Peace-building and social justice awareness.
Peace building is a diplomatic initiative aimed at converting a conflict of aggression into peaceful discourse and resolving disagreements through different political institutions’ members. The critical objective of peace-building is always to end violence among opposing parties. Conciliation, mediation, talks and arbitration are the key to this process. Conflict settlement applies, on the other hand, to the conclusion of an arrangement to settle the situation on two or more parties involved in a conflict. Some methods are put in place to ensure after assessment of the problems from multiple perspectives is possible. Ability to comprehend feelings and emotions of others in the process is very critical when it comes to conflict resolution. Attaining conflict resolution calls for social justice. Social fairness is just the equivalent circulation of resources alongside chances in which outside factors that classify people seems to be irrelevant. The objective of this paper is to outline strategies that can be used to convince the administration that PAX 200 is the key to peacemaking, conflict resolution as well as social justice in the University.
Peacemaking entails forging a settlement between parties that are disputing. Despite the reason that it can be done in direct negotiations with the two sides that are in dispute, it can as well be done with a third party as a mediator who aids in the communication issues (Slattery et al 64). In most instances, the negotiators are official diplomats, but occasionally, the citizens are involved in the peacemaking process. Peacemaking is not just the absence of war or violence. A good example is a Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union which had no disorder but it was not a peaceful time (Slattery et al 64). There are leading figures in peacemaking studies that give the social insight into what means to make peace. Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King represent such characters in history that provide a better perception of how peacemaking process should be undertaken (Slattery et al 65).
The struggle for Gandhi to achieve the independence of India from the British ensured that violence was met with nonviolence resistance. Gandhi maintained that nonviolence could not just be a tactic but has to be embraced as a philosophy of life. Gandhi speaks of nonviolence as a strategy that should be accepted as a way of life to achieve its effectiveness. He argued that peace was only sensible if it was consistently applied universally (Slattery et al 65). Gandhi called for a struggle within each’s soul to take the accountability for the evil to exercise self-control and begin to change. However, violence later broke in India during the fight for freedom because the vital insight into people’ soul was lost for some time. People again determined the source of evil and tried to eliminate it.
In most cases, people feel powerless to create change especially the minorities in the society. The leaders in the nation are held responsible for such situations. They fail to listen to the voices of disadvantaged and less fortunate in the community (Tavaana Organization). The move by the University administration can be likened to this case. Cutting all the diversity education is a move to deprive the students their right to learn what they desire. Such movement will ruin the reputation of the institution given that it has been offering diversity education in the past (Tavaana Organization). The system is made up of students whom will be affected by the decisions of the leadership of the University. The existence of the University depends upon the corporation of the students who will cease benefiting from its services and others who will continue accessing the benefits of the institution on other platforms. Students who feel they are not benefiting from the system will withdraw from the body and change that might affect the university (Tavaana Organization).
Conflict in any organization is inevitable as there different personalities, goals as well as opinions (Tavaana Organization). Proper approach on how to deal with conflicts is the key to hindering the professional growth of employees in an organization and any other member who is affiliated with the body. The first step of conflict resolution is the identification of the cause of the engagement. The more info one has, the more easily it is to resolve the dispute. As an individual picked to give an outline of the way forward on the issue of the University and its move to cut out various courses (Tavaana Organization). It is essential to provide both the university leadership and the student a chance to share their side of the story regarding the issue. Through this, there will be a better understanding of the situation and an element of impartiality. It is also vital to listen to each disputant and make them believe that their information regarding the issue is being acknowledged and encourage them to continue opening up (Tavaana Organization).
It is often not the state but the viewpoint of the condition that causes irritation to worsen and finally leading to picketing or other troublesome sign of a struggle (Moyer 7). The basis of a problem might be regarded as a minor issue that had taken place months before, but the level of stress can elevate to the point that two sides begin to attack each other instead of looking into the real issue. When given the task of restoring things to normalcy, it is essential to have both sides look beyond the incident that is triggering to see the real cause. Probing questions in such a situation will be instrumental in cooling things down. After getting the viewpoint of each party concerning the issue, the next step entails getting each identifies how to think the problem could be changed (Moyer 9).
It is again important to question the different individuals on how they feel things can better work for them. Active listening is vital as a mediator and being conversant with every verbal nuance as well as reading the language is critical. Listening and trying to get the disputants stop fighting to start cooperating should be the primary objective. It means that steering the situation from finger pointing towards ways of resolving conflict should be the core of mediation process. Most importantly is the identification of the solutions that both disputants will be able to support. To achieve this, it is important to point out the virtues of different ideas not just from the perspective of each other but concerning the benefits of the institute. For example, pointing out the need for better collaboration and cooperation to adequately address the issues in the University. Afterwards, it is necessary to get the University leadership and all the parties affected by their decision shake hands and agree to one of the solutions identified.
Issues related to social justice are not new in the face of the globe. The problems are due to unequal distribution of wealth and resources, unfair treatment of people with different culture religion, sexual orientation as well as race (Kozol 43). Issues of fairness ascend in various spheres and play a crucial role in instigating or addressing a clash. Institutions that are impartial will have a habit of instilling a sense of stability and wellbeing among the members of the public whereas the organizations that are perceived to instill injustices will lead to dissatisfaction, rebellion and sometimes revolution. There are diverse categories and perceptions of justice which include distributive, procedural, retributive and restorative. Distributive justice focuses on giving all the members of the public an equal share of the resources available (Kozol 43).
Despite the fact that everyone will approve that affluence would be dispersed equitably, there is literary a divergence as to what amounts as a fair share. Possible standards for circulation entail equality, equity and need. Procedural focuses on creation and executing resolutions according to appropriate procedures that ensure fair treatment (Zinn and Anthony 397). Rules must be consistently followed to avoid unbiased choices. The individuals undertaking the system should be neutral, and the individuals that are affected by the decision should have some representation in the decision-making course. Retributive justice, on the other hand, calls to the view that people merit to be treated in the same way others are treated. It validates penalty as a response to past prejudices. The main idea is that the lawbreaker has gained prejudicial rewards through their conduct and the sentence; the imbalance will be set straight (Zinn and Anthony 398). However, there is a propensity to slip from retributive fairness to a retaliation mission. In this case, restorative truth proves to be more efficient as it concentrates on violations of crimes against individuals. Its primary concern is healing the wounds and restoring the offenders to law-abiding lives.
Kozol, Jonathan. “Still Separate, Still Unequal.” Sept. 2005, Accessed 2017.
Moyer, Bill. “The Movement Action Plan.” 1987, Accessed 2017.
Slattery, Laura, et al. “Exploring Nonviolent Living.” 2005, Accessed 2017.
Tavaana Organization. “The Year Life Won in Serbia: The Otpor Movement Against Milosevic.” Tavaana, 2017, tavaana.org/en/content/year-life-won-serbia-otpor-movement-against-milosevic-0. Accessed 2017.
Zinn, Horward, and Anthony Arnove. “Voices of a People History of the United States.” Accessed 2017.