Escola de Cultura de Pau

(Deconstructing) Faculty of Education. Building G-6

Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona
08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona)

the enemy image Spain

Tel: + 34 93 581 24 14 Fax:
+ 34 93 581 3294

Alicia Barbero Domeño

Carles Vidal Novellas Alicia Barbero Domeño
Cécile Barbeito Thonon Carles Vidal Novellas
Cécile Barbeito Thonon
Irene Santiago Santiago Irene Santiago Santiago

Program of Education for Peace

Escola de Cultura de Pau

Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), September 2005.

The texts on education for peace published by Escola de Cultura de Pau are available to
everybody. In order to obtain such texts, you can download them from
www.escolapau.org/programes/educacio or you can register in our distribution list
(educacioxpau@grups pangeaorg).

- 1-
 NEEDS AND VALUES•
Introduction and educational purposes biological • autonomy •
security • identity
Personal and
contextual
Here is the third volume of the Education for Peace Handbooks which treats the subject of conditions
the enemy image. FEELING OF THREAT (perceived or real)

The present handbook aims to:

ALTERATION OF EMOTIONS, PERCEPTIONS AND
• Help to understand the implications that the enemy image has on our GROUP FEELING
perception and how this influences a conflict.
• Suggest ways to deconstruct the enemy image.

When referring to the enemy, we understand both the other party in the context of an
armed conflict (macro social level) and the relationship between two people or different
groups (micro social level), etc. Therefore, all the exercises can be used as instruments to
think about these two levels: the conflicts between societies or countries and the conflicts ENEMY IMAGE
between groups or communities from different cultures, values, etc. Collectively stereotyped image
The present handbook develops the following structure:
• Everybody has a series of needs, that can be biological or regard our autonomy, POLARIZATION
security or respect for the identity or values that have been created along the Loss of the sense of the conflict
NATURALIZATION OF VIOLENCE
years (1.Introduction: Creating an enemy).
• Sometimes we feel that “the other” (a group different from mine) threatens this
system of needs and values, and certain personal or contextual conditions can PROPOSALS TO DECONSTRUCT THE ENEMY IMAGE
make us more likely to consider the others our enemies (2. What makes us
perceive the other as an enemy?).
• The enemy image generates emotions (like fear, rage or hatred), considerations of While the theoretical part has been created for adults (Educators),
value (stereotypes or prejudices), and group reactions (progressive distance the activities have been planned for boys and girls between 14 – 15 years of age. Educators
between groups) (3. Processes implied in the enemy image). can adapt such activities to suit their circumstances.
• In such situations we can even exert violence and therefore make it impossible
for such conflicts to be resolved in a constructive manner (4. The enemy image in
the conflict).
• For such reasons, we suggest ending with a series of activities which contribute
to reduce the influence of the enemy image (5. Suggestions to deconstruct the
enemy image).

-2- -3-

1. Introduction: Creating an enemy
And ever since I am because you are.
And ever since you are, I am and we are.
And because of love I will be, you will be, we will be.
Pablo Neruda
- 4-
ACTIVITY: Friend / enemy
Educational Purpose: To observe the group perceptions on the meaning of certain words.
Estimated time: 50 minutes.
Development: The poem by Sam Keen The enemy Maker that you will find on page 11 begins
with the verses “Start with an empty canvas”. It refers to the moment in which we have to take
a blank page and show what we understand by the words friend and enemy. First of all, every
participant is asked to divide a blank page in two and to draw an image that he/she identifies
with the concept of a friend and of an enemy.
After that, the class is divided into small groups (from 6 to 10 participants per group). Half of
the groups are asked to choose one of the drawings that refers to the concept of friend and
to create altogether an image that tries to reflect the concept of friend. The other half of the
groups are asked to create the enemy image. The groups are given some time to prepare
their work (3 minutes is enough, since spontaneity is an important factor).
One group is asked to represent their image while the rest of the groups observe and assess their
performance. The participants in the audience are encouraged to comment on what the image
suggests to them, and to express which feelings and emotions it provokes. One after the other, every
group presents their image while the rest of the groups observe and assess their work.
Finally, and before evaluating the work, all the drawings are hung in visible areas of the classroom. It is
important for the educator to take note of the participants’ impressions so that he/she can include them
in the evaluation comments and content introduction.
Evaluation: Have you had a difficult or easy time doing the drawings? What about thinking
of the image you were asked to draw? Have you thought of a few or many different
possibilities? Is it easier to think of images of friends or enemies? Why? Is it easy to
identify our emotions? Which emotions have arisen in the different images? Create a
parallel list of the words that have been used in relation with both of the concepts (for
example: hatred, fear, discrimination...).
Source:
Before starting to talk about the construction of the enemy image it is necessary to share
certain ideas on the key words.
- 5-
In a few words, the ENEMY IMAGE can be defined as the process through which we see a
person or a group of different people in a distorted manner which leads us to discriminate,
exclude and even eliminate them because we feel that this person or group of different
people threatens our needs and values.

However, what is it exactly that makes us feel threatened by others? We will try to answer to
this question in three parts:

a. What are our needs and values?

We all have a series of more or less basic needs ranked according to their importance
and what they cause in our conduct. The development of our personality depends on the
satisfaction (or not) of such needs. We understand some of these basic needs to be the
following:
− Biological needs: Those that we could not live without. If these needs are not satisfied, none of
the rest really matter. These relate to the need of food and drink. This right, which the vast majority
of the population in our country has, unfortunately constitutes a luxury for a large percentage of the
global population.

− Security : Going beyond the security that covering our biological needs brings us (food
security), we refer to the need to feel that our physical integrity or even our lives are not
in danger. Here we refer to the situations that allow us to live without being afraid of
being physically assaulted. These are the situations that a large percentage of the
inhabitants of countries going through armed conflicts or situations of social tension
cannot enjoy.

− Autonomy: Refers to those conditions which allow us to evolve as human beings, such as
freedom of expression, association or mobility, the possibility to have a stable job, with a sufficient
salary that allows us to have leisure time, etc. These conditions often depend on how developed a
country is and on the legal framework developed by each state in order to guarantee them in a
greater o lesser degree.

− Respect towards identity: This is the concept that would answer the question: “Who am I?”.
It is actually the idea that each one of us has of ourselves, being, however, absolutely dependant
on the ideas of others and on our relationship with them. There are certain communities of
reference in which we include or exclude ourselves, such as towns, families, football teams, etc.
Besides, identity is a dynamic concept in that we may not define ourselves the same way today as
we did four years ago, or we may not define ourselves the same way in the company of
different people. Our need to develop our own identity freely is considered a right as well.
As stated above, the degree of satisfaction of such needs varies a lot from country to country
and it can even vary from person to person, according to our personal perception of our own
needs. Therefore, a person can feel that his/her basic needs are covered, while a different
person in the same situation might feel that his/her security, identity, and so on, were under
threat.
Moreover, everybody is guided by a system of values. We understand that these VALUES
constitute a “horizon of sense”1 which finds its meaning through interaction with people. This
is a system that individuals usually acquire through their school, family or church, and that
nowadays is transmitted through the media as well. At the same time, and just like with our
needs, whenever we feel that this hierarchical system of what we value is being questioned
by others, we may feel threatened and therefore initiate the process that will lead us towards
the unfavorable perception of the other. It is important to point out that this feeling of threat
does not always directly lead us to consider the other an enemy (refer to section 2). In fact,
generalizations can play a major role whenever we refer to a group, a country, an ethnic
group, etc.
b. Why do we feel that another person or group threatens our needs?
that our ambition, the fear to confront our values and beliefs, or to lose or recover a
situation of power, can imply, though not justify, the presence of feelings of hatred, envy,
ambition... These are emotions that we feel towards a person, group, institution or country
which causes us to feel threatened, because of political, economic and/or affective reasons.
These feelings often alter our perceptions and it is precisely in this very moment when we start to
visualize the other as an obstacle to the satisfaction of our needs. In this situation we may see the
other as an opponent with contrary or even incompatible interests that we must, however,
respect, or as an enemy towards whom we are unable to feel compassion or respect, and we
therefore need to eliminate.
c. However... who is the other?
Now we find ourselves faced with our fear of losing (or not winning), our fear of who is unknown,
different, foreign, an immigrant, “the other”. However, who is this other person and when does
he/she become my enemy?
ACTIVITY: Who do you see?
Educational purpose: to understand the influence of our perception of people.
Estimated time: 20 minutes.

