University of Pittsburgh, SAD) 10,50 – 11,10 – Nacionalni i konfesionalni identiteti u BiH i problemi socijalne rekonstrukcije postkonfliktnog društva – dr. sc. Dino Abazović (Fakultet političkih nauka, Sarajevo) 11,10 – 11,30 – Moderni identitet i perceptivna patologija: uvjet mogućosti moći – dr. sc. Pavle Mijović (Katolički bogoslovni fakultet, Sarajevo) 11,30 – 12,00 – Diskusija 13,00

– Ručak

15,00 – 15,20 – Interreligious dialogue and the memory of atrocity – dr. sc. George R. Wilkes (University of Edinburgh)

15,20 – 15,40 – Kolektivna memorija - između viktimologije i transformacije društva: narativi Crkava i vjerskih zajednica u BiH – dr. sc. Zlatiborka Popov Momčinović (Filozofski fakultet Istočno Sarajevo) 15,40 – 16,00 – Politička hermeneutika Moltmanna i Metza kao rekonstrukcija nacionalno–religijskih amalgama i politizacije religije – dr. sc. Nikola Knežević (Centar za istraživanje religije, politike i društva, Novi Sad, Srbija) 16,00 – 16,30 – Diskusija 16,30 – 17,00 – Pauza

17,00 – 17,20 – Nasilje, identitet i masmediji – dr. sc. Fahira Fejzić Čengić (Fakultet političkih nauka, Sarajevo)

8

17,20 – 17,40 – Nasilje i mir: utopijsko mišljenje i promjena zbilje – dr. sc. Nerzuk Ćurak (Fakultet političkih nauka, Sarajevo) 17,40 – 18,00 – Dijalogom k izgradnji kolektivne svijesti o masovnim stradanjima – dr. sc. Zehra Alispahić (Fakultet islamskih nauka, Sarajevo) 18,00 – 18,30 – Diskusija 19,00

– Večera

3. listopada, subota

9,00 – 9,20 9,20 – 9,40

9,40 – 10,00

– Sekularna država kao jamac ili razarač religioznosti – dr. sc. Ivan Štuhec (Teološki fakultet, Ljubljana)

– Intelektualac između fanatizma i cinizma – dr. sc. Ivan Šarčević (Franjevačka teologija, Sarajevo) – Diskusija

10,00 – 10,30 – Pauza i osvježenje 11,00 – 12,30 – Završna rasprava 13,00 14,00

– Ručak

– Posjet Tunelu spasa

9

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIÄŒKIM SUKOBIMA

10

Predgovor

Predgovor

Pisati o nasilju i zlu koje ga obujmljuje nije nimalo zahvalno. Puno je ugodnije pisati o dobru i nenasilju, o ljubavi i praštanju.

Međutim, život u Bosni i Hercegovini protkan je i jednim i drugim; i dobrom i zlom, i nasiljem i praštanjem. Jedno i drugo su se kroz povijest izmjenjivali, a izmjenjuju se i danas. Zbornik radova, a prije svega simpozij koji je održan o temi zla nasilja, pokušaj je Katoličkog bogoslovnog fakulteta u Sarajevu da sa znanstvene strane pokuša dati odgovore zašto se zlo događalo i događa u bosanskohercegovačkom društvu, a ujedno da dâ i neke smjernice kako bi zla i nasilja bilo što manje. Može se činiti da je to utopistički posao budući da prestanak zla i nasilja ne ovisi o izvrsnosti znanstvenih pisanih radova, nego prije svega o čovjeku i njegovu srcu gdje se mora roditi odluka o prestanku činjenja zla i nasilja. U tom procesu odluke nečinjenja zla i nasilja, znanstveni, pisani radovi mogu itekako pomoći. Svojom argumentacijom mogu dovesti do toga da razuman čovjek odluči prestati činiti zlo. Jasno je da činjenje zla i nasilja nema previše dodirnih točaka s razumnošću i njih najčešće čini nerazuman čovjek ili čovjek koji je razum potisnuo u stranu.

Međutim, nakon počinjenog zla razuman čovjek može, na temelju argumentiranih znanstvenih radova i činjenica, odlučiti prestati činiti zlo i nasilje.

Ako ovaj zbornik bude barem jednoj osobi pomogao da uvidi svoj grijeh nasilja i ako barem jednoj osobi pomogne da dođe do odluke ne činiti više zlo, onda je tiskanje ovog zbornika ispunilo u potpunosti svoju svrhu.

