Introduction
Terror refers to a pronounced state of fear that results from the human mind being overcrowded by a sense of oncoming danger. When terror becomes a reality it results in either physical or psychological trauma which has a long-lasting impact on the life and well being of an individual. Physical trauma involves sustained injury whereby a scar remains on the body of a victim and it becomes a constant reminder of his or her past experiences e.g. a hand is permanently chopped off or a woman, child or a young girl being raped. Psychological trauma arises from emotional injuries sustained by the victim after physical trauma has taken place and it takes a very long time to heal. Once a victim encounters a horrifying incident he/she stores the information in his brain faculties and this makes up the memory. In simple terms, memory is a person ability to store past experiences, retain this information vividly in the brain and he/she can retrieve the information instantly if the need arises.
Memory is increasingly becoming important in countries and regions which are moving out of the ashes after conflicts since it determines whether the society will stand on its fit and move on or an outbreak of another conflict takes place. In this transition period, a lot of talks is about how the problem can be dealt with one group calling for forgives while the other group wants the perpetrators of the violence to be held accountable for their actions and be punished for it. Those who are for forgiveness want people to forgive and forget about the past and move on while the other wants everything to be remembered for various reasons. The path that society takes is important because it has a lot of political implications due to the advantages and disadvantages accrued in each option and this essay is going to consider each side at a time.
Discussion
After violence and conflict is over the society or country has to move on and the cause of the violence is addressed. One way of addressing the violent past is through the formation of various commissions such as the truth and reconciliation commission which investigates the cause of violence and people who organized and financed it but before we get to this stage we have to remember what happed vividly. Remembering the past involves investigations in order to uncover the events that led to violence and various strategies can be used in order to uncover this. Once detailed information on violence is retrieved we have to remember it for various reasons.
Hamber (1998) gives us some of the reasons which should make us remember our past. To begin with, he states that ‘there is a psychological justification for understanding a process of the past. Psychologically, sleeping dogs do not simply pass or disappear with the passage of time.’ This implies that if we don’t deal remember the past we are bound to encounter problems much later on because the wounds in the victims hearts continue to burn and at one point in the future they will explode. In addition, psychological healing takes place after the survivors are given a chance to air their experiences and views in a very safe and calm environment. Such an environment is usually present in various commissions of inquiry sittings whereby the victims are not intimidated or threatened in order to narrate their horrific stories.
Second, Hamber (1998) argues that ‘uncovering of the past allows for its manipulation to meet the present political and social agendas and interests.’ If as a society we suffer from violence and then we do not have a chance to know what really took place then there is no way we can push the government to address the plights of the victims of the violence. In most cases, conflict results from disagreements between politicians and if we do not get a chance to know the cause then we shall be continuously electing them without knowing that they are our greatest enemies. Politicians themselves may capitalize on this and every time they disagree they will be inciting their followers into violent acts because they know that we are at the end of the day going to hold them accountable for their actions. This, therefore, means that only the body polity is aware of what happened but the other sectors of the society which makes up the complex whole are not represented in any action that takes place later on.
Moreover, Hamber (1998) points out that ‘the importance of acknowledgement of wrongdoing and the uncovering of the truth is also commonly expressed as a way of healing of victims or survivors. If we all accept that violence took place and people were affected we help the survivors a great deal because they realize that we are feeling for them and we are sympathizing with them and this gives them a golden opportunity to accept what happened to them and thus they can easily address their emotional needs. By making victims of violence accept that something terrible happened to them they can take then make sound decisions to prevent their problem from getting out of hard. For example, women raped by soldiers can look for medical assistance and go for counselling in order to restore their confidence and self-esteem. This also builds victims confidence in society since they realize that they are not alone as they rebuild their lives after the violence.
Another reason which makes it mandatory for us to remember our past is the fact that most of the truth commissions that have been formed worldwide to deal with politically related violence conclude their findings on the importance of focusing on the past. The past here may extend beyond the onset of the recent violence because the most recent violence may have a lot of historical implications. These commissions are also well known for promoting reconciliation effectively because during their proceedings because victims are given a platform to address a long-suppressed past and since they give very detailed information necessary steps can then be taken in order to prevent the recurrence of such events in future.
