1.

Concept of violence
Primitive instincts have driven mankind forward through the ages. The need to eat
has caused vast movements in population, migrating to all points of the compass.
Technology has advanced exponentially throughout the ages as more and more
mouths cry out for sustenance, requiring advanced machinery and cultivation
techniques.
The need for shelter has coerced our species to craft soaring structures which
caress the heavens, their roots driven deep to protect from the tremors of an
uncertain earth, their walls strengthened with hardy amalgamations of metals
designed through ingenuity, but driven by fear. Enormous dams have been
constructed not only to provide unending water, but also to provide power for
machines and homes alike. Despite all our advancements, we are still driven
forward by primitive needs.
Yet what does aggression achieve?
It might be argued that without aggression boundaries could not be conquered in
order to expand colonization, but this would be a lie. Without aggression on either
side, compromises could be easily found and opportunities shared; there would be
no need for bloodshed. Yet mankind still strives to argue, finds ways to kill and be
killed. Are we so mortal that we need to prove it in ever-inventive ways merely to
feel weve accomplished something? A man who backs down from confrontation is
often called a coward, yet those who seek out domination are often considered
heroes? In a world that calls itself civilized, does any of this even begin to
marginally make sense?
At the time of writing this, I can count at least seven major wars occurring in the
world. Piling on top of these interminable mountains of death are the everyday
murders and killings that decimate more and more life for no real reason. If Charles
Darwin was truly correct, shouldnt we have evolved beyond this? There is no need
for me to run with the carnivores, to tackle an antelope and tear its throat out with
my teeth. I am civilized, living in a civilized society, and while I am not so ignorant
to believe that much of the singular killings might be based upon primitive hunger
and a need to survive, too much is based upon greed, laziness, and lack of
foresight.
Through my work in security, I see violence almost every day. Horrific actions are
wrought by ordinary people both males and females alike upon their fellows.
These arent bikers, not drug dealers or gangster Mafioso. Theyre people like you,
just regular Joes and Joe-ettes, all trying to bash each others brains out over what
exactly? Ask them and they dont even know. There is no real outcome to these
encounters except a potential bolstering of ego at having defeated their opponent.
Yay for you.
And so it was during one of these moments on the weekend just past that I found
myself wondering about this most primitive of emotions. A young man lay broken
and bloody at my feet, not my victim but the aggressor in a recent conflict at a club
where I am paid to keep the peace. He began an argument and punched another
man the wrong man, apparently. And so two swollen-closed eyes and a broken
nose later, this attacker reclined in the recovery position, vomiting up blood on the
footpath while I waited for an ambulance and wondered if he thought the price had
been worth the cost.
Dont get me wrong, Im not some shining beacon of peace and tranquility, far from
it. The halls of my life are saturated with the tarnish of a violent past, and as such I
speak somewhat from experience. Indeed, I may actually be a worse perpetrator

than most as I depict death and violence of colossal stature in my novels. But I hope
my readers walk away from my tales thinking about the good in life and not the
bad.
Maybe Im nave.
Life erupts in a grand act of brutality as we tear each loose from mothers wombs
and scream our war cries to an unsuspecting world. Is violence so entrenched in our
existence that we will never escape its darkened clutches? Capable of such glorious
things, we still retreat to our most primordial natures when threatened and tear and
maim, hurting that which threatens us and gloating as we slip further and further
away from perfection. One day we might all as a race discover how wretched we
truly are, and in realizing it we might turn away from the path we inexorably tread
through the ages, and head toward a future brimming with wonders beyond
imagining.

I hope so.