Jedna izreka kaže da postoji sedam grijeha koji uzrokuju društveno nasilje: bogatstvo bez rada; zadovoljstvo bez savjesti; znanje bez osobnosti; trgovina bez morala; nauka bez humanosti; vjera bez žrtvovanja; politika bez moralnih vrlina. Iako ovaj zbornik ponajviše govori o nasilju koje se dogodilo tijekom rata u Bosni i Hercegovini, ipak se ne smiju zanemariti ni drugi oblici nasilja.

11

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

Najporaznije bi bilo kad bi čovjek zatvorio oči pred nasiljem i zlom i pravio se da se oni ne događaju; ili još gore kad bi zlo i nasilje gledao kao nešto pozitivno. Prvi korak u iskorjenjivanju zla i nasilja je istinoljubivost. A njoj se ovim zbornikom želimo približiti.

Darko Tomašević, dekan KBF-a

12

Uvod

Uvod Društveno zlo – naša odgovornost (Uvodni govor dr. sc. Zorice Maros na simpoziju)

Ovaj simpozij pod nazivom „Zlo nasilja u etničkim sukobima. Poraz moralno-povijesnog imperativa: Nikad više“ dio je trogodišnjeg programa koji je započeo prošle akademske godine pod generalnim naslovom „Od rata do pomirenja. Doprinos vjerskih zajednica ozdravljenju i obnovi društva“. Svake je godine planirano šest tribina, s po dva uvodničara, namijenjenih prvenstveno studentima, ali otvorenih i svim građanima, te jedan ovakav međunarodni znanstveni skup. Prva godina, koja će završiti ovim skupom, tematizirala je „Nasilje u etničkim sukobima“, sljedeća, koja počinje s tribinama u studenom, posvećena je temi pravednosti, a treća bi bila promišljanje o mogućnostima oprosta, pomirenja, ozdravljenja i obnove društva. Motive i ciljeve programa pokušat ću približiti raščlanjivanjem generalnog naslova.

Od rata do pomirenja

Iskustvo rata, pretrpljena i počinjena zla dovela su našu zemlju u nimalo zavidnu situaciju. Rat je kao oružani fizički sukob prestao, ali je podmuklo prebačen na politički, kulturni, gospodarstveni, ekonomski pa i etičko–moralni nivo. U svim društvenim aspektima dominiraju problemi i nepravde koji razaraju našu društvenu scenu i onemogućuju minimalnu kvalitetu ljudskog življenja i konstruktivnog suživota. Dugogodišnja, unutarnje-vanjska politička manipulacija, dovela je ovu zemlju na sam rub ne samo materijalnog nego prvenstveno moralno–duhovnog siromaštva, i to kroz razna i nečovječna poniženja ljudskog dostojanstva. Cilj programa nije odrediti uzroke rata, nije identificirati žrtve i zločince, niti pravno uspostavljati krivnju. To trebaju raditi političke 13

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

institucije. Cilj je ukazati i „demontirati“ ono što teoretičari nazivaju „strukturama zla“. Nasilje onih razmjera koje smo imali u ratu omogućili su točno određeni društveno–psihološki mehanizmi.

Isti ti mehanizmi, mutatis mutandis, podržavaju i ovu društveno– političku shizofreniju, od koje proračunatu korist imaju samo neki beskrupulozni demagozi. Cilj programa je, dakle, prepoznati to zlo kako na njega sami ne bismo pristali, priznati ga kako bismo ga se oslobodili, osuditi ga kako se ne bi uvuklo u ljestvicu naših vrijednosti.

Doprinos vjerskih zajednica Jedna od demografskih posljedica rata su i nove, homogene, jednonacionalne i jednoreligijske sredine. U jednoj radijskoj emisiji Slobodne Europe, u veljači ove godine, završio je srednjoškolac Ante, Mostarac koji nikad nije bio na Starom mostu jer se plašio onih preko, riječima da se „Bošnjake može prepoznati po boji kože i teksturi lica“. Na društvenim je mrežama ta, „duboko rasistička izjava“ izazvala niz zgražajućih osuda, ružnih i ponižavajućih riječi, nacionalističkih poruka. Na prvi pogled i površan pristup čak je i ohrabrujuće to što su se građani konačno probudili i zgrozili.