Arguing along with the same point Payne (2004), notes that remembering our past helps society a great deal. This is because ‘perpetrators of violence are given a chance to admit and apologize for it. In so doing; they advance the truth about the past and accountability for those crimes. This allows for both individuals and societal reconciliation.’ Once the organizers of the violence give us the truth the government or groups which may have been denying the violence are forced to accept the reality and shoulder their responsibilities which touches on the compensation of the victims for their sufferings as well as establishing necessary institutions which will assist the victims. Payne also argues that Confession about our violent past also gives the perpetrators of violence a chance to play their role in building a new society. For instance, the Gacaca courts in Tanzania which were established by the UN are used to try those people who took part in Rwanda’s genocide in 1994. They are good because they give the perpetrators of this heinous act a chance to reduce jail terms because by confessing the role they played in organizing and funding violence in their country they help in rebuilding the country.
Remembering our past is not just enough we need to do it in a very upright and sound manner in order to avoid adding salt to an injury. In this respect have Hamber has given us five maxims that we can use in remembering and dealing with our past. These maxis are: We have to remember in a contextual, creative and official way, remember in a diverse and representative way, remember in a legitimizing way, remember in a complex way and finally we have to remember in a forwarded looking way. If we follow these maxims fully and implement them to the letter then we are bound to form very strong and unbiased commissions which can give us an opportunity to bury our troublesome past and move on as a society.
The first maxim calls for us to remember our past the prevailing political and social context will have a big role to play and they should not be ignored. These two factors determine whether the society goes for amnesty or the perpetrators of violence are punished thoroughly. Creativity calls for a holistic approach whereby we address the needs of the survivors and at the same time we restructure our institutions to prevent the occurrence of violence. Diversity means that all the members of the society are represented equally in all the various groups that are appointed to look into the violence. Failure to do this may bring about mistrust since one group e.g. Politicians may hijack the process in order to cover up their mistakes.
The process must be legitimate in that it recognizes the loss that people have accrued such as the loss of loved ones and thus all through the proceedings of various commissions’ addresses these issues properly. Complexity is brought about by the fact that in one single act of violence there may be many underlying factors that can be related to the violence. Therefore all these factors must be given equal weight were being addressed and finally remembering of the past should be done in a way that makes the society realize that there was a problem, it has been addressed fully and the future of the society is bright since necessary steps have been taken in order to make sure violence is not going to take place again.
After violence is over not everyone agrees on the importance of remembering the past. Some people feel that forgetting the past is the best way to forge forward. Those who argue along this line give various reasons which entitle them to their opinion. First, they argue that we need to forget our past so that we can give the young people who are bound to become future leaders a chance to distance themselves from past violence and abuses in their society. In addition, if we give the youth to know the past injustices that their communities have faced they may become bitter and out of their bitterness, they may fail to understand the importance of living in these communities and migrate to other regions in search of greener pastures. I forget our past we can create a new clean future that is not polluted by our past mistakes.
Second, Hamber (1998) argues that ‘the realization of uncovering the past can be more psychologically painful than leaving it undisturbed.’ This case mostly applies to the victims who are called upon to give testimony of what happened. Most of them prefer to keep quiet rather than be tormented again while giving evidence of what happened. Imagine a rape victim who has developed a phobia towards men after being raped giving an account of how she was brutally raped by men in front of her children to a panel whereby the men are the majority. She can easily break into tears since she already has not to trust men anymore and in such a situation she prefers to keep mum and forget about what happened to her. In addition, there are those people who feel that society as a whole will suffer more by being given a chance to explore what happened because this is like opening wounds that are healing and it is a very painful exercise.
Uncovering the past is also viewed as an obstacle towards achieving peace and can result in more violence. This is due to the fact that for the past to be uncovered all those people who were affected by the violence have to give detailed accounts of how they were attacked and the reason that made them become the prime targets of the attractors. This can be a time bomb because if they were attacked by their neighbours as a form of revenge then it means that can easily be enticed to fights back. For example, one tribal pastoralist community attacks another and steals their herds and runs away with them. Giving a chance to the community whose cattle was stolen to explain what happened will be like waking up lying dogs and at the same time, we will be giving them a chance to justify a counter-attack mission. This case may also apply to countries where politics are divided along ethnic lines are leaders are elected due to their ethnic backgrounds. If violence erupts after a disputed election then remembering the violence will not give citizens a chance to accept one another. A good example here is Kenya whose politics is divided along tribal lines.