Nonviolence (from Sanskrit ahim , non-violence, "lack of desire to harm or kill") is the
personal practice of being harmless to self and others under every condition. It comes from the belief
that hurting people, animals or the environment is unnecessary to achieve an outcome and refers to
a general philosophy of abstention from violence based on moral, religious or spiritual principles. [1]
Mahavira (599 BCE527 BCE), the twenty-fourth tirthankara of the Jain religion, was the torchbearer of "ahimsa" and introduced the word to the world and applied the concept in his own life. He
taught that to attain nirvana, one must abstain from violence.
Nonviolence also has 'active' or 'activist' elements, in that believers accept the need for nonviolence
as a means to achieve political andsocial change. Thus, for example, the Tolstoy and Gandhian non
violence is a philosophy and strategy for social change that rejects the use of violence, but at the
same time sees nonviolent action (also called civil resistance) as an alternative to passive
acceptance of oppression or armed struggle against it. In general, advocates of an activist
philosophy of nonviolence use diverse methods in their campaigns for social change, including
critical forms of education and persuasion, mass noncooperation, civil disobedience, nonviolentdirect
action, and social, political, cultural and economic forms of intervention.
Petra Kelly founded the German Green Party on nonviolence

In modern times, nonviolent methods of action have been a powerful tool for social protest and
revolutionary social and political change.[2][3][4] There are many examples of their use. Fuller surveys
may be found in the entries on civil resistance, nonviolent resistanceand nonviolent revolution. Here
certain movements particularly influenced by a philosophy of nonviolence should be mentioned,
includingMahatma Gandhi leading a successful decades-long nonviolent struggle against British rule
in India, Martin Luther King's and James Bevel's adoption of Gandhi's nonviolent methods in their
campaigns to win civil rights for African Americans,[5][6] and Csar Chvez's campaigns of
nonviolence in the 1960s to protest the treatment of farm workers in California. [7] The 1989 "Velvet
Revolution" inCzechoslovakia that saw the overthrow of the Communist government[8] is considered
one of the most important of the largely nonviolentRevolutions of 1989.[9] Most recently the
nonviolent campaigns of Leymah Gbowee and the women of Liberia were able to achieve peace
after a 14-year civil war.[10] This story is captured in a 2008 documentary film Pray the Devil Back to
Hell. In an essay, "To Abolish War," evolutionary biologist Judith Hand advocated the use of
nonviolent direct action to dismantle the global war machine.[11]

The term "nonviolence" is often linked with or used as a synonym for peace, and despite
being frequently equated with passivity and pacifism, this is rejected by nonviolent
advocates and activists.[12] Nonviolence refers specifically to the absence of violence and is
always the choice to do no harm or the least harm, and passivity is the choice to do nothing.
Sometimes nonviolence is passive, and other times it isn't. So If a house is burning down
with mice or insects in it, the most harmless appropriate action is to put the fire out, not to sit
by and passively let the fire burn. There is at times confusion and contradiction written about
nonviolence, harmlessness and passivity. A confused person may advocate nonviolence in a
specific context while advocating violence in other contexts. For example, someone who
passionately opposes abortion or meat eating may concurrently advocate violence to kill an
abortionist or attack a slaughterhouse, which makes that person a violent person.[13]

2.Give exemples of types of violence

Violence can be divided into three broad categories:[2]

self-directed violence

interpersonal violence

collective violence

Violent acts can be:

physical

sexual

psychological

emotional

This initial categorization differentiates between violence a person inflicts upon himself or herself,
violence inflicted by another individual or by a small group of individuals, and violence inflicted by
larger groups such as states, organized political groups, militia groups and terrorist organizations.
These three broad categories are each divided further to reflect more specific types of violence.
Violence is primarily classified as either instrumental or reactive / hostile.[8]

Self-directed violence[edit]
Self-directed violence is subdivided into suicidal behaviour and self-abuse. The former
includes suicidal thoughts, attempted suicides also called para uicide or deliberate elf-injury in
some countries and completed suicides. Self-abuse, in contrast, includes acts such as selfmutilation.