Life in a society implies a relationship between us and the rest. Whenever the
groups of reference get into contact and differences arise, it is normal to have
certain conflicts (not necessarily violent) 2. It is whenever the guarantee of the needs Development: The participants are asked to pay attention to the following image:
or interests of some is incompatible with the guarantee of the needs of others that a
conflict arises.

We can deal with a conflict in a competitive manner by adopting a relationship with the other that is
based on rivalry, or we can establish bonds according to relationships of empathy, cooperation or
the will to negotiate. In order to deal with a conflict in a cooperative manner there must be some
previous conditions: we must have a predisposition to cooperate, the necessary skills to do so,
know the other person well or trust this person. When we lack these necessary conditions, when
we don’t know the person we have a conflict with well or when we don’t trust this person, we let
stereotypes or prejudices influence us and we are therefore more likely to deal with the conflict in a
competitive manner.

In this second case, if we don’t know the other person, we will perceive the lack of
guarantees to satisfy our basic needs as a threat.

1Mèlich, JC.; Palo u, J; Poch, C; i Fons, M. (coord.). La veu de l’altre: reflexions i experiències per educar en
valors ètics. Els llibres de l’ICE de la UAB. Bellaterra, 2002.
2 We refer to CONFLICT as a confrontation of contrary interests and needs between two or more parties.

Whenever an emotional aspect such as the perception of threat arises, it is understandable

Evaluation: What’s the meaning of the image? Do you think that the people It is when these judgments lead us to a behavior which uses inequality as an excuse to
around you often make similar associations? Why do you think this happens? Do justify exclusion that we are talking about DISCRIMINATION.
you have any idea of how we could stop this situation? You can both act out the
image or work on an skit based on the idea suggested by the image. We have already tried to put the pieces of the puzzle back together. Now we would like you
to read this poem aloud and then think about its meaning.
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau / Drawing by Plantu, published in Le Monde.
The Enemy Maker
THE OTHER is the person (or group) that we feel different from.
To Create an Enemy …
Everybody is different from several points of view, such as age, sex, physical Start with an empty canvas.
features, sexual orientation, personality, medical conditions, life-style, Sketch in broad outline the forms of
beliefs... However, we should not worry about these differences. We can Men, women, and children (...).
consider and experience the differences existing between human beings as a
source of personal and social enrichment when such diversity is developed Trace onto the face of the enemy the greed,
based on relationships of cooperation and solidarity. Otherwise, however, we Hatred, carelessness you dare not claim as
can consider such differences as threats. Your own.
The other, then, can be a ‘friend’, a ‘non friend’ or an ‘enemy’ according to our ability to accept or
Obscure the sweet individuality of each face.
reject the existing differences. We make a distinction between a friend and a non-friend because
we assume that we cannot be everybody’s friend, but this does not imply that we consider these
Erase all hints of the myriad loves, hopes,
people enemies. Seeing the other as an enemy represents a step beyond having stereotypes and
Fears that play through the kaleidoscope of
prejudices, and it implies, as stated before, that we consider the existing differences as threats.
Every finite heart.
Seeing the other as an enemy involves a series of psychological reactions (refer to part 3) that are
not usually present when we see the other as a non friend.
Twist the smile until it forms the downward
Arc of cruelty.
Friend Non friend Enemy

Business relationship Competitive Strip flesh from bone until only the
What kind of relationship Cooperative or Abstract skeleton of death remains.
do I have with the other? business relationship relationship

How do I act when faced I see the difference I have stereotypes Exaggerate each feature until man is
with somebody different as a source of and prejudices of the I see the difference Morphed into beast, vermin, insect.
other3 as a threat to my
from me? enrichment
needs.
Fill in the background with malignant
Figures from ancient nightmares – devils,
Demons, myrmidons of evil.
At the same time, it is widely accepted that this diversity may bring certain inequality and
conflict. Therefore, the INEQUALITY would imply an affective and judgmental vision of the
When your icon of the enemy is complete
difference. It seems that some of the diversity variables are inevitably subject to value
You will be able to kill without guilt,
judgments, and attraction or rejection ranks.
Slaughter without shame.

The thing you destroy will have become

Merely an enemy of God, an impediment
3 Refer to part 8 of this handbook
To the sacred dialectic of history.

Sam Keen
 Afterwards, the pairs exchange their roles.
2. What makes us perceive the other as an enemy? Evaluation: the leader of this activity will encourage a debate so that the group
can relate the feelings and emotions felt with the following elements which
activate the enemy image:
As we have seen above, there exist many differences between people which do not imply any sort Did you feel secure during the game? What contributed or not to this feeling?
of a problem. There are cases, however, in which a person who is different from us ends up being • How did you act while you were blindfolded? Did you feel secure? Did you
our enemy. In the previous section we have also analyzed how some people can feel that their feel that you had the skills to meet your objective? Why? Why not?
needs are covered while others feel threatened under the same circumstances. Which factors
• While you were blindfolded, did you feel the need to talk or ask questions? Were
make us more likely to see those who are different from us as enemies?
you bothered by the fact that you were not allowed to talk? What would you have liked to
This very often depends on the connection between the concrete conditions of the people, their say if you had been given permission to talk?
relationship with the rest (personal and micro social elements) and certain special conditions • What was your behavior while you were blindfolded? Were you patient and able to
typical of the context in which we live (macro social elements). Let’s proceed step by step: settle with the given situation or did you try to accomplish your objective despite the
situation of insecurity? Was anybody impatient? Did anybody kick the objects or not
respect the rules?
Me and how I relate with the rest The conditions of the context
· feeling insecure · existence of an unresolved environment Then, the different kinds of conduct can be related with our everyday life, in which
· Having difficulty to accept people who are or history everybody has a different capability to solve his/her conflicts: some tend to use
different from me · Presence of a group leader who justifies constructive strategies and some others destructive ones.
· not expressing my own feelings and the use of violence Source: Adaptation from the activity “The remote control”. Seminar on Education for Peace - Asociación Pro
emotions verbally · Reaction to violent acts Derechos Humanos. La Alternativa del Juego 2. Juegos y dinámicas de Educación para la paz. La Catarata.
· using destructive ways to solve conflicts · the Media Madrid: 2001.
· Polarizing governmental policies
Now let’s concentrate on the above mentioned characteristics:
a. Me and how I relate to others − Insecurity: if we tend to be afraid of our environment and to doubt what to do in order to face
it.
Certain personal characteristics make us more likely to feel threatened by the other. Which are
these characteristics? − Low self-esteem: if we dislike our perception of ourselves, grant little value to ourselves
and believe that no matter how hard we try nobody will like us or take notice of us....
ACTIVITY: Searching for the other − Difficulty in accepting people who are different from us: if we refuse from the start to
Educational Purpose: to understand those personal elements which lead us to listen or meet people with different opinions, if we are judgmental and not very
perceive those different as an enemy. understanding of the rest of the people or cultures, but, at the same time, not very
critical towards ourselves or what we like.
Estimated time: 20 minutes.
Necessary material: blindfolds, obstacles of different sizes and materials. − Inability to express our feelings and emotions verbally: if whenever we experience
feelings of rage, disappointment or fear towards somebody we are not able to express
Development: The participants are grouped in pairs. Each participant will stand them verbally but we keep them to ourselves instead, or we express them but in very
at a 10 meter distance from his/her partner. A series of different obstacles will softened terms, these emotions accumulate and lead us to perceive the other as an
be placed all along said distance. One of the partners, who will keep silent and undesirable person that we do not want to know anything about. This situation causes
will be blindfolded, will have to skip them in order to reach the other partner. the tension towards the other person to increase.
The latter will guide the blindfolded partner by always making the same sound,
therefore making it easier or more difficult for him/her to reach his/her
objective. This game is to be played twice: the first time the guiding partner will
stand still, while the second time, he/she will be able to move around.
-1 0 - - 11 -
- Use of destructive strategies to solve our own conflicts or reduced capability to deal with them in Construction of the image of a
Construction of the enemy image
a constructive manner: if whenever it is necessary, in a precise moment in time and without the use friend or of a non-friend
of violence, we are not able to express our rage, disappointment or fear of other people, but we · security · insecurity
release these feelings in a destructive manner, that is through screams, insults, assaults, revenge, · self-esteem · low self-esteem
etc. · predisposition to know the other · inability to see the positive aspects of the
· verbal expression of emotions other
On the one hand, altogether or separately, these factors make us more likely to consider the Communication and dialogue · inability to communicate emotions
difference as a threatening element to our integrity (both material and social). That is why we · channel emotions in a constructive manner · incorrect channeling of emotions
identify the different one as an enemy. If we are used to solving conflicts in a destructive manner,
we can end up employing violent conduct in order to discriminate, exclude or eliminate whoever is
different. The following activity will help us understand how the above mentioned personal factors lead us to
perceive the person who is different from us as an enemy.
On the other hand, these factors make us more likely to adopt the predominant opinion in our
environment against a person or a part of the population who are different from us, thus reinforcing ACTIVITY: Who is my enemy and why?
the influence of the majority. Even though we might not totally agree with the opinions of the Educational purpose: to analyze the relationship between the feeling of threat
majority, our insecurity, our inability to express opinions, etc, might lead us to behave towards that and everybody’s needs.
person or part of the population who is different according to the predominant opinion in our
environment. Estimated time: 30 minutes.
Necessary Material: paper, pens and a bucket.
Let’s analyze some examples:
Development: Each participant writes down the name of a person or group that he might
A young Arab man joins our class. Let’s imagine that we are insecure and that we are not consider (or might have considered) an enemy, and writes down three reasons why he/she
used to talking about our fears, anxieties or their causes. If we ever had a bad considers them an enemy. Then, the participants get together in pairs and exchange their
experience with an Arab boy or girl, we will easily regard this young man as an enemy by papers: each participant has to try to guess which threatened need hides behind the
whom we feel threatened (we might be afraid of losing friends, not learning enough, reasons written down on the papers (refer to the subject of threats in the first part). The
having bad influences) and we will incorporate the negative messages of the Arab participants get together in small groups and talk about the needs aroused, relating them
population existing in our environment. Therefore, we will easily react in accordance with to the threats that make people likely to perceive whoever is different as an enemy. They
these external messages by having an aggressive attitude towards him, especially if we give the papers back to their owners, who turn them into a paper ball and throw them into
are used to solving certain situations through violent conducts. If we feel more secure, the bucket by turning their enemy into “a person who is different from me because...”
we trust ourselves and we do not reject the person who is different from us from the very or “a person with whom I disagree because... but whom I respect” or “a person than I
start, it will be easier for us to perceive this young man as a classmate with whom we envy because...”, or “a person I don’t get along with...”. Evaluation: Which threats that
might coincide in some aspects. Therefore, we will stop the external negative messages arose during the activity made the participants perceive the other person as an
with regard to the Arab population and we will treasure him as just another mate, with enemy? Which needs arose? Do you think that analyzing the needs that lead us to see
both qualities and defects. the other person as an enemy can help us not to see him/her as such? Why? Why not?
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau

Another everyday example can be found when we have a very close friend who, all of a sudden,
-1 3 -
starts to show more interest towards another person without leaving our friendship. We can
experience this situation in a positive manner by incorporating this person as a friend or, at least, if
we feel comfortable expressing what we do not like, we can tell our friend that we resent his/her
carelessness and therefore ask for more attention. Otherwise, we may feel that our friendship is
under threat and therefore identify the other person as an enemy. If there is a negative rumor about
this person, we will incorporate it quickly and we will blame this person in order to justify our own
violent attitude towards him/her. This is a typical behavior among insecure people that have low
self-esteem, a hard time expressing their feelings and few resources to deal with new situations
and conflicts. Cultural differences contribute to this process as well whenever they arise in
a context of insecurity, little tolerance for uncertainty or a lack of common codes.
 b. The conditions of the context
However, besides the existence of personal elements and ways in which we relate with the rest
that can lead us to perceive the other person as an enemy, there often are certain conditions
typical of the context in which we live that play an important role as well. In fact, these conditions
can in a more or less conscious manner predispose us to identify the different one as an enemy
and to acquire violent attitudes of exclusion and elimination.
An example may be found in that neighborhood or area of town where years ago there used to be
a stable population, but that, all of a sudden, starts to receive new people. The local inhabitants
have two options: they can integrate the newcomers positively or, otherwise, perceive that they
threaten the existing leadership or benefits, etc., and, therefore, identify them as enemies against
whom to have a violent behavior. This second response depends on the different social elements
present in that neighborhood or area of town.
In other cases, the enemy image is an intentional fabrication. An example is provided by the
armed conflicts in which some governments create favorable conditions amongst their
population to activate the enemy image in order to legitimize the use of force against another
country so that it can have access to, maintain or increase its own power. The most recent
and popular case is the war of the US against Iraq, where the strategies used by the US
government to lead its own population to legitimize its war against Iraq (by manipulating the
feeling of threat through the use of false information on the existence of weapons of mass
destruction, by trying to relate it to the war in Afghanistan, the September 11 terrorist attacks,
and so on) can be easily identified. Propaganda campaigns against concrete countries or
groups of people are almost always used to justify an increase in the expenditure on arms or
police control, cuts in personal liberties or to obtain new natural resources, such as
petroleum. If it is true that the attitude of certain governments or armed groups can represent
a real threat, it is also important to be conscious on how often the perception that somebody
else is threatening us is used to legitimize war when, actually, there are several alternative
ways to deal with a war threat (by activating strategies of coordination, involving the
intelligence services of the countries, controlling the trade of arms or other illegal products,
reducing the social and economic expenditure among the countries worldwide, etc).
The following activity will help us understand the macro social elements that make it easy
for people to incorporate the enemy image.
- 14
ACTIVITY: Cinema forum: Fahrenheit 9/11, by Michael Moore, 2004.
Educational purpose: to identify the different elements used by certain
governments in order to legitimize the use of violence to attack another country.
Estimated time: 122 minutes to watch the documentary, 50 minutes for the debate.
Necessary material: The documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 by Michael Moore, 2004. The
teacher’s guide published in English on the director’s website can be useful too:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/books-films/fahrenheit911/teachersguide.
Development: seeing the documentary.
Evaluation: Guide for the debate:
• Which violent act placed the population under a situation of vulnerability, making it
feel like a victim before an external enemy?
• What was the role of the media when creating an enemy image of Saddam
Hussein? What did they hide? What did they exaggerate in order to justify the use of force
against Iraq? Which kinds of content did they utilize so that the population would see
Saddam Hussein as an enemy?
• Which hidden interests did George W. Bush have to create an enemy image and
thereby involve the population?
• Which strategies were used so that the majority of the population saw Saddam
Hussein as an enemy thus legitimizing the use of force against Iraq?
• What was the role of religion and the sense of patriotism when activating the
enemy image among the population?
• Which elements do you think were also used in Spain?
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau
Let’s analyze the conditions of the context that make it easier for the enemy image to be activated
among the population:
− The existence of an unresolved environment and/or history which emphasizes the differences
as threats and establishes relations of competition between the groups for economic, ideological
or ethnic reasons.
This is the case in former colonies, particularly in Africa, in which boundaries and political systems
that were not respectful with their reality were imposed and where nowadays different clans
compete in order to control the natural resources and political power. It is the case in Israel and
Palestine as well, where the populations compete over the same territory. It is also the case in
China and Tibet, in which a secular communist regime of Chinese culture opposes the Buddhist
Tibetan model, not to mention a long list of armed conflicts between states.
− The intervention of one or more leaders or of a government to justify violent actions in the
name of a nation, the Lord or race (honor, faith or purity).
- - 15 -
History has witnessed many leaders using openly racist or homophobic rhetoric, like the 9/11. Then, think of other examples you know: look for the concrete social elements that
Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic, who promoted the genocide of the Croatian, Bosnian activate the enemy image among the population.
and Albanian populations... These leaders, under the pretext of honor, religion or purity, Examples from the
force their populations to accept and legitimize atrocities against specific groups, while the Social elements that contribute Example suggested by the
documentary
real interest is to obtain or keep economic or territorial power. to create the enemy image Farenheit 9/11 participants.

