Our daily violence

The difficulty in building social justice produces revolt and the consequent loss of reason, generating imbalance and conflict...

In the morning, in any bakery, the television stains its programming red with the blood of the criminal. The presenter announces the death of the bandit, writhing in an orgasmic tone. On the other side of the screen, peaceful and good-natured citizens smile with satisfaction, while drinking coffee naturally and commenting on the projectile's accurate target. At lunchtime, social networks publish the scene of a fight in traffic. The driver, enraged, chases the motorcycle until he hits it and destroys it, injuring the motorcyclist who is unconscious in the crosswalk. On the radio, there is the announcement of the death of a patient who was waiting for care in the corridor of a public hospital at the same time that passers-by were trying to write down the license plate of the imported car of a wealthy and drunk young man, on the run, after running over 8 people at the bus stop . The silence of dawn is awakened by the cry for help of a woman threatened by her husband, revolted by the end of the relationship. A few meters away, a clash broke out between demonstrators and police. The former believe they are fighting for their rights while the other side seeks to maintain a supposedly established order.

Our everyday violence has different nuances that break down in the gradients of experiences. Regardless of this, it is almost always the result of subjugation or the non-existence of rationality, paradoxically rationally justified as reactions to previous actions.

Exasperation seems to be everywhere.

Let's see how nature responds violently to the excesses imposed on it — forest fires, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis —, harboring phenomena of intense aggression, which transform and destroy our existence, just as the animal world manifests its ferocity in the form of subsistence or survival and, contradictorily, generates a positive fact when we refer to natural selection.

In human beings, anger, hatred, self-defense and fear bring us closer to the most primitive reactions, generating violent acts and, as they distance themselves from consciousness, they can also be considered purely natural actions, as Hobbes affirmed and — later — Freud, who said that violence was a constitutive part of man.

However, there are other factors that can be considered.

Hanna Arendt, in the last century, reflected on the trivialization of evil. Our society has internalized violence, making it an everyday triviality, with a nihilistic view of human existence as something superfluous and expendable. There is in such an observation the loss of value – inestimable – of life.

We live in a consumerist, individualistic and frustrated society, always driven to seek more, generating conflict and dissatisfaction. Pierre Bordieu, philosopher and sociologist, saw violence as maintaining a system of class domination. In this case, he referred to another type of hostility to which we are subjected, generated by economic violence. Such acts imposed by institutions result in a truculent return against them, as we can deduce when Sartre expressed his concern with the institutional forms of violence, making it clear that a given violent act throws open portals for others.

Rousseau suggested that man is good at his core, but society corrupts him, so that competitiveness generates loss of otherness and the degradation of human relations, which brings up the concept of ''man's wolf'', created and eternalized by the philosopher Hobbes.

The difficulty in building social justice produces revolt and the consequent loss of reason, generating imbalance and conflict. In this area, Bordieu developed the concept of symbolic violence, where the dominated individual is transformed into an accomplice in his own subjugation to a compulsory social model.

From this, we can understand that violence can be in oppression and liberation as a response to an imposed act. Ambiguously, it carries with it — from a moral point of view — rejection, when in its oppressive form, and, at the very least, understanding, when it is a liberating reaction. Authors such as Rousseau, Proudhon and Marx, revealed such duplicity in their thoughts, each one defending their ideas.

Taking into account that we are beings with different needs, this standardization of behavior imposed by a dominant class culminates in aggressive reactions, especially when human beings cannot adapt to such standards, whether social, cultural, economic or behavioral. Against this assertion, Bauman, in his social analysis, declared that the truths established during modernity are in disrepute.

Such transformations are vital in changing our behavior — introjected and mandatory —, especially with regard to consumerism, opening the possibility of revolt against social archetypes. However, such behaviors (although present in humanity) are subject to cooling.

Socrates, Plato and Aristotle brought reason as a way to avoid primitive and instinctive attitudes. Kant, in the 18th century, classified human actions into “will” and “desire”. The first would be shaped by consciousness, resulting in rational acts, while the second would bring a merely instinctive component comparable to that of animals, making irrationality prevail. Therefore, there is the concept of controlling violent acts through the suppression of passions when will imposes itself on desire.

If, on the one hand, we live in a trivialization of violence in modern society, on the other hand, perhaps the human attraction for truculence presented in the media is justified, since there is – in such acts – the flourishing of instincts common to man. Hostility is always a possibility when it comes to humanity, even clouded by the desired rationality. For this reason, the same brutality that draws our attention to the canvases brings a vengeful pleasure with the aggressor's succumbing, according to our conception of what is fair — from violence against the victim, our thirst for justice emerges, united with our rapture by the choleric revenge against the offender.

As Nietzsche stated, the cruelty contained in violence — in addition to revenge — brings with it a strong appeal to what is violent as a desirable spectacle and also from a cultural point of view.

What to say about the scenario of an agonizing bull awaiting the final thrust of the sovereign bullfighter, insanely idolized by thousands of people in an arena exuding suffering?

Thus, attraction to violent images is common. First, due to the empathic issue, including in fiction, and secondly, due to the curious observation of the human capacity to impose cruelty on others, especially when it exceeds all limits of a supposed understanding.

There is also the biological argument in the interest in violence, as the feeling of pleasure that surrounds it involves genetic and hormonal factors; and so is the human complexity.

Violence is neither unique nor the same. It is inserted in different forms and contexts, bringing with it symbolism and primitivism of intrinsic and extrinsic origin. It is born and permeates the individual experience; it spreads. Its reasons crossed the centuries and settled in societies like mutated viruses, perfected in high contagion. Aggressiveness inhabits humans and imitates nature, and can manifest itself when least expected.

In this way, education must go beyond the academic environment and fill human issues, reaching the scope of philosophical knowledge, in order to help in the management of frustrations. Thus, there will be a greater possibility of peaceful coexistence among our peers, through impulse control. It is imperative to deal with our insecurities and desires to minimize the deleterious effects of disappointments, as this is the only way we will be able to limit our untimeliness.

Many have developed and will still develop questions with different answers – whether we agree or not – about violent actions and reactions in our world. The fact is that violence is everywhere and inhabits us, latent, and it is up to human beings to evolve along the path of reason, social justice and self-control, wisely channeling energy and emotions towards edifying things.

And you, how do you expand your rationality? Are you still shocked by the violent demonstrations shown daily in the media or are you curiously drawn to them? Do you believe that violence is an inevitable response to social injustice?

Marcelo Kassab.

Writer and Dental Surgeon.