Collective violence[edit]

Massacre of Polish civilians duringNazi occupation of Poland, 1939

Collective violence is subdivided into structural violence and economic violence. Unlike the other two
broad categories, the subcategories of collective violence suggest possible motives for violence
committed by larger groups of individuals or by states. Collective violence that is committed to
advance a particular social agenda includes, for example, crimes of hate committed by organized
groups, terrorist acts and mob violence. Political violence includes war and related violent conflicts,
state violence and similar acts carried out by larger groups. Economic violence includes attacks by
larger groups motivated by economic gain such as attacks carried out with the purpose of
disrupting economic activity, denying access to essential services, or creating economic division and
fragmentation. Clearly, acts committed by larger groups can have multiple motives. [citation needed]
This typology, while imperfect and far from being universally accepted, does provide a useful
framework for understanding the complex patterns of violence taking place around the world, as well
as violence in the everyday lives of individuals, families and communities. It also overcomes many of
the limitations of other typologies by capturing the nature of violent acts, the relevance of the setting,
the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim, and in the case of collective violence
possible motivations for the violence. However, in both research and practice, the dividing lines
between the different types of violence are not always so clear.[citation needed]

Warfare[edit]
Main article: War

A United States M8 Greyhoundarmoured car in Paris during World War II

War is a state of prolonged violent large-scale conflict involving two or more groups of people,
usually under the auspices of government. It is the most extreme form of collective violence. [9] War is
fought as a means of resolving territorial and other conflicts, as war of aggression to conquer
territory or loot resources, in national self-defence or liberation, or to suppress attempts of part of the
nation tosecede from it. We know also ideological, religious and revolutionary wars.[10]
Since the Industrial Revolution, the lethality of modern warfare has grown. World War I
casualties were over 40 million and World War II casualties were over 70 million.

Non-physical[edit]
Violence includes those acts that result from a power relationship, including threats
and intimidation, neglect or acts of omission. Such non-physical violence has a broad range of
outcomes including psychological harm, deprivation and maldevelopment. Violence may not
necessarily result in injury or death, but nonetheless poses a substantial burden on individuals,
families, communities and health care systems worldwide. Many forms of violence against women,
children and the elderly, for instance, can result in physical, psychological and social problems that
do not necessarily lead to injury, disability or death. These consequences can be immediate, as well
as latent, and can last for years after the initial abuse. Defining outcomes solely in terms of injury or
death thus limits the understanding of the full impact of violence.[2]

Interpersonal violence[edit]

Deaths due to interpersonal violence per million persons in 2012

0-8
9-16
17-24
25-32
33-54
55-75
76-96
97-126
127-226
227-878

Interpersonal violence is divided into two subcategories: Family and intimate partner violence that
is, violence largely between family members and intimate partners, usually, though not exclusively,
taking place in the home. Community violence violence between individuals who are unrelated,
and who may or may not know each other, generally taking place outside the home. The former
group includes forms of violence such as child abuse, intimate partner violence and abuse of the
elderly. The latter includes youth violence, random acts of violence, rape or sexual assault by
strangers, and violence in institutional settings such as schools, workplaces, prisons and nursing
homes. When interpersonal violence occurs in families, its psychological consequences can affect
parents, children, and their relationship in the short- and long-terms.[11]
Child maltreatment[edit]
Main article: Child abue
Child maltreatment is the abuse and neglect that occurs to children under 18 years of age. It
includes all types of physical and/or emotional ill-treatment, sexual abuse, neglect, negligence and
commercial or other child exploitation, which results in actual or potential harm to the childs health,
survival, development or dignity in the context of a relationship of responsibility, trust or power.
Exposure to intimate partner violence is also sometimes included as a form of child maltreatment. [12]
Child maltreatment is a global problem with serious lifelong consequences, which is, however,
complex and difficult to study.[13]
There are no reliable global estimates for the prevalence of child maltreatment. Data for many
countries, especially low- and middle-income countries, are lacking. Current estimates vary widely
depending on the country and the method of research used. Approximately 20% of women and 5
10% of men report being sexually abused as children, while 2550% of all children report being
physically abused.[2][14]
Consequences of child maltreatment include impaired lifelong physical and mental health, and social
and occupational functioning (e.g. school, job, and relationship difficulties). These can ultimately
slow a country's economic and social development.[15][16] Preventing child maltreatment before it starts
is possible and requires a multisectoral approach. Effective prevention programmes support parents
and teach positive parenting skills. Ongoing care of children and families can reduce the risk of
maltreatment reoccurring and can minimize its consequences.[17][18]
Youth violence[edit]