Ante je postao javna sramota, i to sramota „jednog naroda“, kako se kod nas obično ne generalizira, nego „nacionalizira“. Ali, srednjoškolaca poput Ante Bosna i Hercegovina je prepuna na sve tri strane. „Štancaju“ se industrijskom proizvodnjom, prvenstveno indoktrinacijom kroz školski sustav. Antina je sramota, poniženje onih koji su to od njega napravili. Antin je strah od drugoga njegova osobna tragedija, ali naša odgovornost i krivnja. Cilj programa je i vidjeti mogu li vjernici različitih religija, a iz izvora nekih nepromjenjivih i univerzalnih vrijednosti, i uz suradnju s društvenim i humanističkim znanostima, potaknuti na zajedničko djelovanje i time smanjiti distancu među ljudima koju je stvorila podjela društva na žrtve i agresore?

14

Uvod

O ozdravljenju i obnovi društva Iako neke ozbiljnije psihološke studije poriču da društvo kao cjelina može biti mentalno bolesno, uzimajući u obzir ovo naše, dajem si tu slobodu, možda neutemeljenu no ipak opravdanu, da ih stavim pod upitnik. To što neko društvo stvara gore opisane srednjoškolce, još uvijek nije, uvjetno rečeno, znak mentalne patologije. Ali, zabrinjavajuće je i simptomatično što si to isto društvo koje ih je „stvorilo“ daje za pravo da ih zdušno osuđuje za ono što su postali. Na liniji one Nietzscheove: „Tjeraš me da gazim po blatu i onda se čudiš što sam uprljan!“ Kad bi se samo neki izolirani pojedinci ponašali na način na koji se ponaša dobar dio našeg društva, po malo stručnijim parametrima ozbiljno bi se posumnjalo u njihovo mentalno zdravlje i vjerojatno bi završili na prisilnoj hospitalizaciji usmjerenoj resocijalizaciji i vraćanju kontakta sa stvarnošću (Šušnjić). Ali, s obzirom na to da je kod nas riječ o većini, ti su, zdravom razumu zabrinjavajući simptomi, inercijom mase čak ušli u ljestvicu vrijednosti. Erich Fromm, u knjizi Zdravo društvo, kaže: „Činjenica da milioni ljudi imaju iste poroke, ne pretvara te poroke u vrline. Činjenica da su im mnoge greške zajedničke, ne čini greške istinitima. Činjenica da milioni ljudi pate od istih oblika mentalne patologije, ne čini ih zdravima.“ Mi stariji, generacije koje su „ratovale“, imali smo bar sreću da i u nečovječnim ratnim uvjetima sretnemo i upoznamo onu izvornu, temeljnu ljudskost. Ljude koji su se žrtvovali za susjede ili bar pružali onaj Franklov „prkos duha“ toj neljudskoj situaciji. U njima smo imali potvrdu da je svijet ljepši od onoga kakvim se pokazuje. Da su ljudi ipak bolji od onoga što nam situacija omogućuje da vidimo. Novijim je generacijama sustavno, planski i proračunato ukradena i ta mogućnost da svijet i drugoga vide drukčijim od interpretacije koju su im nametnuli. Bivši su moćnici, bivši državni sustavi, kontrolirali ponašanje građana, ono što ljudi čine, današnji upravljaju emocijama ljudi i onim što oni misle. Oblikuju svijest, misao, savjest. Britanski književnik George Orwel u romanu 15

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

„1984“ kaže da moćnici kontroliraju mišljenje tako što nam razbiju duh u komade kako bi ga sastavili u željeni oblik. Isus je upozoravao učenike da dobro paze što i kako slušaju, upozoravao ih na lažne proroke, na one koji „duh“ ubijaju. Time je zapravo upozoravao upravo na interpretaciju stvarnosti. A interpretacija nije promatranje svijeta kakav jest, nego njegova nametnuta konstrukcija.

Cilj programa je ukazati na tu ideološku konstrukciju kako bismo, iz temeljnog osjećaja građanske i vjerničke odgovornosti, pružili bar taj franklovski „otpor duha“, ili onu Jasperovu „duhovnu emigraciju“.

Zaključno: Suočiti se s prošlošću, napraviti iskorak iz vlastitih slabosti, zakoračiti u prostor unutarnje slobode preuzimajući odgovornost za ono što smo činili i, možda čak važnije, preuzeti odgovornost za ono što sad ne činimo, temeljni su uvjeti obnove našeg društava i, rekla bih, naše ljudskosti. Prihvatiti identitet umjesto identifikacije, ljudskost umjesto pripadnosti, solidarnost u čovječnosti umjesto isključivosti tabora, mislim da je to minimum koji dugujemo Anti kao simbolu svih naših srednjoškolaca. Dužni smo im duboku ispriku za strah i neznanje u kojem su odrasli.