There is also the fear that if the society keeps a good account of its past this information can be manipulated later by some people and used as a weapon of revenge. This is very true especially in young democracies where tribal cards and race influence the politics of the country. Take for example the US where the black population was segregated earlier on in its history and to earn full citizenship and their constitutional rights they had to fight for them. Now that the blacks are full citizens there is no need to keep on talking about their past because if they ever manage to produce a ‘black’ president then out of their bitter past the president may call for revenge and in this case, the blacks may start attacking there fellow white citizen. The US past has a lot of influence in the ongoing presidential campaigns whereby plots to kill Obama a candidate with a black origin is being reported now and then in the press. In such a case it’s good to forget the past because it’s going to create mere troubles than it can solve.
Now that I have looked at the two possibilities which can be employed by society in order to overcome its past violence I believe that the first option i.e. remembering the past violence is the best way to go. This is because it gives us a chance to know where we have come from but also gives us a clear direction of where we are going as a society and this can make us have a focused mind. This is due to the fact that once we have uncovered the whole truth relating to our violent past we can punish the perpetrator and at the same time we can put in place mechanisms in our society that will prevent the recurrence of violence. The victims can also be compensated fully for their suffering and this will give them an opportunity to be integrated back into our functioning society where they can contribute positively towards the well being of the society.
The various commissions formed can also give us a chance to rescue the nation from collapsing especially if the violence was related to our political structure. For instance, if the commission proves that amnesty for the perpetrators and financiers of the violence is the way to go then everyone will be willing to forgive and forget because all the details relating to violence will have been availed to us by these commissions and from the information then we end up having a strong foundation for our decisions.
I also suggest a ‘hybrid’ solution whereby as a society people agree on merging the better sides of remembering and forgetting as a way of addressing the past. That is we remember first and later on, we forget. This option is pegged on the fact that memory itself is believed to have therapeutic and invigorating effects which are beneficial to society. Forgetting on the other hand allows an individual to slowly forget and eventually to get relieved of the burden of the past experiences he/she has been carrying for a long time. In addition, psychologists argue that if we are given a chance to remember our violent past and learn about the whole truth relating to it then it becomes possible for us to embark on a journey of forgetting all that we have experienced and the long process of healing and recovery begins at this stage.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can overcome our past through two avenues; a society can choose either to remember or forget our past experiences. Remembering our past is the best remedy because it becomes part of the social history and it can only make the society grow stronger by uniting all its members. An explicit system of addressing the past violence has been arrived at and they are increasingly becoming critical in the formations of various commissions that are formed in order to address the origins and effects of violence. These strategies are contained in the five maxims I have highlighted in the essay and they need to be implemented fully. For those who are for forgetting.
Reference
Ankersmit, F. R., (2001): The sublime dissociation of the past: How to Be (come) what one is no longer. Groningen University Press.
Caruth, C. (1995): Trauma: Explorations in memory. The John Hopkins University Press.
Eng, L.D. and Kazanjian D. (2003): Loss. University of California Press.
Hamber, B. (1998): Remembering to Forget: Issues to consider when establishing structures for dealing with the past.
Hayes, G. (1998): We suffer our memories: Thinking about the Past, Healing and Reconciliation. American Imago – Volume 55, Number 1.
Johnson, P. (2007): The Emotional effect of Violence. United Behavioral health.
Payne L. A. (2004): In search of Remorse: Confessions to perpetrators of past state Violence. Brown Journal of World Affairs: Vol. 11 issue 115.
Richard, W. and Hamber, B. (2002): Symbolic Closure through memory, reparation and revenge in post conflict societies. Journal of Human Rights Vol. 1.
Van Der Kolk, A and Van Der Hart, O. (1991): The Intrusive past: the flexibility of memory and the engraving of Trauma. American imago Journal Vol. 13.
Wilkson, D. (2005): Silence on the Mountains; Stories of terror, Betrayal and forgetting in Guatemala. Journal of Latin American Anthropology.