The Kids off the Block memorial featuring hundreds of simple stone blocks, one for each child killed by violence
in Roseland, Chicago

Following the World Health Organization, youth are defined as people between the ages of 10 and
29 years. Youth violence refers to violence occurring between youths, and includes acts that range
from bullying and physical fighting, through more severe sexual and physical assault to homicide. [19]
Worldwide some 250,000 homicides occur among youth 1029 years of age each year, which is
41% of the total number of homicides globally each year ("Global Burden of Disease", World Health
Organization, 2008). For each young person killed, 20-40 more sustain injuries requiring hospital
treatment.[19] Youth violence has a serious, often lifelong, impact on a person's psychological and
social functioning. Youth violence greatly increases the costs of health, welfare and criminal justice
services; reduces productivity; decreases the value of property; and generally undermines the fabric
of society.
Prevention programmes shown to be effective or to have promise in reducing youth violence include
life skills and social development programmes designed to help children and adolescents manage
anger, resolve conflict, and develop the necessary social skills to solve problems; schools-based
anti-bullying prevention programmes; and programmes to reduce access to alcohol, illegal drugs and
guns.[20]Also, given significant neighbourhood effects on youth violence, interventions involving
relocating families to less poor environments have shown promising results. [21] Similarly, urban
renewal projects such as business improvement districts have shown a reduction in youth violence.
[22]

Intimate partner violence[edit]

Main article: Dometic violence and Intimate partner violence
Intimate partner violence refers to behaviour in an intimate relationship that causes physical, sexual
or psychological harm, including physical aggression, sexual coercion, psychological abuse and
controlling behaviours.[2]
Population-level surveys based on reports from victims provide the most accurate estimates of the
prevalence of intimate partner violence and sexual violence in non-conflict settings. A study
conducted by WHO in 10 mainly developing countries[23] found that, among women aged 15 to 49
years, between 15% (Japan) and 70% (Ethiopia and Peru) of women reported physical and/or
sexual violence by an intimate partner.
Intimate partner and sexual violence have serious short- and long-term physical, mental, sexual and
reproductive health problems for victims and for their children, and lead to high social and economic
costs. These include both fatal and non-fatal injuries, depression and post-traumatic stress
disorder, unintended pregnancies, sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.[24]
Factors associated with the perpetration and experiencing of intimate partner violence are low levels
of education, history of violence as a perpetrator, a victim or a witness of parental violence, harmful
use of alcohol, attitudes that are accepting of violence as well as marital discord and dissatisfaction.
Factors associated only with perpetration of intimate partner violence are having multiple partners,
and antisocial personality disorder.
A recent theory named "The Criminal Spin" suggests a mutual flywheel effect between partners that
is manifested by an escalation in the violence.[25] A violent spin may occur in any other forms of
violence, but in Intimate partner violence the added value is the mutual spin, based on the unique
situation and characteristics of intimate relationship.

The primary prevention strategy with the best evidence for effectiveness for intimate partner violence
is school-based programming for adolescents to prevent violence within dating relationships.
[26]
Evidence is emerging for the effectiveness of several other primary prevention strategies those
that: combine microfinance with gender equality training;[27] promote communication and relationship
skills within communities; reduce access to, and the harmful use of alcohol; and change cultural
gender norms.[28]
Sexual violence[edit]
Main article: Sexual violence

