Violence and Wars - Part 2 (concluded)

Freud goes on to point out that the ruling class will try to set themselves above the law and the “ruled class” will establish its rights and its societal gains by insisting that no one is above the law by injecting codes into the law in the name of equality of all. If those in power resist and do not adjust, there will be civil strife and insurrections.  It is possible that over time there is a cultural evolution of identity between members of the community, common interests are valued, and the laws are accepted and complied with. But, “exercise of violence” even within a group, “cannot be avoided when conflicts of interests are at stake.”  He goes on to give several examples from history. 

Within large empires, the central power squashes conflicts quickly; but eventually they fall apart. “For humanity at large the sole result of all these military enterprises was that, instead of frequent, not to say incessant, little wars, they had now to face great wars which, for all they came less often, were so much the more destructive.” 

“There is but one sure way of ending war and that is the establishment, by common consent, of a central control which shall have the last word in every conflict of interests, says Freud. “For this, two things are needed: first, the creation of such a supreme court of judicature; secondly, its investment with adequate executive force. Unless this second requirement be fulfilled, the first is unavailing.”  Freud thinks that the second condition is unlikely to be met and says “It has no force at its disposal and can only get it if the members of the new body, its constituent nations, furnish it. And, as things are, this is a forlorn hope.”

Deeply rooted sense of unity shared by all members of community is needed to avoid conflicts of interests. We are still looking for some such unifying notion but in vain. Such cohesion is brought about more often by compulsion than by shared sentiments. “And, in our times, we look in vain for some such unifying notion whose authority would be unquestioned.” That is because we ignore the unfortunate fact that right is founded on force and need violence to maintain it.

Freud agrees that man has an active instinct for hate and violence which is easily kindled. But he also points out that it is a necessary instrument for survival. It is not alone because it is a part of the polarities of nature, namely Love and Hate. Humans have, what Freud calls “those that conserve and unify, which we call "erotic" (in the meaning Plato gives to Eros in his Symposium), or else "sexual" (explicitly extending the popular connotation of "sex"); and, secondly, the instincts to destroy and kill, which we assimilate as the aggressive or destructive instincts.” They act in concert. Self-preservation is of erotic nature, but it requires aggressive action to gain its end. In addition, these two instincts do not act in isolation; they act in concert with several other factors such as ideals and motives and opinions. 

Finally, Freud suggests that one way to control the destructive, violent instinct is through engaging its opposite, its counter-agent namely Love. “All that produces ties of sentiment between man and man must serve us as war's antidote.” These ties are of two kinds: such relations as towards a beloved object without the sexual connotation, or love in the sense it is used in religion; and sentiment of identification with other members of the community. 

This amazing conclusion reached by Freud should be no surprise. This is what Buddha and Jesus and all spiritual masters have been saying for centuries.

There is another method Freud suggests and calls it an indirect approach. He suggests that “men should be at greater pains than heretofore to form a superior class of independent thinkers, unamenable to intimidation and fervent in the quest of truth, whose function it would be to guide the masses dependent on their lead. There is no need to point out how little the rule of politicians and the Church's ban on liberty of thought encourage such a new creation. The ideal conditions would obviously be found in a community where every man subordinated his instinctive life to the dictates of reason. He remarks immediately that such a course is “utterly utopian.”

He ends his letter with the hope that our dread of the potential destruction of wars and cultural development may help mankind get rid of wars.