Ispriku ne samo za ono što su postali nego i za ono što su mogli, a nisu! Antina je zadnja izjava, meni osobno najdirljivija, da mu je „bilo lijepo“ s druge strane i da se „ipak nije osjećao drugačijim“, poraz našeg intelekta i neizreciva ljaga naše ljudskosti!

Suočavanje s prošlošću i preuzimanje odgovornosti za sadašnjost jest i minimum iskrenog, a ne politički isprogramiranog, odavanja počasti samim žrtvama rata i nasilja. Jer, na koncu, najhumanija, ljudski konstruktivna počast koju žrtvama možemo odati jest raditi na izgradnji svijeta u kojemu njihova smrt neće biti ponovljena! Ovaj je program, koji i vi činite mogućim, naš mali doprinos u izgradnji takva svijeta. I hvala vam na tome.

16

James KEENAN

Boston College Stokes N331, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 james.keenan.2@bc.edu

Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom Summary

Contemporary studies of prisoners in the United States show inevitably high rates recidivism. Prisoners ingrained by vicious habits that shape them in prison often hope that the habits they learned in prison would not be with them when they were out of prison. Prisoners leaving prison needed to recognize an appreciation of the on-going effects of what was learned in the culture of violent prison life.

I would call these contexts like prison, or violent ghettos, vicious structures of social formation.

We need to recognize that anthropologies are inevitably embodied and that questions of repetitive returns to senseless violence are not only indications of civil unrest, but also indications of vicious habits socially appropriated. Just as personal habits are not broken by acts of the will or by sloganeering like „Never Again“, neither are habits ingrained in a society broken by acts of the will alone; rather social reform requires corrective social practices.

This paper looks at the how recent developments in the socially-oriented theories of virtue ethics might be appropriate contexts for developing a socially responsible strategy to respond to barbaric ideologies interested in correcting the past.

Key words: vicious structures of social formation, embodied anthropologies, acquired vices, social practices, prison life.

I believe that there are two major concerns in this symposium. First it acknowledges that the violence in ethnic conflicts continues and repeats itself. In the invitation, the organizers note that these conflicts „represent a major challenge to academic circles, not only because of their barbarity, but because of their 17

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

potential for repetition, since they often present themselves as correcting the past“. Second, the organizers want us „to uncover the mechanisms that influence ideologies of conflict that persist in different forms and at different levels, even after the end of the conflict“.

In order to not only uncover but also to remedy these causes, I want to suggest how recent work in virtue ethics provides us a way of understanding the social structures that promote or inhibit moral growth as well as the attendant practices and habits that are cultivated in that structure. I do this because we need to recognize that anthropologies are inevitably embodied and that questions of repetitive returns to senseless violence are not only indications of civil unrest, but also indications of vicious habits socially appropriated.

Just as personal habits are not broken simply by acts of the will or by sloganeering like „Never Again“, neither are habits ingrained in a society broken by acts of the will alone; rather social reform requires corrective social practices. This paper looks at the how recent developments in the socially-oriented theories of virtue ethics might be appropriate contexts for developing a socially responsible strategy to respond to barbaric ideologies interested in correcting the past.

I also want to provide a parallel concern. Contemporary studies of prisoners in the United States show inevitably high rates recidivism. Prisoners ingrained by vicious habits that shape them in prison often hope that the habits they learned in prison would not be with them when they left prison. They needed to recognize an appreciation of the on-going effects of what was learned in the culture of violent prison life. I would call these contexts like prison, or violent ghettos, vicious structures of social formation. I imagine one could say that these vicious structures of social formation are formed during ethnic conflicts.

Before I begin, then, let me say a few words about imprisonment in the United States just so that you can understand why 18

James KEENAN, „Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom“, 17-28

we American ethicists write on the topic and why I believe our prisons is a topic that has relevant analogies to those issues developed here at this conference. So first, some general facts.1 • From 1980 to 2008, the number of people incarcerated in America quadrupled-from roughly 500,000 to 2.3 million people.

• Today, the US is 5% of the World population and has 25% of world prisoners.