Meeting of victims of sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Sexual violence is any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual comments or
advances, or acts to traffic, or otherwise directed against a persons sexuality using coercion, by any
person regardless of their relationship to the victim, in any setting. It includes rape, defined as the
physically forced or otherwise coerced penetration of the vulva or anus with a penis, other body part
or object.[29]
Population-level surveys based on reports from victims estimate that between 0.311.5% of women
reported experiencing sexual violence.[30] Sexual violence has serious short- and long-term
consequences on physical, mental, sexual and reproductive health for victims and for their children
as described in the section on intimate partner violence. If perpetrated during childhood, sexual
violence can lead to increased smoking,[31] drug and alcohol misuse, and risky sexual behaviours in
later life. It is also associated with perpetration of violence and being a victim of violence.
Many of the risk factors for sexual violence are the same as for domestic violence. Risk factors
specific to sexual violence perpetration include beliefs in family honour and sexual purity, ideologies
of male sexual entitlement and weak legal sanctions for sexual violence.
Few intervention to prevent sexual violence have been demonstrated to be effective. School-based
programmes to prevent child sexual abuse by teaching children to recognize and avoid potentially
sexually abusive situations are run in many parts of the world and appear promising, but require
further research. To achieve lasting change, it is important to enact legislation and develop policies
that protect women; address discrimination against women and promote gender equality; and help to
move the culture away from violence.[28]
Elder maltreatment[edit]
Main article: Elder abue
Elder maltreatment is a single or repeated act, or lack of appropriate action, occurring within any
relationship where there is an expectation of trust which causes harm or distress to an older person.
This type of violence constitutes a violation of human rights and
includes physical, sexual, psychological, emotional; financial and material abuse;
abandonment; neglect; and serious loss of dignity and respect.[2]
While there is little information regarding the extent of maltreatment in elderly populations, especially
in developing countries, it is estimated that 46% of elderly people in high-income countries have
experienced some form of maltreatment at home[32][33] However, older people are often afraid to report
cases of maltreatment to family, friends, or to the authorities. Data on the extent of the problem in
institutions such as hospitals, nursing homes and other long-term care facilities are scarce. Elder
maltreatment can lead to serious physical injuries and long-term psychological consequences. Elder
maltreatment is predicted to increase as many countries are experiencing rapidly ageing
populations.

Many strategies have been implemented to prevent elder maltreatment and to take action against it
and mitigate its consequences including public and professional awareness campaigns, screening
(of potential victims and abusers), caregiver support interventions (e.g. stress management, respite
care), adult protective services and self-help groups. Their effectiveness has, however, not so far
been well-established.[34][35]

Targeted violence[edit]
Several rare but painful episodes of assassination, attempted assassination and school shootings at
elementary, middle, high schools as well as colleges and universities in the United States led to a
considerable body of research on ascertainable behaviours of persons who have planned or carried
out such attacks. These studies (1995-2002) investigated what the authors called "targeted
violence," described the "path to violence" of those who planned or carried out attacks, and laid out
suggestions for law enforcement and educators. A major point from these research studies is that
targeted violence does not just "come out of the blue".[36][37][38][39][40][41]

Every day violence[edit]

As an anthropological concept, this kind of violence may refers to the incorporation of different forms
of violence (mainly political violence) into daily practices

3.Peacefull conflict-transformation
Conflict transformation is the process by which conflicts, such as ethnic conflict, are transformed
into peaceful outcomes. It differs from conflict resolution and conflict management approaches in
that it recognises "that contemporary conflicts require more than the reframing of positions and the
identification of win-win outcomes. The very structure of parties and relationships may be embedded
in a pattern of conflictual relationships that extend beyond the particular site of conflict. Conflict
transformation is therefore a process of engaging with and transforming the relationships, interests,
discourses and, if necessary, the very constitution of society that supports the continuation of violent
conflict".[1]

Approaches, definitions[edit]
Conflict transformation approaches differ from those of conflict management or conflict resolution.
[2]
Whereas conflict transformation involves transforming the relationships that support violence,
conflict management approaches seek to merely manage and contain conflict, and conflict resolution
approaches seek to move conflict parties away from zero-sum positions towards positive outcomes,
often with the help of external actors.[1]
Conflict transformation theory and practice are often associated with the academics and
practitioners Johan Galtung and John Paul Lederach. According to Johan Galtung'sTrancend
Method conflict transformation theory and practice, and process/es, comprise: [3]
1. Mapping the conflict formation: all partie, all goal, and all iue;
2. Bringing in forgotten partie with important take in the conflict;
3. Having highly empathic dialogue with all partie ingly;
4. Each conflict worker may pecialize on one conflict party;
5. In thee dialogue identifying acceptable goal in all partie;
6. Bringing in forgotten goal that may open new perpective;

