Peace as a Practice of Everyday Life – A Psychological Reflection on the Interview with Paul Galles
I have read the interview with great interest and appreciation. I find Paul Galles’ reflections thoughtful, constructive and remarkably close to what I consider essential for building a culture of peace. I particularly appreciate that he does not approach peace merely as a political objective or the absence of violence, but as a way of living, relating to others and assuming responsibility for our common future.
His emphasis on human dignity, education, social justice and democratic participation is especially valuable. I also appreciate his recognition that peace is not a permanent condition but an ongoing process that requires constant attention and effort.
From my perspective as a psychologist and psychotherapist, however, I would like to add a few reflections that could deepen this discussion, particularly concerning the psychological foundations of peace and the role of education.
1. Peace begins within the individual, but cannot end there.
Paul Galles rightly emphasizes that peace begins with recognizing the dignity of others. I would add that our ability to recognize the dignity of others is closely connected to how we understand ourselves.
People who constantly feel threatened, inferior, humiliated or excluded may find it more difficult to approach others with openness and trust. Fear and insecurity can encourage defensive attitudes, prejudice, aggression and the need to dominate.
This does not mean that insecurity inevitably leads to violence. Many people who have experienced considerable suffering develop extraordinary compassion and solidarity.
Nevertheless, inner peace and social peace are deeply interconnected.
From my psychological perspective, inner peace does not mean the absence of difficulties, frustration or emotional suffering. It means developing the capacity to face life's challenges without losing our sense of dignity, responsibility and connection with others.
Peace therefore requires not only political and social structures but also psychological maturity.
1. Education for peace must begin with a sense of belonging.
I particularly appreciate Paul Galles' statement that peace cannot simply be taught; it must be experienced.
This is perhaps one of the most important messages of the entire interview.
Children do not become peaceful primarily because adults explain the importance of peace to them. They develop peaceful attitudes through their daily experiences of relationships.
A child who experiences encouragement rather than humiliation, cooperation rather than competition at any price, and respectful guidance rather than domination is more likely to develop confidence in themselves and trust in others.
One psychological principle deserves particular attention:
A child who feels that they belong and that they can make a meaningful contribution is less likely to seek recognition through destructive behaviour.
This is especially relevant when discussing youth violence, bullying, exclusion and radicalization.
Behind certain forms of aggressive behaviour, we may discover discouraged young people who have lost their sense of belonging or who believe that power and domination are the only ways to gain recognition.
Of course, not all violence can be explained in this way. Family circumstances, social inequalities, traumatic experiences, peer influence and broader cultural conditions must also be considered.
But a preventive approach should always ask not only how to stop destructive behaviour, but also how to create the conditions in which constructive behaviour becomes possible.
I would therefore encourage schools to place greater emphasis on cooperation, encouragement, emotional development and shared responsibility.
1. Living together requires more than tolerance.
Paul Galles makes an important distinction between coexistence and genuinely living together.
This distinction is particularly relevant for Luxembourg.
Our multicultural society is often presented as a successful example of diversity. Yet living in the same country, working in the same institutions or attending the same schools does not automatically create meaningful relationships.
From a psychological perspective, tolerance is necessary, but it is only a beginning.
Tolerance may simply mean accepting the presence of people who are different from us. Genuine social cohesion requires something more: curiosity, empathy, mutual trust and the willingness to learn from one another.
We must move from merely accepting differences towards discovering our common humanity.
In my view, this is one of the greatest educational challenges facing Luxembourg.
Our children should not only learn different languages. They should also learn the language of human relationships: how to listen, how to express disagreement respectfully, how to cooperate and how to recognize the dignity of someone whose background or beliefs are different from their own.
1. Peace does not mean avoiding conflict.
Another particularly valuable aspect of the interview is Paul Galles' distinction between conflict and enmity.
I fully agree.
Conflict is a natural and sometimes necessary part of human relationships. It can stimulate learning, creativity and social progress.
The psychological challenge is not to eliminate disagreement but to prevent disagreement from becoming hostility.
One important obstacle is our human tendency to identify ourselves too strongly with our opinions.
When our beliefs become inseparable from our personal identity, criticism of an opinion can easily be experienced as an attack on our dignity.
We then become more interested in proving that we are right than in understanding what might be true.
This is particularly visible in political debates, social media discussions and sometimes even within families and communities.
