Conflict Theory and Biosphere Annihilation
Robert J. Burrowes
In a recent article titled ‘Challenges for Resolving Complex Conflicts’, I pointed out that existing conflict theory pays little attention to the extinction-causing conflict being ongoingly
generated by human over-consumption in the finite planetary biosphere (and, among other outcomes, currently resulting in
200 species extinctions daily). I also mentioned that this conflict is sometimes inadequately identified as a conflict
caused by capitalism’s drive for unending economic growth in a finite environment.
I would like to explain the psychological origin of this biosphere-annihilating conflict and how this origin has
nurtured the incredibly destructive aspects of capitalism (and socialism, for that matter) from the beginning. I would
also like to explain what we can do about it.
Before I do, however, let me briefly illustrate why this particular conflict configuration is so important by offering
you a taste of the most recent research evidence in relation to the climate catastrophe and biosphere annihilation and
why the time to resolve this conflict is rapidly running out (assuming, problematically, that we can avert nuclear war
in the meantime).
In an article reporting a recent speech by Professor James G. Anderson of Harvard University, whose research led to the
Montreal Protocol in 1987 to mitigate CFC damage to the Ozone Layer, environmental journalist Robert Hunizker summarizes
Anderson’s position as follows: ‘the chance of permanent ice remaining in the Arctic after 2022 is zero. Already, 80% is
gone. The problem: Without an ice shield to protect frozen methane hydrates in place for millennia, the Arctic turns
into a methane nightmare.’ See ‘There Is No Time Left’.
But if you think that sounds drastic, other recent research has drawn attention to the fact that the ‘alarming loss of
insects will likely take down humanity before global warming hits maximum velocity.... The worldwide loss of insects is
simply staggering with some reports of 75% up to 90%, happening much faster than the paleoclimate record rate of the
past five major extinction events’. Without insects ‘burrowing, forming new soil, aerating soil, pollinating food
crops...’ and providing food for many bird species, the biosphere simply collapses. See ‘Insect Decimation Upstages Global Warming’.
So, if we are in the process of annihilating Earth’s biosphere, which will precipitate human extinction in the near
term, why aren’t we paying much more attention to the origin of this fundamental conflict? And then developing a
precisely focused strategy for transcending it?
The answer to these two questions is simply this: the origin of this conflict is particularly unpalatable and, from my
careful observation, most people, including conflict theorists, aren’t anxious to focus on it.
So why are human beings over-consuming in the finite planetary biosphere? Or more accurately, why are human beings who
have the opportunity to do so (which doesn’t include those impoverished people living in Africa, Asia, Central/South
America or anywhere else) over-consuming in the finite planetary biosphere?
They are doing so because they were terrorized into unconsciously equating consumption with a meaningful life by parents
and other adults who had already internalized this same ‘learning’.
Let me explain how this happens.
At the moment of birth, a baby is genetically programmed to feel and express their feelings in response to the stimuli,
both internal and external, that the baby registers. For example, as soon after birth as a baby feels hungry, they will
signal that need, usually by crying or screaming. An attentive parent (or other suitable adult) will usually respond to
this need by feeding the baby and the baby will express their satisfaction with this outcome, perhaps with a facial
expression, in a way that most aware parents and adults will have no difficulty identifying. Similarly, if the baby is
cold, in pain or experiencing any other stimulus, the baby will express their need, probably by making a loud noise.
Given that babies cannot immediately use a cultural language, they use the language that was given to them by evolution:
particularly audibly expressed noise of various types that an aware adult will quickly learn to interpret.
Of course, from the initial moments after birth and throughout the next few months, a baby will experience an increasing
range of stimuli – including internal stimuli such as the needs for listening, understanding and love, as well as
external stimuli ranging from a wet nappy to a diverse set of parental, social, climate and environmental stimuli – and
will develop a diverse and expanding range of ways, now including a wider range of emotional expression but eventually
starting to include spoken language, of expressing their responses, including satisfaction and enjoyment if appropriate,
to these stimuli.
At some vital point, however, and certainly within the child’s first eighteen months, the child’s parents and the other
significant adults in the child’s life, will start to routinely and actively interfere with the child’s emotional
expression (and thus deny them satisfaction of the unique needs being expressed in each case) in order to compel the
child to do as the parent/adult wishes. Of course, this is essential if you want the child to be obedient – a socially
compliant slave – rather than to follow their own Self-will.