- The reaction to violent acts that cause fear and tension among the population, which feels Unresolved History
vulnerable.
When an armed group or a state attacks the civilian population with bombs (Islamic radical
terrorism or national Palestinian, Chechnya, Basque, Irish, etc., terrorism) or with actions
meant to destroy their societies (demolitions of Palestinian houses by the Israeli army,
forced relocations of groups of the population by all armed groups in Colombia, etc.) they Leader that justifies violent actions
in the name of the nation, God or
drive the assaulted population to reject them, not to recognize their motives, be afraid of
religion
them and be willing to pay them with the same coin.
Reaction to violent acts
- Media that informs about a social context suitable for the creation of an enemy image.
This was the case of the Serbian radio and television channels before the start of the war in
the former Yugoslavia. It is also the case of the Mil Colines radio station in Rwanda, which
encouraged the Hutu population to destroy the Tutsis. Media that help to generate
hatred
- State policies which lead the population to be on one of the sides and take part in war.
In this case, we can refer to the policies of economic rewards in the US for those people
who provide information on suspicious citizens that might be involved in Al Qaeda. In Policies that encourage people to
Colombia they have economically encouraged people to join armed groups in the take a side in an armed conflict
countryside and provide information about suspicious citizens thus acting as informers.

ACTIVITY: Making relationships.... Evaluation: Was it easy or difficult to find examples? Why? Do you think that the
Educational purpose: to understand the social elements that make the populations acquire a governments use these tools to justify an increase in their military expenditures or
determined image and be guided by this enemy image. a reduction of personal freedoms? How is all of this related to the creation of the
enemy image?
Estimated time: 30 minutes. Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau

Necessary material: The documentary F a h r e n h e i t 9 / 1 1 , by Michael Moore,

2004; photocopies of the following chart. So far we have looked at the micro and macro social factors that predispose us to activate
Development: Once that you have found out which are the social elements that activate the enemy image. However, what happens if this mechanism is already present in us? How
the enemy image among the population, fill in the following chart in order to illustrate does it influence our perception of the other?
each one of them with a concrete example from the documentary Farenheit

-1 6 - - 17 -
3. Processes implied in the enemy image If when walking past us we have the impression that he/she is standing too close to us, we will
probably hold our bags tight and look at him/her in a defensive manner.

If we focus on this example, we will see how prejudices are made up of three elements:
Seeing the other as an enemy makes us have reactions that are difficult to control. In thoughts, “he/she will steal my bag”; feelings/emotions, “I’m afraid of walking next to this
this section we will try to understand which reactions they are and which mechanisms gypsy person”; and actions-discrimination, “I’ll pull a long face and hold my bag tight”.
have lead us to develop them. STEREOTYPES are simplified mental images built and shared by the members of a group (‘our’
group) of the members of another group (‘them’).
Processes implied in the enemy image These are attributed to a person due to the fact that this person belongs to a specific group. They
Emotions are difficult to change, they simplify reality, and they are based on generalizations of the sort
Perceptions Belonging to a Language “every x is y...”. These stereotypes get activated whenever we bump into somebody that we do
group not know and of whom we have only minimum information.
Prejudices and stereotypes Endogroup-exogroup · Fear · Do we talk about the
Resistance to change Favoritism · Anxiety perceived or felt other or about the
· Resistance inside the group in advance l ió
relationship with the
Stereotypes can be positive –“Latin-Americans are warm-hearted” -, negative “Latin-Americans
· Attention and memory · Homogenization · Susceptibility other? are lazy”, or neutral “Latin-Americans have indigenous features”. We have to point out that this
· Expectations · Differentiation last stereotype does not imply any value judgment and, therefore, we cannot know whether the
· Self performance · Excessive attention person who expresses this opinion empathizes or not with the Latin-American community.
· Sense of belonging Lack of dialogue ·
Dehumanization
However, how are these stereotypes created? There are three mental processes
· Polarization
that help us to create them:

a. Perceptions
How do we see the world around us? We build our image of the world based on
those everyday experiences that we have been gathering since the day we were
born. Therefore, the way we see it is strongly related to the prejudices and
stereotypes that exist in our society against certain groups of people.
Perceptions are generated by two phenomena: prejudices and stereotypes.
PREJUDICES, as the name indicates, are the judgments that we make before getting to know
somebody or something. These are unverified value judgments that can be either favorable or
unfavorable of an individual or a group4.
These prejudices lead us to assume, for example, that, without even knowing the people who
make up the gypsy community, the gypsies in general are thieves and that, therefore, they may
steal from us. This value judgment will probably have an enormous influence on our behavior and
we will likely find ourselves discriminating against a person that belongs to this community: we will
be careful when in the presence of a gypsy person since he/she is definitely going to steal our
bag.
a) Social Categorization: we classify the information about the world around us
through what we call “social categories”. For example, we all know that a pear is a
piece of fruit that would belong to the category of food and so on. We see people the
same way, that is, according to the community that they belong to. We may say that a
Colombian person belongs to the category of Latin-American and not to the category
of Nordic people. Social categorization is useful to organize the information and
simplify reality.
b) Social categorization has to do with the comparisons we establish between the different
categories. For example, we compare cultures, nationalities, skin colors, socioeconomic
levels, etc. We have to point out that these comparisons are based on the actual differences
between these categories, but we also magnify these differences so that whenever in front of
two people from different cultures we notice more differences than similarities. Therefore,
comparisons are based on magnified differences.

4 The section on emotions was inspired by the manual of reference for subjects related to intercultural affairs by
the group AMANI. Educación Intercultural. Análisis y resolución de conflictos. Ed. Popular. Madrid, 2004.
- 18 - - 19 -
 If we see three Colombians and three Swedes, we will compare whether they are blond or states that we agree with.
dark-haired instead of realizing how both have a head and two feet.
c) The attribution of characteristics: stereotypes add subjective information
ACTIVITY: Memorion
according to each person’s expectations. We define groups and attribute some
or other features according to the stereotypes that we have. When we see Educational purpose: to realize how our attention and memory are selective.
things in differentiated categories, we add information according to our
expectations, prejudices and stereotypes: if we continue analyzing the example Estimated time: 10 minutes.
above, we will be likely to assume that the Colombians are cheerful and open-
minded, while the Swedes are formal and punctual. Necessary material: Pieces of paper and pens.

Development: Choose the case of two opposing groups (for example Catalonian or
As we have seen, stereotypes and prejudices are deeply-rooted processes that act even without Basque nationalists and Spanish nationalists). Every participant chooses, in the
having us being conscious of how they can regulate and guide our behavior. That is why it is framework of this duality of groups, who he/she feels closer to or not. Then, they make a
important to know how they operate, how each one of us reproduces them or not, and how that list of the statements or actions carried out by each group that they deem positive or
often leads us to stop recognizing our own difficulties or mistakes. negative.
Another interesting aspect of our perception of the other is that it is very difficult to change. Why? Group we Group we
Well, there are several factors that have a lot to do with it: our resistance to change, selective agree with: disagree with:
attention and memory, expectations towards one another, and what we call the “self- Positive aspects of their
performance” effect: policy
a) Resistance to change: Stereotypes and prejudices are not easy to modify,
they are “resistant to change”, because they are related to the values of the
groups they use. If we believe that the Jews are sectarian, even though we meet Negative aspects of their
very open-minded and self-critical Jews, it will be very difficult for us to change our policy
minds. We will suffer from the same resistance to change with regard to those prejudices that
we might have against those people or groups that we consider our enemies.