I believe that the ability to disagree without rejecting the other person is one of the clearest signs of psychological maturity.
Children and adults alike need opportunities to develop this ability.
We should teach not only freedom of expression but also the art of listening, questioning our own assumptions and acknowledging that we may be mistaken.
A peaceful society does not require everyone to agree. It requires people who are capable of disagreeing without losing respect for one another.
1. Social justice is also a psychological necessity.
I appreciate Paul Galles' emphasis on housing, education and equal opportunities.
Social injustice is not only an economic or political issue. It also has profound psychological consequences.
When individuals repeatedly experience exclusion, humiliation or a lack of opportunities, they may gradually lose confidence in themselves, in others and in public institutions.
This can contribute to discouragement, resentment and social withdrawal.
A society cannot expect people to develop a strong sense of collective responsibility if they consistently feel that they have no meaningful place within it.
At the same time, material security alone does not guarantee social peace.
Human beings also need recognition, purpose, belonging and opportunities to contribute.
For this reason, social policies should not be limited to providing assistance. They should also strengthen people's capacity to participate actively in society.
Here I find Paul Galles' reflections on migrants and refugees especially important.
People should not be regarded merely as recipients of support but as individuals with abilities, experiences and contributions that can enrich our common life.
1. Peace requires courage, not merely kindness
One point I would like to develop further concerns the relationship between peace, courage and responsibility.
Sometimes peace is misunderstood as avoiding confrontation, remaining silent or accepting injustice in order to preserve harmony.
But genuine peace cannot be built on fear, submission or indifference.
There are moments when maintaining peace requires us to speak out against discrimination, humiliation, violence or injustice.
Psychological maturity involves learning to combine empathy with courage, kindness with firmness, and respect with clear personal boundaries.
We can reject harmful behaviour without rejecting the human dignity of the person responsible for it.
This distinction is essential in education, psychotherapy, family relationships and political life.
1. A peace institute should develop practical human capacities.
I find the proposal for an independent peace institute in Luxembourg particularly promising, and I appreciate Paul Galles' insistence that such an institute should not become merely another academic institution.
From my perspective, its greatest contribution would be to connect psychological knowledge, education and practical community experience.
I would suggest beginning with a limited number of concrete initiatives:
Peace education in schools: Helping children develop emotional awareness, cooperation, conflict-resolution skills and a sense of belonging.
Support for parents and educators: Offering practical approaches to encouragement, respectful communication, constructive discipline and the prevention of discouragement.
Intercultural dialogue: Creating opportunities for people from different backgrounds to move beyond superficial exchanges towards meaningful personal relationships.
Training in constructive disagreement: Helping young people and adults recognize prejudice, manage emotional reactions and engage in respectful consultation.
Evaluation and learning: Assessing whether these activities improve relationships, reduce exclusion and strengthen participants' sense of responsibility and belonging.
I would particularly emphasize that such initiatives should build on the experience of existing organizations and professionals.
Their effectiveness should be evaluated not only through the number of participants or activities organized, but also through observable changes in attitudes, relationships and behaviour.
For example, do children feel safer and more included? Are conflicts handled more constructively? Do teachers feel better supported? Are participants more willing to listen to people with different views?
These would be meaningful indicators of progress.
A final reflection
What I appreciate most about Paul Galles' interview is that it brings peace closer to everyday human experience.
Peace is not something that politicians alone can establish, religious leaders can preach, or schools can teach through special lessons.
It is a responsibility shared by all of us.
Nevertheless, I would like to add one essential psychological insight: Peace is not simply the result of teaching people how they should behave. It grows when we create conditions in which people experience belonging, dignity, encouragement and the possibility of making a meaningful contribution.
A discouraged person may struggle to contribute constructively to society. A person who feels respected, connected and useful is often better equipped to cooperate with others.
This is why I believe that the development of social interest, empathy and a sense of shared responsibility should be central to any serious effort to promote peace.
We should also remember that peace is not a destination we reach once and for all. It is a continuous process of personal and collective learning.
Perhaps the most important question we should ask ourselves is not simply, How can we create a more peaceful society?
But also:
What kind of human beings are we helping our children to become, and what kind of relationships are we creating among ourselves?
Our answers to these questions will determine the quality of peace we can build for future generations.
Fari Khabirpour
Psychologist and Psychotherapist
Luxembourg
Comments