Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming

Collective Consciousness: A Path to a Culture of

Healing

M.A. Thesis
Submitted by:

Kristin Famula, USA

kfamula@yahoo.com

To the European University Center for Peace Studies

Stadtschlaining/Burg, Austria

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Master of Arts Degree in

Peace and Conflict Studies

Word Count: 21,402

February 2007

Thesis adviser: Dr. H.B. Danesh

Acknowledgements
Many important people have contributed directly and indirectly to this final project.
Very special thanks to my thesis advisor, Dr. Hossain B. Danesh who has spent many
hours talking, meeting, and emailing about various aspects of this paperalways
encouraging me and helping me to find new ways of looking at the ideas.
Thank you also to the European University Center for Peace Studies (EPU) and Dietrich
Fischer who helped me find a unique and wonderful support-group of dedicated peace
workers.
And lastly, deep thanks and love to my parents, Roberta and John Famula, my sister
Jamie and my partner, Jason Adams for their continuous support, love and faith in my
path towards peace work. Even while I have questioned my own choices in what will
promise to be a difficult career, they have been a pedestal of never-ending
encouragement.

Abstract
Traumatic events leave long-lasting, detrimental consequences on the individuals
affected. Societal traumas, such as terrorist attacks, war, and natural disasters, which
impact entire populations, similarly inflict enduring pain and suffering. These traumas
have damaging effects that are not recognized by the wounded culture. The negative
results of which are incorporated into the collective consciousness of the culture; making
ideas and actions, based on the traumatic event, seem inherent and natural. Traumatic
events occur cyclically; re-occurring if the effects are never fully healed.
Two methods for healing will be examined in this paper: healing from Posttraumatic
Stress Disorder and lessons learned from numerous Truth and Reconciliation
Commissions with the hopes of finding a new approach to healing entire societies from
the harmful effects of trauma. Finally, the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (GTRC) and Education for Peace (EFP) will be considered as new
frameworks for cultural healing.

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Trauma and the Effects of a Traumatic Event

11

1. How We Respond to TraumaThe Need to Heal

2. Societal Trauma and Healing

16
18

Chapter 3: TraumaWorldview Collective Consciousness

26

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Worldview
Collective Consciousness
Consciousness Upheld
Memory
Impact of Trauma on the Collective Consciousness
Collective Consciousness Transformation through Trauma Healing

Chapter 4: Healing from TraumaPosttraumatic Stress Disorder

1. Treatment for PTSD
2. Difficulties with PTSD treatment

41
43
44

Chapter 5: Healing from TraumaTruth and Reconciliation Commissions

1. Treatment through TRCs
2. Difficulties with TRCs
a. Truth
b. Justice
c. Granting Amnesty
d. Top-Down Approaches
e. Time and Resources
f. Long-term Healing

47
50
53
54
55
56
56
57
57

Chapter 6: A Case StudyThe Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

27
29
30
32
34
39

Background
The Observable Impact on the Unhealed Community
The GTRC Mandate
Process for Healing
Transforming the Collective Consciousness
Previous Trauma in Greensboros History
Lessons Learned

59
59
61
62
63
65
66
68

Chapter 7: Culture of Healing

71

1. Culture of Healing as Implemented in Education for Peace (EFP)

2. Relevance of EFPs Culture of Healing to other Communities
a. Societal Trauma has a long-lasting impact
b. Acknowledging Past Trauma
c. Understanding Collective Consciousness and its Impact on Individuals
i. Building Non-Violent Relations & Reframing Identity

76
78
79
79
82
84

Chapter 8: Conclusion

86

Appendix I: Mandate for the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission

89

Appendix II: Prerequisites and components of an effective program of Peace

Education

92

References

93

Healing Societal Traumas and Transforming Collective

Consciousness: A Path to a Culture of Healing

Traumatic events are widespread and the effects of these shocking incidents permeate
through the lives of individuals world-wide. Tragedies such as car accidents, natural
disasters, marital or parental aggression, and even rape and murder occur every day in
every part of the world. Responses and reactions to these traumatic events vary from
person to person, but most individuals will, at some point in their lives, be affected by
trauma. While many individuals are able to heal from their experiences, is it possible that
some symptoms still linger? Most psychologists and mental health workers would
answer that question in the affirmative. It is not uncommon for individuals who have
experienced trauma, to change their attitudes or behaviors. In fact, these deeply
disturbing experiences often live with people for the rest of their lives.

In 2005, after Hurricane Katrina swept through the Gulf Coast of the United States,
wiping out most of the homes and businesses in New Orleans, Louisiana, survivors dealt
with many problems in addition to the loss of loved ones and displacement. Examples of
ongoing problems included sleep deprivation, depression, and re-living the event. In
particular, the first anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, triggered many vivid memories and
emotional pain.

Similar to those of the hurricane survivors, most traumatic events leave the impacted
individuals with emotional and psychological pain. After some time, victims of trauma
may feel as if they have moved on from the incident, but sometimes the effects are even
deeper than realized and can result in more severe and long-term, painful consequences.
Dr. Kendall Johnson, a crisis-management consultant for several school districts in
California, has observed many of these trauma side-effects during his work as a marriage
and family therapist. Some of these long-term results include anger at oneself and others,
perpetual pessimism and physical problems associated with the stress of trauma,
including stomach and head aches, weight loss or gain, and even increased likelihood for
illnesses (Johnson, 2006, 66). With the frequency of traumatic events and the severe
impact and lingering effects of trauma so often going unrealized, trauma itself becomes a
larger reason for concern.