• Combining the number of people in prison and jail with those under parole or probation supervision, 1 in every 31 adults, or 3.2 percent of the population is under some form of correctional control.

Our imprisonment policy is rife with racial disparities.

America’s tangible and deeply rooted racism is most evident in our imprisonment policies. Consider these facts.

• African Americans now constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million incarcerated population.

• African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites.

• Together, African American and Hispanics comprised 58% of all prisoners in 2008, even though African Americans and Hispanics make up approximately one quarter of the US population.

• One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime.

• 1 in 100 African American women are in prison.

A final statistic highlights how if a white young male and an African-American young male are arrested, the likelihood of their eventual imprisonment is radically different: Nationwide, AfricanAmericans represent 26% of juvenile arrests, 44% of youth who are detained, 46% of the youth who are judicially waived to crimi1

„Criminal Justice Fact Sheet“, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet.

19

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

nal court, and 58% of the youth admitted to state prisons (Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice).

The imprisonment policy in the United States is commonly referred to as Mass Incarceration. Mass incarceration has led, however, to more crime than less. The National Institute on Justice reports that if you go to prison once, you are more likely to return to prison. Returning to prison, which we call recidivism is a trademark of mass incarceration.

• Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.

• Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.

• Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.2 Why do prisons turn citizens into reciduvidist offenders?

Allison Schrager explains: „Prison obliterates your earnings potential. Being a convicted felon disqualifies you from certain jobs, housing, or voting…. each year in prison reduces the odds of postrelease employment by 24% and increases the odds you’ll live on public assistance. Time in prison also lowers the odds you’ll get or stay married. Being in prison and out of the labor force degrades legitimate skills and exposes you to criminal skills and a criminal network. This makes crime a more attractive alternative upon release, even if you run a high risk of returning to prison.“3 I cannot go into details here, but the prison system indelibly forms the character of its prisoners for the worse. Whatever crime leads to an arrest, once the arrest happens a repeating set 2

3

20

„Recidivism“, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE, http://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/pages/welcome.aspx. See also The Bureau of Justice Statistics, http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=17; Matthew R. DUROSE - Alexia D. COOPER - Howard N. SNYDER, „Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010“, United States Department of Justice, April 2014, http://www.bjs.gov/content/ pub/pdf/rprts05p0510.pdf.

Allison SCHRAGER, „In America, mass incarceration has caused more crime than it’s prevented“, Quartz July 22, 2015., http://qz.com/458675/in-america-mass-incarceration-has-caused-more-crime-than-its-prevented/.

James KEENAN, „Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom“, 17-28

of fairly life-shaping influences on the prisoner, from the arrest, court proceedings, and public humiliation to treatment by guards and fellow inmates to hearings before disciplinary and parole boards, the entire social structure creates a context where worse, deeper, and more profoundly affecting vices are formed, nurtured and sustained. The violence alone in American prisons helps explain a part of the social structure that erodes the moral character of the imprisoned American.4 This background helps explains why American Catholic Theological Ethicists today write on responding to the social structures of vicious formation. Some of their work I turn to now, because it might show us the importance of socially-grounded theories in virtue ethics.

Years ago Judith Kay, a professor of theological ethics who has worked in prisons and in criminal justice, raised the question of vices embedded in a people: how do you help them to get rid of them. Actually she framed it in terms of the people of Israel. Yah4

On the prevalence of gangs and violence in US prisons, see Graeme WOOD, „How Gangs Took Over Prisons“, The Atlantic Monthly, October 2014., http:// www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/how-gangs-took-overprisons/379330/; See also that „many prisons host conditions that are recipes for violence. Such conditions include overcrowding, insufficient staff training, excessive solitary confinement, insecure facilities, mistreatment of mentally ill inmates, policies that weaken family ties, a culture of disrespect between staff and prisoners, and little accountability for wardens.“ „Inmates experience rape by other prisoners and staff, gang rape, gang violence, and excessive force from officers—often with no reliable procedure to report violence. At times, inmates are mistreated by the same staff members who process their complaint reports. Unfortunately, since there is no uniform way to track violent trends in prisons, there are no accurate measures of violence in prisons—suggesting that the public may know only a fraction of how many inmates are suffering rape and assault.“ http://www.justicefellowship.org/ prison-violence; on the causes, effects, and prevention of violence in prisons, see https://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/188706/ causes2.pdf; on a „culture of violence“ in California prisons, see: http://www. sbsun.com/general-news/20150630/prison-law-office-alleges-culture-ofviolence-in-san-bernardino-county-jail; on better alternatives in Finland and Norway, see: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/ why-scandinavian-prisons-are-superior/279949/; http://www.theguardian. com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-prison-inmates-treated-like-people.

