Colonialism is often defended as a moral mission, a mission to educate and civilise the non-western world, and often used Christian Missionaries to convey their message. However, this perspective stands to much debate, as through the years the Empires have often been questioned on what the true intentions behind colonialism were. Were they purely moral? Or were they based on profit, and excavating the best resources from foreign land?
Imagine how our culture would appear had the likes of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle not existed? Quite impoverished, it can readily be assumed. But then again, where would European Culture be today had Islam not existed? This is an intellectual/cultural debt that is yet to be sufficiently acknowledged.
Oppressive regimes have always been threatened by art. It is visceral communication, delivering a message and a mood in an instant. It sustains culture, binds society together, and gives it an identity outside of state control. Art can reflect the world of the viewer back at them with more clarity. It can kindle revolution.
Peace Studies as an academic discipline began in the aftermath of World War II. As in most fields, the study was shaped by the ideology and recorded contributions of men. However, the changing landscape of women’s peacebuilding roles developed a theoretical framework for the inclusion of women in peace processes. The theoretical perspectives on women and peace argues two main points. First, women are naturally averse to war due to their biological nature in nurturing children. Second, the women nurturing feminine trait has been devalued because it is superior to the male counterpart and therefore provides for better cooperation for peace. I can’t endorse either school of thought, but I am convinced that there is a need for stronger decision-making roles for women in peace processes especially since women have delivered successful contributions to peace as evident in Liberia.