7. Arriving at overarching goal acceptable to all partie;

8. Arriving at hort, evocative, goal-formulation;
9. Helping define the tak for all partie with that goal in mind;
diembedding the conflict from where it wa,
embedding it elewhere,
bringing in forgotten partie, goal;
10. Verifying how realizing that goal would realize partie' goal;
11. Helping partie meet at the table for elf-utaining proce;
12. Withdrawing from the conflict, go on to the next, being on call.
and are based upon baic premie inspired by main world religions:[3]
1. following Hindu thought...
Conflict the Detroyer and Conflict the Creator; conflict a a ource of violence and conflict
a a ource of development. The conflict [i.e. conflict tranformation] worker ha the third
role a Preerver, tranforming the conflict by avoiding violence, promoting development.
2. following Buddhit thought...
Codependent origination, everything grow together in mutual cauation. Conflict have no
beginning and no end, we all hare the reponibility; no ingle actor (like tatemen)
carrie all the reponibility (monopoly) and no ingle actor carrie all the guilt.
3. following Chritian thought...
Ultimately, the reponibility for conflict tranformation lie with individual and their
individual reponibility and deciion to act o a to promote peace rather than violence,
and the principle of hope.
4. following Daoit thought...
Everything i yin and yang, good and bad, there i the high likelihood that the action choen
alo ha negative conequence and that action not choen may have poitive
conequence; hence the need for reveribility, only doing what can be undone.
5. following Ilamic thought...
The trength deriving from ubmitting together to a common goal, including the concrete
reponibility for the well-being of all.
6. following Judaic thought...
The truth lie le in a verbal formula than in the dialogue to arrive at the formula, and that
dialogue ha no beginning and no end.
According to Berghof Foundation, conflict transformation means:
A generic, comprehenive term referring to action and procee eeking to alter the
variou characteritic and manifetation of violent conflict by addreing the root caue of
a particular conflict over the long term. It aim to tranform negative detructive conflict into
poitive contructive conflict and deal with tructural, behavioural and attitudinal apect of
conflict. The term refer to both the proce and the completion of the proce. A uch, it
incorporate the activitie of procee uch a conflict prevention and conflict reolution
and goe farther than conflict ettlement or conflict management.[4]

According to Institute for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding (ICP), conflict

transformation means:
Conflict tranformation, in contrat to conflict reolution, doe not only eek to reolve the
contradiction in a conflict etting. It alo aim at addreing tructural and ocial root caue
by challenging injutice and retauring human relation and it deal with ethnical and valuebaed dimenion. Conflict tranformation i not only an approach or a tool but primarily a
mindet. Conflict tranformation, according to our 3 C approach, need to be
comprehenive, compaionate and creative.[5]
According to Search for Common Ground conflict transformation initiatives are often
characterized by longtime horizons and interventions at multiple levels, aimed at changing
perceptions and improving communications skills addressing the roots of conflict, including
inequality and social injustice.[6]
The Principle of Conflict Tranformation, by TransConflict, specify further in order to help
with defining conflict transformation:

Conflict hould not be regarded a an iolated event that can be reolved or managed,
but a an integral part of ociety on-going evolution and development;

Conflict hould not be undertood olely a an inherently negative and detructive

occurrence, but rather a a potentially poitive and productive force for change if
harneed contructively;

Conflict tranformation goe beyond merely eeking to contain and manage conflict,
intead eeking to tranform the root caue of a particular conflict;

Conflict tranformation i a long-term, gradual and complex proce, requiring utained

engagement and interaction;