I recently read David Cortright’s Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas as part of the Peace Studies PhD program I am currently in. I had not heard of the book prior, but it blends some of the themes of my current area of study with my enjoyment of history as a history major.
The book is a history of the approaches people and groups have taken to take a stand against violence over the course of the past few centuries, especially the past 150 years or so. There is a helpful overview of the origins of peace movements, nonviolent strategies, as well as the great barriers that have traditionally undermined peace efforts in the course of history which is perhaps the most insightful and interesting portion of the book.
The history of peace efforts in the face of great international challenges such as World War I, World War II, and other wars was incredibly insightful. There is an abundance of histories written on just about all other aspects of these conflicts, but I had not yet come across an analysis of these events through the eyes of peace advocates. It was fascinating to read about the various groups, philosophies, different methodologies, and key figures like Einstein among others.
Where the book is really strong is in illuminating the forces that undermine the work of peace when it really matters. One of the key themes that consistently shows up is nationalism functioning as a barrier to peace efforts. I’ve known the distinction between patriotism and nationalism, but I came away wanting to distinguish these concepts even more clearly. Nationalism is a key theme that exposed the limits of the peace movements from the World Wars all the way to more recent conflicts. I was amazed at how much was in place prior to the World Wars to support the peace processes and how quickly much of it dissolved in the waves of nationalism that swept over the countries.
There is a great introduction to the historical movements of nonviolence as well general treatments of the dynamics of violence in society and the difference between pacifism and nonviolence. One of the things that struck me is how leaders of nations time and time again have routinely sacrificed hundreds of thousands of lives because of certain patterns of thinking that history has shown to be inadequate to the moment they faced. It’s a tragedy and a reminder to advocate for reconciliation in society and between nations as the path of hope for peace.