One of the critically important ways in which this denial of emotional expression occurs seems benign enough: Children
who are crying, angry or frightened are scared into not expressing their feelings and offered material items – such as
food or a toy – to distract them instead. Unfortunately, the distractive items become addictive drugs. Unable to have
their emotional needs met, the child learns to seek relief by acquiring the material substitutes offered by the parent.
But as this emotional deprivation endlessly expands because the child has been denied the listening, understanding and
love to develop the capacity to listen to, love and understand themself, so too does the ‘need’ for material acquisition
endlessly expand.
As an aside, this explains why most violence is overtly directed at gaining control of material, rather than emotional,
resources. The material resource becomes a dysfunctional and quite inadequate replacement for satisfaction of the
emotional need. And, because the material resource cannot ‘work’ to meet an emotional need, the individual is most
likely to keep using direct and/or structural violence to gain control of more material resources in an unconscious and
utterly futile attempt to meet unidentified emotional needs. In essence, no amount of money and other assets can replace
the love denied a child that would allow them to feel and act on their feelings.
Of course, the individual who consumes more than they need and uses direct violence, or simply takes advantage of
structural violence, to do so is never aware of their deeply suppressed emotional needs and of the functional ways of
having these needs met. Although, I admit, this is not easy to do given that listening, understanding and love are not
readily available from others who have themselves been denied these needs. Consequently, with their emotional needs now
unconsciously ‘hidden’ from the individual, they will endlessly project that the needs they want met are, in fact,
material.
This is the reason why members of the Rothschild family, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Amancio Ortega, Mark
Zuckerberg, Carlos Slim, the Walton family and the Koch brothers, as well as the world’s other billionaires and
millionaires, seek material wealth and are willing to do so by taking advantage of structures of exploitation held in
place by the US military. They are certainly wealthy in the material sense; unfortunately, they are emotional voids who
were never loved and do not know how to love themself or others now.
Tragically, however, this fate is not exclusive to the world’s wealthy even if they illustrate the point most
graphically. As indicated above, virtually all people who live in material cultures have suffered this fate and this is
readily illustrated by their ongoing excessive consumption – especially their meat-eating, fossil-fueled travel and
acquisition of an endless stream of assets – in a planetary biosphere that has long been signaling ‘Enough!’
As an aside, governments that use military violence to gain control of material resources are simply governments
composed of many individuals with this dysfunctionality, which is very common in industrialized countries that promote
materialism. Thus, cultures that unconsciously allow and encourage this dysfunctional projection (that an emotional need
is met by material acquisition) are the most violent both domestically and internationally. This also explains why
industrialized (material) countries use military violence to maintain political and economic structures that allow
ongoing exploitation of non-industrialized countries in Africa, Asia and Central/South America.
In summary, the individual who has all of their emotional needs met requires only the intellectual and few material
resources necessary to maintain this fulfilling life: anything beyond this is not only useless, it is a burden.
If you want to read (a great deal) more detail of the explanation presented above, you will find it in ‘Why Violence?’ and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’.
So what can we do?
Well, I would start by profoundly changing our conception of sound parenting by emphasizing the importance of nisteling
to children – see ‘Nisteling: The Art of Deep Listening’ – and making ‘My Promise to Children’.
For those adults who feel incapable of nisteling or living out such a promise, I encourage you to consider doing the
emotional healing necessary by ‘Putting Feelings First’.
If you already feel capable of responding powerfully to this extinction-threatening conflict between human consumption
and the Earth’s biosphere, you are welcome to consider joining those who are participating in the fifteen-year strategy
to reduce consumption and achieve self-reliance explained in ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth’ and/or to consider using sound nonviolent strategy to conduct your climate or environment campaign. See Nonviolent Campaign Strategy.
You are also welcome to consider signing the online pledge of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’.
As the material simplicity of Mohandas K. Gandhi demonstrated: Consumption is not life.
If you are not able to emulate Gandhi (at least ‘in spirit’) by living modestly, it is your own emotional
dysfunctionality – particularly unconscious fear – that is the problem that needs to be addressed.
Biodata: Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive
research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since
1981. He is the author of ‘Why Violence?’ http://tinyurl.com/whyviolence His email address is flametree@riseup.net and his website is here. http://robertjburrowes.wordpress.com
ends