Author Roberto Vivo argues in this book that war is not a necessary part of human nature, and that it should be treated as a crime manageable by an international court. He acknowledges that it will take a great deal of education and cultural change in order to do so, but points out that similar battles against slavery, racism and torture have been largely successful or are moving in that direction. He suggests that if we as a species begin to take small steps in the direction of eliminating war, and continue to do so, the human race will at least make substantial progress towards peace, and towards saving the lives, well-being and happiness of billions of people in the process.
Vivo’s arguments are rational, intelligent, and clearly presented. His language is thoughtful and scholarly, but simple and straightforwardly put, without jargon or obfuscation. His argument also makes a great deal of sense, especially since he acknowledges that this change will not come easily and argues the need for a long-term, multi-generation approach grounded in education, social advocacy, and cultural change. He does not dismiss the idea that a peace founded exclusively in the power held by one party, or a peace based on a lack of respect for human rights and liberties, is worse than the alternative. He has obviously done a substantial amount of historical research, and discusses, among other things, the way a society’s openness to diversity and new ideas shapes its capacity for peaceful coexistence.
In fact, as an argument presented to win over academically-inclined, cool, rational readers, this succeeds admirably. However, it would perhaps be more likely to affect and persuade more people if it also included a few more visceral, personal, human examples of the costs of war, addressing the heart as well as the head. In some cases, too, he is a bit too ready to accept one side of an argument without thoroughly investigating the other. He lists slavery as a wrong equal to war, for example, but it is notable that peaceful advocacy failed to eradicate slavery in the US, where war succeeded. He glosses over other problems as well, arguing for example that “As the United States discovered under the presidency of George W. Bush, Western society simply will not permit the reinstitution of torture with impunity…,” – but one might argue that, in fact, the torture was permitted and those at the top who authorized it have suffered few, if any, real consequences as a result. A bit of editing might also polish up the book’s language and grammar, which can be awkward in places: “All of our arguments in pro of peace…” for example.
As a clear, rational argument for working towards an end to war, this is a valuable and convincing document – however, it would benefit from some additional emotional force and from a more thorough and complex discussion of some of the more difficult issues raised.
~IndieReader.