b) Selective attention and memory: Do we remember everything we see? Do we
want to? Why do we have an easier time remembering certain things than others?
Our memory is “selective”. This means that we remember things that catch our
eye and are interesting for us, but we do not even pay attention to the rest. We do
not have any trouble remembering the lyrics of our favorite band, but we do not
have such an easy time remembering the elements in the chemical periodic table.
The same thing happens with the perception of the other. We are more likely to
remember the information that is coherent with our stereotypes than the one that
is not. For example, if I behave well with one colleague and bad with another, it is
more possible that we pay more attention and therefore remember more the
positive actions of the first and the negative actions of the second. This example
can also be applied to political parties, urban bands, states, etc., we will pay more
attention and therefore remember better the positive actions of the parties, bands and
Evaluation: What can you see? Which boxes contain most of the examples? Do you
think that the amount of positive actions by the group you agree with constitutes an
objective or a subjective fact? Compare your answers with those participants who agree
with the group you disagree with.
Additional suggestions: It is important to choose a case in which the actions by
the groups are more or less balanced (it is not always the case) and that is close
to the participants carrying out this activity, so that there can be opposing
opinions and it can be proved that it is not really much about what some groups
do objectively fine and others wrong, but about everybody’s selective attention
and memory.
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau

- 20 - - 21 -
 c) Expectations of the other: As we have seen in the example above, there is a close
relationship between the stereotypes and expectations that we have from the others. We
usually expect from the other what the stereotype guides us to expect. If stereotypes orient our
expectations and their confirmation reinforces these stereotypes, we will realize that we are
caught up in a vicious circle. If we meet a Japanese person, we will expect him/her to be kind
and introverted and that is why we will be nice to him/her: consequently, it is very possible that
this person will treat us kindly. This can be a neutral expectation, but what happens when we
expect a Muslim to behave like a terrorist? Expecting the worst is usually referred to in terms
of “hostile prediction” and it is especially dangerous when, after predicting hostile actions by
the other, we decide to step forward in order to prevent them.
We could think that if our expectations do not come true, the stereotype tends to grow weaker
and it therefore becomes easier to overcome, but, unfortunately, this is not how things work:
the final result is always the confirmation of the stereotype, regardless of whether our
expectations come true or not. If our expectation comes true, we understand why we keep the
stereotype, but if it does not come true, we take it as the exception that proves the rule, and
we therefore find ourselves right at the beginning once again.
d) The self-performance effect: However, this is not it. There is a SELF-
PERFORMANCE EFFECT, which can be defined in terms of the “trend to act
according with the expectations that we believe the rest have of ourselves” 5. This
makes both our expectations and stereotypes not only guide our beliefs or thoughts and lead
us to create an enemy image, but also give shape to our own behavior based on the other. A
very common case is the one of the teacher telling the student that he/she is good-for-nothing
and that he will never do anything right. This is exactly what the student will end up thinking,
not because the student is actually good-for-nothing, but because he/she will end up
internalizing and reproducing his/her teacher’s belief.
All of this will make stereotypes grow stronger leading us even to believe that stereotypes describe
our reality, without noticing that they “build” it instead. But this already implies getting into more
complicated matters. What we are interested in at the moment is realizing that we finally build and
forge relationships based on the stereotypes that regulate our actions.
5 Group AMANI. Educación Intercultural. Análisis y resolución de conflictos. Ed. Popular. Madrid, 2004.
- 22 -
b. The sense of the group before the enemy
Everything we have seen so far cannot be understood without being placed within the framework
of what we usually refer to as the “sense of belonging to a group”.
The SENSE OF BELONGING TO A GROUP refers to the sympathy that we develop with the
group(s) that we belong to.
Many of us will find that we belong to different groups, such as school friends, college
friends, sports clubs or camp friends, etc. We usually belong to those groups that we feel
we have things in common with, with whom we share preferences (music, football), values
(friendship), experiences (concerts, etc.). However, we do not only belong to groups of
friends, we also are part of a family, we live in a specific neighborhood, in a specific city,
etc. However, if we count all the groups and communities that we belong to, we will realize
that we do not identify with them the same way. We will probably feel closer to our college
or sports club friends than to out colleagues, or even than to our school friends. This
happens because there is a difference between belonging to a group and feeling that we
belong to a group and that greatly depends on which moment of our life we are in.
We build our identity on based on all of that. The sense of belonging to a group has a lot
to do with the moment of our life in the same way that our identity is a flow that we build
all along our lives, so our identity is dynamic and it greatly depends on our sense of
belonging to a group. We build our identity within the social space of a group, which is
supported by a series of specific values that will end up becoming our own values upon
which we construct our identity. It is very important to understand the way in which the
groups relate, since the creation of the enemy image requires the existence of the groups
to build it. This image cannot be created in a short term, but it requires a group process in
which we sew together our beliefs, opinions, ideas, stereotypes, prejudices, images, etc.,
with regard to the other group.
The creation of the enemy image does not only take place within the framework of a competition
between groups. While cooperative group relationships are based on the construction of the other
as a friend, as somebody that can compliment and enrich our group, competitive group
relationships are based on the perception of the other as a threat, as an enemy that we have to
get far and/or protect ourselves from. If we compete between groups, it won’t be strange to
think that each group, “us”, will try to get stronger in order to be able to face the enemy,
“them”.
- 23 -
We will refer to our group, “us”, the group that we belong to, as ENDOGROUP (the prefix endo
means “inside”, of the same group); we will refer to the other group, “them”, as EXOGROUP (exo
means “outside”).
There are certain communities where this perception of “us” is deeply rooted, to the point which
certain groups use specific words to refer to all of the rest: Jews and gentiles, gypsies and payos,
military and civilian...
Let’s see how this rigid vision influences the groups once that the enemy image is activated:
• Group favoritism: each one of us builds a perception of oneself that is far more positive than it
actually is. In fact, we do not take into account our negative characteristics or weaknesses and,
without any problems, we project them on the exogroup, “them”, the enemy. This is what we call
group favoritism, which means that we favor the vision of our own group.
• Blame and attribution of negative characteristics: We believe that everything that happens
to us in relation to the other is his/her fault. Therefore, we have “negative” feelings, such as rage
or anger, because of the other “enemy’s” fault. They are the ones to blame for anything that
happens to us. Likewise, the enemy image is built through the attribution of negative
characteristics to the other to a point in which we become unable to even see his/her positive
characteristics.
• Homogenization of each group: We perceive that all of us who belong to the same group
think the same way, without being able to see the differences that there can be between us. In
some extreme cases, this leads us to an absolute internal control of the group so that nobody
escapes from the line of thinking traced. Likewise, we also tend to see the exogroup as a
homogeneous and stereotyped entity.
• Difficulties to debate: We lose common sense and adopt rigid and intolerant positions
towards the “other” which make it very difficult for us to talk.
• Differentiation from the other group: We need to point out the difference between
“us” and “them”. There is a greater and more polarized distance between the groups.
This differentiation can be expressed verbally -“we are not like them” or “we do this, they
do this other thing”- or through the use symbolic languages like clothing, that is a style
that distinguishes one from the others and makes it easier for people to socially
recognize them.
• Magnification of the enemy: We consider the enemy bigger, more powerful and crueler
than it actually is.
- 24 -
• Excessive attention to the opposing group: We pay excessive attention to the
opposing group. We follow all their movements keeping alert in case of an alleged attack. Any fact
affects us and our reference group directly.
• Dehumanization: We attribute to a group or community non-human characteristics
which exclude them from the category of human beings (they are compared to animals, demons or
they are treated as a lifeless object – collateral damage-, not taking into account that they have
fears, feelings, families, friends, etc.) We suggest you to do the following activity so that this
concept becomes easier to understand:
•
ACTIVITY: Mara against Mara
Educational purpose: to think about the differentiation trend among the groups.
Estimated Time: 50 minutes.
Necessary material: photocopies of the text to analyze and of the charts to make
analysis easier.
Development: The participants will gather in groups of 4 or 5 in order to read and
analyze the text with the help of the charts.
M-18 and M-S. In the sixties some urban armed bands started to arise in Los Angeles (US), the so-
called maras, which were usually made up of youngsters – many of them Central-American
immigrants, who found themselves on the streets due to unemployment. The so-called Mara 18
takes its name from the Los Angeles street where its base is located. Later the Mara
Salvatrucha was created, taking its name from the way people coming from EL Salvador
were called. The maras essentially traffic in drugs and stolen cars and steal from stores. In order to
fight these activities, the Los Angeles police adopted an expulsion policy which contributed
to the expansion of this problematic issue. Nowadays, the M-18 and M-S maras are present in
the US, Canada, Mexico and all Central-America.
Belonging to a mara has a special meaning for its members: "M-18 is my family. This tattoo
links me to it for life” says Bad Boy, from M-18. Most of the members of the maras can be told
from the others through the symbols that identify their group: on the one hand, the
members of M-S are identified through the number 13 or with the word southern and
they often have tattoos with an “M” or an ”M-S” or the words “Salvadorian pride”. On
the other hand, the members of M-18 usually have tattoos with the numbers “666”
(which add up to 18) or “XVIII”. There is a great rivalry between the maras: the members of
M-18 refer to those of M-S in terms of: “Dried Shit”, and out of the 2000 homicides per year
registered in El Salvador, 40% are attributed to confrontations between members of the
maras. However, their antagonism is, the least to be said, questionable:
-25 -
it is not only difficult to tell one from the others through their clothes (they often wear
very baggy jeans and baseball caps), but there actually isn’t any real cause for
confrontation that goes beyond the competition between the two gangs.
According to a Salvadorian sociologist, “the violence between maras is essentially aimed at the
destruction of those who they believe are their enemies: they are youngsters of very similar
economic and social background, who only differ from one another according to whether they
belong to one or the opposite group”.
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau, based on an article published by Le Monde Diplomatique. March 2004, p. 18-19.