21

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

weh got the Jews out of Egypt but while they were in Israel they became oppressed. Inevitably Israel internalized that oppression and that internalized oppression materialized in some acquired vicious habits. For instance, for Israel to be conquered, Israel needed to be divided. In time, Israel oppressed internalized their being divided and divisiveness became a habit, a vicious one, for them, not only in Egypt, but in their return to Israel.

Kay examines a number of vices that result from various forms of oppression. She notes for instance that in a class-oriented society that continually reinforces the notion that one’s „ability“ is what leads a person to success, in that society, manual laborers „ascribe their lack of social standing to their own inability and“ subsequently, „develop habits of inadequacy and worthlessness“. Having vicious habits affect not only how we feel and act, but also how we understand and see reality. Of course this echoes the insight of Aristotle that we see as we are. Thus Kay adds, „Internalized oppression, like vicious habits, prevents accurate assessments of reality“.5 There is much else that we can take from Kay. For instance, she reminds that these vices that are acquired through oppression are „acquired involuntarily and sustained mindlessly“.6 As habits they do not happen overnight. Through a variety of influences and daily commerce, habits of oppression are formed and nurtured. Quoting a colleague, she writes: „No oppressed group can remain immune to the institutionally and socially empowered untruths which purport to ‘justify’ its oppression.“7 Kay ‘s insights into oppressed persons as collectives certainly have resonance for us at this symposium. Many of the vicious habits appropriated by people in conflict are not developed freely, nor are they developed intentionally. Moreover, these habits impact a people’s read on reality thus giving warrant to perpetuate a variety of 5 6 7

22

Judith W. KAY, „Getting Egypt out of the People: Aquinas’ Contributions to Liberation“, G. Simon HARAK, Aquinas and Empowerment: Classical Ethics for Ordinary Lives (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1996.), 1-46, at 23.

J. W. KAY, „Getting Egypt out of the People“, 26.

Erica SHEROVER-MARCUSE, Emancipation and Consciousness (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986.) 4.

James KEENAN, „Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom“, 17-28

courses of harmful actions.

Still, Kay offers us great hope when she turns to Thomas Aquinas’ understanding of virtue as second nature, because there she argues that we help the oppressed „to identify and dismantle their internalized oppression“.8 For Aquinas virtue and vice are „second nature habits“. (See Summa Theologiae I-II 56.5; 78.2).

She writes that as such virtues and vices are respectively right - and wrong-making habits that respectively either conform to our true (good) human nature or are contrary to our good human nature. As second nature they cannot replace nor destroy our original, essential nature. As Thomas writes in Summa Theologiae I-II 53.1.ad1: „as stated in Ethic. Vii. 10, a habit is like a second nature, and yet it falls short of it. And so it is that while the nature of a thing cannot in any way be taken away from a thing, a habit can be removed, though with difficulty.“9 Kay writes: „Internalized oppression is an aspect of second nature. Just as people do not become their good or bad habits essentially, so people do not become their internalized oppression essentially, although it may greatly restrict their functioning. People with bad habits are potentially free to develop virtues that enable them to act and think more in tune with their nature.“10 Finally Kay wisely notes that for Thomas, within the concept of second nature, he differentiates virtues from vices inasmuch as virtues conform to human nature and vices are alien to it. Kay writes: „Humans are flexible, internalized oppression is rigid; humans are dynamic, internalized oppression is static; humans create new solutions to old problems, internalized oppression perpetuates ineffec8 9

J. W. KAY, „Getting Egypt out of the People“, 29.

AQUINAS, Summa Theologiae I-II 53.1.ad1; Ad primum ergo dicendum quod, sicut dicitur in VII Ethic., habitus similitudinem habet naturae, deficit tamen ab ipsa. Et ideo, cum natura rei nullo modo removeatur ab ipsa, habitus difficile removetur.

10 J. W. KAY, „Getting Egypt out of the People“, 32. On a similar note, see Edmund SANTURRI, „Human corruption and the Possibility of Love: Dostoevskian Ruminations on Forgiveness“, William WERPEHOWSKI - Kathryn GETEK SOLTIS Virtue and the Moral Life: Theological and Philosophical Perspectives (Lexington: Lanham, 2014.), 173-186.