Fill in the boxes based on the text you read:

Mara 18 Mara Salvatrucha

How are the members of

the maras
M-18 and M-S similar?
Which identification
symbols do they use to
be different from the
other band?
What do they call the
other band?

Evaluation: Compare the factors which make the members of the two bands different and
similar. Would you say that they are very different? Why not? Let’s analyze how violent
the members of the bands can be. Do you think that this violence is justified? Now,
choose two opposing groups which are common in your environment (two football teams,
two national bands, two urban tribes, etc.) and fill in the following chart:

Names of the groups:

How are the members of
these groups similar ?

- 26 - - 27 -
 Which identification
signs make them
different from one
another?
Which derogatory
words do they use to
refer to the other?

Evaluation: Do you think that you belong to a group that clearly differentiates itself
from another? How does each one differentiate itself from the other? What is the
relationship between these groups like? Is there any violence between the two?
Think about other examples of opposing groups and ask yourselves the same
questions.
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau

.
 leads us to express value judgments on people, which characterize and define them rigidly, leaving
hardly any margin at all to get to know them for who they are.
c. Emotions

We not only think of the enemy, but we even feel the enemy. The enemy image depends on
feelings and emotions.
- Fear: If we bear in mind that the other can become an enemy as soon as we start perceiving
him/her as a threat or danger to us and our group, then it is easy to understand the feeling of
fear which starts to be generated in our group. This fear constitutes an innate answer to
insecurity and an alert before a real danger which leads us to take measures in order to protect
ourselves. Then, we find ourselves thinking of ways to defeat and win the enemy in order to
deal with it.
- Perceived or anticipated anxiety: even though fear is related to a concrete fact by which we feel
threatened, we can also suffer from anxiety. Anxiety is a negative and out-of-proportion answer to
the cause that generates it. Therefore, by perceiving the enemy as bigger and stronger than it
actually is, we will work on strategies to defend ourselves and successfully face the enemy which
are directly proportional to its magnitude, that is big and strong, just like our enemy. However, what
will happen once that the others find out about the dimension of our strategy? As we are their
enemies too, they will probably think of ways to defeat us and they will probably work on big
strategies just like ours. In conclusion, both groups will feed a spiral of violence and build the enemy
image over the ghost of an enemy.

- Strong emotional burden: On the other hand, it is also very likely that, because of the enemy
image, we will take everything that has to do with the relationship with the others very seriously. We
will register everything the enemy does or says in terms of a challenge or attack against us, granting
it too much importance. This reaction is due to our estate of alert and to the excessive sensitivity of
our emotions.
d. The language
It is also important for us to analyze the role carried out by language and observe how it is used to
define the members of a group and not the relationships between the groups. It is not very difficult to
hear derogatory sentences against the Maghribian community, but it would be strange to listen to a
sentence like, for example, “We Catalonians do not like the Maghribian” or “We Catalonians and the
Maghribian have a negative relationship”. These sentences that refer to the relationships between
the groups put the emphasis on the way we relate with one another, and not on the way we see the
people who have these relationships.

It is necessary to observe how stereotypes refer to the others, to the ones being stereotyped, but
they never say anything about the ones articulating the stereotype. The verbal space for a
relationship is then deleted and the only thing that remains is the group or the person being
stereotyped. If we spoke in terms of relationships and not in terms of people, this would be helpful to
understand our responsibility on our perceptions. On the other hand, the way we create stereotypes

4. The enemy image in a conflict
A demand or a request does not stop making sense or lose meaning
if articulated by the enemy, the opponent or the terrorist.
We have actually accumulated too many pending issues, unbearable arrogances,
excessive injustice, double standards, fanaticisms of all kinds and false truths.
Vicenç Fisas. Peace is possible
As we have seen, the distortion generated by the enemy image has very perverse effects on the
relationship between groups. This fact, if considered within the framework of a competitive
context, greatly influences a conflict’s dynamics We can say that from the enemy image to the
justification of violence (discrimination, exclusion or even elimination of the other) there is a very
small step. But let’s see how we get there:
Confusion between Person-Process- Problem
Invisibility of the causes of the conflict
Distrust Polarization
Loss of the sense of the conflict
Naturalization of violence
− Confusion between Person (or group) - Process - Problem: It is very important to
understand that the person that we are in conflict with does not constitute a problem him/herself,
but that what we have is a clash of needs (a problem) with that person. This is the reason why
people are killed in wars, while the reasons for the war are the natural resources, the fight for
independence, etc. At a closer level, we confuse the person with the problem, when, for example,
we insult immigrants for taking our jobs instead of thinking that the problem might be that they are
underpaid for carrying out the same work. With this confusion, the other is not the person we have
a problem with, but “the other is the problem itself”.
− Invisibility of the causes of the conflict: Within the context of a conflict with great rivalry,
the confrontation acquires such strength that the real causes that generated it are soon forgotten.
- 29 -
This is what happens in the case of rivalries between urban gangs, who cannot even remember
how their confrontation began (refer to the example of the M-18 and M-S maras in the text), or in
the case of wars between whole blocks (during the cold war, between the Western block and the
Soviet block, or nowadays between the US and the “evil countries”), in which the mere existence
of the enemy (the capitalist/the communist, the imperialist/the terrorist) constitutes a good enough
reason to maintain a war or attacks against the civilian population.
− The sense of the conflict is lost: When the causes of a conflict are not visible any longer, it
is easy to lose the real sense of the rivalry and not to realize that the means are getting further
away from the ends.
We can find an example in our country’s (as many others’) political life, where the parties of the
opposition reject the proposals by the government’s party by principle –and vice versa- that is for
the mere reason that the one who had the idea was the other, no matter how valid the idea was.
The sense of the conflict is lost as well in some armed confrontations in which the fight is more
closely related to the fact that war itself has become the economic system (because the soldiers
do not have any other professional possibilities, because the economy is based on the trade of
weapons, because the exploitation of the natural resources or the weapons traffic allows us to
finance a war) rather than with the real causes of the conflict.
− Distrust: The people and groups distrust the other people and other groups: They suspect
that the other will attack them at any moment, that it has spies among them, or that, whenever
the other has a gesture to get closer to them, it is because it is setting a trap. The more
people distrust the other people and groups, the less and more deteriorated communication
there is between the two. This leads to such a deepening of the existent division of the
population that they end up establishing relationships based on fear, hatred and revenge. A
very common fact in the peace negotiations of an armed conflict is to believe whenever an
armed group declares a cease-fire that it is doing so in order to gain strength and attack again
later. This distrust turns the enemy into a suspect of anything that can go wrong (immigrants
are blamed for unemployment, crime and school failure). At a more sophisticated level of
distrust, and in certain sectors (especially when carrying out complex work negotiations, etc.),
this distrust can lead us to believe that the enemy is paying people in our surroundings to spy
on us or to influence us against our own interests. This fact can increase the level of distrust
among the members of our own group, ending up fragmenting and breaking the structure of
the endogroup.
− Polarization: Every group sets itself in more and more rigid and distant positions and it
becomes more and more difficult to overcome the stereotypes and prejudices against one
another, since these become the bases of our communication. We will then get caught up in a
- 30 -
spiral of distance, violence and lack of communication which will become more and more
difficult to break.
5. Proposals to deconstruct the enemy image
- Naturalization of violence: In an extreme situation people lose their ability to sympathize
with the other to a point in which they consider the other as an undesirable object. This leaves an
Taking into account the most direct consequences of internalizing the enemy image within
open space to use any level of violence (psychological or physical) in order to discriminate,
the dynamics of a conflict (that is to confuse the Person-Process-Problem, make the
exclude or even eliminate the other.
causes of the conflict invisible, distrust the other, etc.), we suggest six different ways to
There are cases, actually, of organized urban groups which have a speech that legitimates limit their importance by focusing attention on the problem and trying to forge more open
different levels of violence against other people or groups. This is the case, as well, of the Army relationships with the others.
and wars in general, which legalize the killing of people from the enemy armies, and very often not
only military.
Differentiate the person from the problem

Person Problem

Channel emotions Work on a flexible Have an open attitude Understand the real
Overcome your fear concept of personal and Listen causes of the
Humanize the other· collective identity actively confrontation
Sympathize with the Focus on what Respect the other, Look for common needs
other makes you similar be humble... Look for creative
Recognize the Respect the solutions to the problem
other’s pain differences

a. Working with people: Humanizing oneself and the other

1. Channel emotions

Whenever we talk about emotions it is important to start by saying that having emotions is a natural
thing and that, therefore, we cannot condemn ourselves or anybody else for feeling emotions such
as disappointment, fear and even rage. However, it is also important to be careful and know how to
channel these emotions so that we do not release them against the other: it can be natural to feel
rage towards somebody in a set moment, but this does not mean that we are going to exert violence
against this person. It is natural to feel afraid of somebody in a given moment, but this does not
paralyze us, make us flee, or have violent reactions, but face our fear instead.

- 31 - - 32 -
 How do we do that?
• By being conscious of our emotions and asking ourselves: “Am I angry at this
person? Whenever I think of this person, do I feel rage/fear/humiliation?”
• By releasing these feelings without having that person in front of us: by
screaming, taking a shower, crying, doing sport...
• By assessing how much those feelings influence our relationship with this
person: Does feeling hatred/rage/fear...make me be unfair to the other person? Does it
make me tell him/her things that I can regret later? Does it prevent me from listening to
this person carefully?
• By sharing our emotions with people we trust.
• By dealing with the feelings and the relationship with the other person: What do
these emotions cause in me? How could I fix that?
• In contexts of violence, it is challenging to learn how to channel rage in a constructive
manner so that we do not increase the circle of violence by releasing it against the other or by
establishing a dependant relationship. We can channel our emotions constructively through the
search for justice or defense of the human rights.
OVERCOME YOUR FEAR: Even though fear is not a negative emotion itself –it often helps us
to protect ourselves from concrete situations of threat-,it can turn into a problem when we decide to
close our mind to a person, or even to become violent o become paralyzed because of our fear.
Fear has been consciously used more than once to justify a greater expenditure in armament
or to turn the other into an enemy in order to justify war. In these cases, it is extremely
important to think about which interests hide behind the promotion of a culture of fear. Why
does the government of my country speak about a neighboring country or group of people in
such negative terms? how does it benefit from that?
HUMANIZE THE OTHER: from the basis of knowledge. Being afraid is closely related
to our lack of knowledge about the other: since we see him/her as an enemy, we
forget that he/she has feelings –like fear, just like us-, friends, a family, hobbies and,
actually, maybe more than one thing in common with us. If we think about how his/her
environment must be, bear in mind that he/she is a person too, and that, therefore,
he/she has weaknesses, we can contribute to see him less as an enemy and more like
a human being.
SYMPATHIZE WITH THE OTHER: A step beyond bearing in mind that the other is a
person too is represented by thinking that his/her reasons can be as valid as ours.
Sympathizing with the rest means making the effort to identify the other person’s
emotions and recognize his/her feelings. This does not imply sharing his/her reasons
nor justifying them, but it does imply getting closer to his/her perceptions.
- 33 - -
RECOGNIZING THE OTHER PERSON’S PAIN: Sometimes when both parties
have experienced painful and strong emotions, it is difficult to sympathize.
However, it is still important for both parties to recognize that the other has
victims and relatives that suffer as much as “ours” too.
ACTIVITY: Other people’s biographies
Educational purpose: to generate more human perceptions of people or groups that
we usually do not trust.
Estimated time: 50 minutes.
Development: The following activity is individual. Each participant chooses a
“villain” from a story, novel or a film, or even a person that he/she totally
disagrees with. Then, he/she answers the following questions: Why do I think that
I don’t trust him/her? Are there any justified reasons? Why not? As an exercise to
“humanize” the character, the participants will write a composition describing
this character’s family context, friends, childhood, feelings, likes and dislikes,
dreams and weaknesses. Once finished, the participants will have to analyze what
they have in common with the character.
Evaluation: How did we feel while writing the composition? Has this contributed to
give an alternative (more human) image of the character or have we kept a distant
perspective of him/her? What makes us feel closer to the character? What makes
us feel more distant from him/her? Now, if we concentrate on ourselves, which kind
of people or groups of people do we usually find difficult to trust? What generates
this feeling? Are there any justified reasons? Why not? What could help us
overcome this distrust?
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau
2. Work on a flexible concept of your personal and collective identity
As stated before, one of the reasons why we feel likely to suffer from the enemy image is that we
are afraid that other cultures, values and methods might put our identity in danger. This perception
of threat arises because it is usually considered that our personal and social identity must be
fixed. If we take into account that our identity, that is “what makes us unique”, changes according
to our age, to the people that we relate with along our lives, the context(s) in which we live, etc., it
is logical to think that our cultural identity, that is the identity of the society where we live –which is
influenced by technological, ethnic and moral evolutions too, not to mention the mixture of people
with different interests-, must evolve as well.
34 -
After we understand, then, that our personal and collective identity are not fixed but that they
evolve instead, and that it is logical that they evolve as time passes by and as the context in which
they are inscribed changes, we can see the evolution of our personal and collective identity as an
enrichment and not as a threat.
How do we do that?
• By criticizing our identity and, therefore, treasuring what we consider to be
positive and rejecting what we consider to be negative.
• By trying to preserve those aspects of our identity that seem positive and trying to
change those that seem negative to us.
• By being equally critical with the identities of other people, groups or
communities.
• By trying to be enriched by those aspects of other people’s identities that we
consider positive and rejecting other aspects that we consider negative.
PUT THE ENPHASIS ON WHAT MAKES US SIMILAR: Even though it might seem
impossible, we can think that we have things in common with the Inuit or Australian indigenous
populations: it could be our age, gender, fears, hobbies, expectations of life, ways of dealing with
challenges... If we make the effort to find those aspects that we have in common instead on
emphasizing those that make us different, we will find a very easy way to break barriers between
people.
ACTIVITY: Get together!
Educational purpose: to identify what we have in common between the members of
the group and think about how this influences the integration of the group.
Estimated time: 30 minutes.
Development: make the participants take a walk in a determined space. The
participants will have to get together in groups according to their similarities (it
does not matter how many people there are per group) as the person who organizes
the activity mentions certain identity characteristics, such as age, political believes,
culture, hobbies, religion, favorite football team, family role, urban tribe, work...
In order to make the grouping activity easier, the participants will be able to ask one
another where they stand in each case (this will also allow them to get to know each other
better).
Evaluation: How did we feel? Was it easy for you to define yourselves in each
case? Why not? If somebody was left without a group, how did he/she feel? If
nobody was left without a group, why do you think this happened? Do you think
that all the characteristics mentioned are part of your identity? Were there other ones?
-3 5 - - 36 -
Which ones? Which attitude did you have when two differentiated groups were
created? Which attitude did you have when more than two groups were created?
Additional suggestions: It is possible that one person might feel uncomfortable when asked to
publicly join a group. It is very important to point out before carrying out the activity that nobody
will be forced to join a group at all times and that the participants will be allowed to pretend or
even not to take part in the activity for certain of the characteristics mentioned .