23

ZLO NASILJA U ETNIČKIM SUKOBIMA

tive approaches; humans remember, internalized oppression causes us to forget; humans hope, internalized oppression breeds despair; humans discern, internalized oppression is reactive; humans think, internalized oppression confuses.“11 Kay helps us then to see that vices as second nature are different from virtues as second nature. The former are departures from our humanity and therefore less in line with the vision that we have of what it means to be human. Dismantling vicious habits then is a liberative and restorative process bringing us back to our own humanity.

Though we are familiar with virtues and vices as personal, I have been emphasizing how virtues and vices are second nature in collectives. This I think can be easily assumed. We can talk for instance of some people being more hospitable than others, some being more known for generosity as well. Remembering that these are about the second nature description, we are not saying that one culture is essentially more generous or hospitable, only that they are habitually that way (and of course, enjoying it).

The virtues can be seen as social because they are always interrelational. We know from Thomas, for instance, that there can be no prudence without justice, nor living faith without charity. This inter-dependence means that virtues are disposed to animate not only the powers within a person, but more importantly to integrate these powers within the person and therefore to incorporate the person within the human network. Again, as Thomas reminds us, virtue is never solely concerned with a personal good, but always also with the common good.

Another writer is concerned about the overall structure of virtue ethics. In his dissertation Daniel Daly pursued the question, if Thomas Aquinas was interested in virtue as the foundation of his ethics, how did he articulate moral norms. Daly found in the virtue of prudence the source of such articulation.12 But then he began asking 11 J. W. KAY, „Getting Egypt out of the People“, 32.

12 Daniel DALY, „From Nature to Second Nature; The Relations of Natural Law, Acquired Virtue, and Moral Precepts in Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae“, PhD dissertation, Boston College (March 2008.); See also his „Virtues, Principles and a Consistent Ethics of Life“, Thomas NAIRN (ed.), The Consistent Ethic of Life: Assessing its Reception and Relevance (Maryknoll: Orbis, 2008.), 48-60.

24

James KEENAN, „Vicious Structures of Social Formation: Acquired Vices, Embodied Anthropology, Social Practices, and Human Freedom“, 17-28

other questions about the culture and platform and societies out of which virtue formation occurs. Reflecting on the notion of social sin, Daly began arguing that some social structures themselves promote structures of virtue or vice, for instance, one hopes that a church parish is a virtuous structure, though one recognizes a prison as being a social structure of vicious formation.13 In philosophical ethics, Bernard Williams helped us to see that in our turn to justice so often we only see justice as a set of principles and norms and not as a virtue embodied in a person whose motivations, intentions ad choices are formed in order to give each their due in the common good.14 Following from William’s insight, Katherine Getek Soltis, in her dissertation on justice as a virtue in the reform of prisons, begins with the premise that too much of contemporary ethics dealing with prison reform used a principle-based ethics. Rather than developing an ethics that primarily regulated actions, Soltis was interested in developing a framework that empowered human agency. While we may know prisons to be social structures of vicious formation, she claimed that prisons must be attentive to all the personnel who are part of the vicious social structures. She saw then that virtue was needing to be realized in the lives of all prison guards and that the guards like the prisoners needed also themselves to be treated justly by their superiors. Moreover, justice must of necessity be considered in the lives of the families of the prisoners and the families of the guards as well as in the neighborhoods where prisons are built and function. She argued therefore to empower the moral agency of inmates through just action, to reformulate the role and practices of correctional staff, and to facilitate just relationships between offenders and their communities and families. Furthermore, prisons themselves, as social structures, can be understood as moral agents that bear responsibility for cultivating injustice in society. For the United States prison, a model of justice as virtue mandates unremitting efforts to transform offenders and the 13 Daniel DALY, „Structures of Virtue and Vice“, New Blackfriars 92 (2011.), 341-357.

14 Bernard WILLIAMS, „Justice as a Virtue“, Moral Luck (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982.), 83-93.

25

ZLO NASILJA u etničkim sukobima Poraz

moralno-povijesnog imperativa: nikad više

Zorica MAROS / Darko TOMAŠEVIĆ (ur.)

ZLO NASILJA u etničkim sukobima

Zorica MAROS / Darko TOMAŠEVIĆ (ur.)

ISBN 978-953-241-517-9

Sarajevo: Katolički bogoslovni fakultet, 2016.

Zagreb: Glas Koncila, 2016.