Source: Adaptation from the activity “Groups of names”. Seminar on Education for Peace – Association for Human
Rights. La Alternativa del Juego 2. Juegos y dinámicas de educación para la paz. La Catarata. Madrid: 2001.
RESPECT THE DIFFERENCES: As a complimentary element, besides looking for what
we have in common, we must also respect what makes us different. This exercise must
be carried out from a state of equality, without thinking of differences in terms of
superiority or inferiority, and from an honest effort to understand this diversity.
3. Have an open attitude
Although dialogue is often seen as a way to understand somebody else, it is not very common for
this dialogue to be understood in terms of an exchange with somebody else with an open attitude.
That is why it is important to put the emphasis on the importance of listening to the other person
from an equal position. We must be predisposed to know the other person with honesty and good
will.
LISTEN ACTIVELY: We must base our dialogue on listening. By listening attentively
we will be able to understand the contents of the other person’s message. That is
why it is not only important to listen to the other person, but to make the other person
feel listened to as well, through our corporal language, our look, by nodding and
asking further questions or paraphrasing what this person tells us to clarify certain
issues.
RECOGNIZE THE OTHER: Recognizing that everybody is worthy of affection and
that everybody has positive traits is an exercise that implies certain attitudes of:
• Respect towards the people who have opposing ideas. We can disagree with somebody’s
opinions, but this does not imply that we have to ridicule or undermine those people that do not
share our opinions or habits with.
• Deep analysis. An attitude that does not interpret that other people’s mistakes are caused
by their perverse nature, or that their good ideas are due to external causes and that they
have hidden intentions.
• Self-criticism. An attitude by somebody who is ready to recognize his/her own
mistakes and that is ready to be as critical with him/herself as with the rest.
 • Focus on the contents. An attitude thanks to which we accept the other person’s good ideas
and proposals instead of rejecting them for the mere fact that those who defend them are “the
others”.
• Of equality in the relationship. An attitude that favors the relationship with other people
from a point of view of equality, without any arrogance or feeling of superiority.
ACTIVITY: Politically incorrect
Educational purpose: to identify examples of narrow-minded
attitudes. Estimated time: 50 minutes.
Development: The participants have to choose different news from the politics
section of newspapers in which the 5 above mentioned attitudes (respect towards
ideas, deep analysis, self-criticism, focus on the contents and equality in the
relationship) are not respected. Make a list of the attitudes or expressions used in each
case.
Evaluation: Was it easy to find examples in the newspapers? Which do you think are the
most common attitudes? Do you think that they could change? Which attitudes do you
think you have had yourselves?
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau
b. Start from the roots of the problem in order to find solutions
1. Understand the real causes of the confrontation
If we think that the other person is the problem, we run the risk of forgetting that this problem has
real causes, that it’s motivations that have lead this person to become my enemy. If we think this
way, we could end up caught in a dynamic of competition and disqualification of the other without
any connection whatsoever to the reasons that caused it. It is very important, then, not to forget
that our rivalry is due to real causes and that the way to solve it has nothing to do with reinforcing
the rivalry with this person, but with solving the problem according to what caused it.
ACTIVITY: Capulets and Montagues
Educational purpose: to recover the real causes of a violent conflict. Estimated Time: 40
minutes.
Development: The participants have to remember the plot of the play Romeo and Juliet,
where they can see how the Capulets and Montagues have hated each other for
generations without having anybody remembering the initial reason for this hatred. All the
participants work together to make a list of current examples of rivalries between gangs,
governments, sports teams, etc. The participants get together in groups of 4 –5. The
participants take one of the sides to think about the possible causes of the confrontation
and feasible ways to find a solution that suits the both opposing parties.
Evaluation: Was it easy to find the causes of the rivalries for all of the examples?
Which were the most difficult/easiest cases? Why? Do you think that there is always
a justified reason for a confrontation? Why not?
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau
2. Look for common needs
Despite the most evident differences, all the confrontations can share the same needs: even the
biggest rivals can have common needs. We can find examples in the cases of confrontations both
between people and between countries. For example, social expenditure against military
expenditure is a factor that benefits the vast majority of the population instead of war between
countries. The populations of two countries will probably coincide in having their taxes destined to
community services (improving the education and health systems, etc.) instead of having them
destined to eliminating the people from the opposing community. The most frequent need among
families, friends, associations, work colleagues, etc., is to find a way to solve the problem that
suits both parties.
How do we do that?
• By not focusing on our own particular interests and prioritizing general interests
instead.
• By looking for common interests with the other person or people involved in the
conflict.
• By forging relationships based on these common interests.
3. Look for creative solutions to the problem
We often think that our problems with other people have no solution at all, maybe not because it is
an impossible problem to solve, but because we do not see further than the customary solutions.
If we make an effort to be creative and use our imagination, we can find solutions to solve a
problem that we may have with somebody.
How do we do that?
• By looking for the right environment and a predisposition to look for ideas
• By not rejecting any idea from the very start, because every single idea can be useful if
we find out how to modify it according to our needs.
• By getting inspiration from every possible field: other ways of behaving, other cultures,
other professions...
- 38 -
ACTIVITY: Socks out!
Contents
Educational purpose: to promote creativity by getting used to not rejecting any
idea from the very start and getting inspiration from every single possible field,
different ways of doing things, other cultures, other professions, etc. Introduction and educational purposes 2
Estimated time: 30 minutes.
Development: The participants get together in groups of 4 – 5 plus another
participant who acts as an “idea destroyer detector”. Every one must choose a
1. Introduction: Creating an enemy 4
specific field (sciences, home, agriculture, children, etc.) and make a list numbering
as many things as possible that we can do with a sock in that specific field. While a. What are our needs and values? 5
the brain-storming takes place, the “idea destroyer detector” must make another list b. Why do we feel that another person or group threatens our needs? 6
c. However...who is the other? 7
of any of the possible expressions used to stop creativity (like, for example, “Yes,
but...”, laughter, “that would never work”, “What?”, surprised looks, etc.). 2. What makes us perceive the other as an enemy? 10
Evaluation: How many ideas came out? How were the socks normally used? How
many “idea destroyer” expressions did you find? Do you think that in your daily life
you usually accept other people’s ideas or do you disqualify them from the very a. Me and how I relate to others 10
b. The conditions of the context 14
start? Which “idea destroyer” expressions did you use? How many others do you
know? (you can make a list) Was it useful to look for ideas from other fields? Are
you used to doing this when you’re looking for creative ideas? 3. Processes implied in the enemy image 18
Source: Escola de Cultura de Pau

Recommended Bibliography a. Perceptions 18

b. The sense of the group before the enemy 23
• Colectivo A M AN I. Educación Intercultural. Análisis y resolución de c. Language 27
conflictos. Ed. Popular. Madrid, 2004. d. Emotions 28

• Lozada, M. “Violencia política y polarización social: desafíos y

alternativas”. Conferencia dictada en el CELARG, Caracas, 9 de 4. The enemy image in a conflict 29
junio de 2002. Material no publicado.
• Martín-Baró, I. “Conflicto y polarización social”. XX Congreso 5. Proposals to deconstruct the enemy image 32
Interamericano de Psicología, Caracas, 1986.
• Psychologists for Social Responsibility. Enemy Images. A Resource
a. Working with people: Humanizing oneself and the other 32
Manual on reducing enmity. Washington, 2002.
b. Start from the roots of the problem in order to find solutions 37
http://www.psysr.org/EnemyImages1989.pdf
Recommended Bibliography 40

- 39 - - 40 -