While resultant effects are most often observed and researched in individual survivors,
trauma can also be shared across a larger population, affecting not only individuals, but
entire societies. Since the individual impact of traumatic events can be so severe and
long-lasting, it is necessary to also examine the effect on a societal level. Societal or
cultural traumas, such as those inflicted by the subjugation of native peoples, are
common as nations fight for sovereignty, populations work towards equality, or
civilizations strive for power. Societal leaders, often promise that similar traumas will
never happen again, while at the same time stressing the necessity of forgetting or
forgiving these traumas as unfortunate parts of a cultures history. Riane Eisler observes
in her historical account of Goddess-Worshiping societies, [i]t is a widespread

assumption that however bloody things have been since the days of the Sumerians and
Assyrians this was just the unfortunate prerequisite for technological and cultural
advance (Eisler, 1987, 66). As a consequence of unintentionally defending or
rationalizing the actions of those committing atrocities, the healing process can be
delayed or negated altogether. Social scientist and trauma and healing researcher, Duane
Elgin suggests that some of the traumas following this pattern include, genocide,
slavery, religious persecution, colonialism, and gender oppression (Elgin, October 1997,
26). The subsequent effects of particular traumas on societies are ignored or not
understood, but as with individual victims, the resultant symptoms and effects still exist
whether acknowledged or not. Over time, the product of these neglected traumas is an
unhealed society with negative consequences woven into the fabric of the culture.

These unresolved, cultural traumas have a pervasive, long-lasting, negative grasp on the
identity of each culture. Individual views of the world are influenced by each trauma.
This tendency is very similar to that of a child learning a lesson. If she paints on the
walls, and is yelled at by her parents afterwards, chances are, she will think differently
about painting on the walls in the future. While this seems an insignificant example
when compared to the challenges that are created by traumatic events, it helps illustrate
how an event can change the way a person thinks. After a car accident, survivors are
often extremely cautious while driving, and may even become angry or afraid of other
drivers without reason. On a larger scale, imagine what might happen to an individuals
perception of the world if they are violently attacked and their family members are killed
by a stranger. The persons view of the world around him will change drastically.

Possibly he will be afraid of total strangers; or he will have thoughts of revenge against
people of the same description as his attacker; either way, he will begin to think
differently and subsequently act differently after the traumatic event. Indeed thoughts,
actions and even ideas about what is inherent and natural behavior is shaped in part by
the process of healing, or not healing, from these traumas. Thus, entire cultures affected
by a common traumatic event develop a similar worldview - a collective consciousness which determines how they heal from these traumas, and subsequently how they
approach future conflicts.

Many psychologists and trauma professionals have realized that traumatic events often
generate future traumatic events. This occurs because the collective consciousness of the
traumatized population has transformed to incorporate trauma as natural behavior.
Adults who were abused as children often re-enact the same violence on others (if they
have not been able to heal from the trauma). Similarly, populations impacted by trauma
will often react violently, inflicting similar violence upon others. Medical biophysicist
and psychologist, Peter Levine, who developed a new method for healing from trauma
called Somatic Experiencing, agrees that experiencing traumatic events greatly
increases the likelihood for future violence. While violence is only one outcome of
unresolved trauma, it is certainly an important effect to examine (Levine, 1997, 225).
The potential for violent tendencies would not be so much of a worry, if they were not so
increasingly prevalent, but recent studies show the magnitude and severity of violence.
In 2002, the United Nations and World Health Organization released a report on violence
and health world-wide. In the report, they describe violence as a global public health

concern. Some alarming statistics on violence were described, including, as they call it,
the tip of the iceberg1.6 million people dying in 2000 from violence worldwide
(Krug et al., 2002). This statistic does not take into account the extremely high rates of
violence that do not result in death, including the approximately 40 million children that
are abused worldwide each year (http://www.saiv.net/statistics.htm). Other violence
occurs during war and in other cases where extreme force is used to solve conflicts.
Statistics of violent abuse raise the concern that humankind has not yet found a successful
way of dealing with the problem.

Battles over political power, natural resources, diverse beliefs, differing ethnicities and
other reasons are common explanations for the abundance of violent conflicts. However,
if unresolved societal trauma does exist as a previously unrecognized driver of the
proclivity towards violence, it is important to develop a method for healing from that
trauma. Levine draws a connection between the increase in violent behavior and the
absence of healing after trauma, which he describes as among the most important root
causes for the form modern warfare has taken. The perpetuation, escalation, and violence
of war can be attributed in part to post-traumatic stress (Levine, 1997, 225).

Traumatic events are widespread in individuals and populations across the globe. These
traumas leave long-lasting, negative impacts on individuals; affecting every aspect of an
individual including physical, mental, behavioral, and emotional elements of ones
identity. Regardless of whether or not a person develops more serious illnesses or

10

disorders from a trauma, the traumatic event itself will produce deep-rooted, damaging,
results if not fully healed.

Acknowledging and healing from these traumas will open an outlet for creative
alternatives to transforming future challenges nonviolently. There are no easy solutions
for healing from deep traumas, especially those that have occurred decades ago and have
been clouded over by time, but Elgin explains, it may seem unwise to bring the dark side
of humanitys past into the light of day, but, unless we do, this unresolved pain will
forever pull at the underside of our consciousness and diminish our future potentials
(Elgin, October 1997, 27).

This paper will examine different methods of healing in an effort to find a technique for
healing entire societies; for cultural healing. Two current methods for healing trauma
victims will be examined: the positive and negative aspects of methods used for healing
from Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); and the lessons learned from numerous
Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs). These two processes, PTSD treatment
and TRCs, were selected because they have been both examined as successful methods
for healing and scrutinized for their possible failures. Both techniques treat trauma
healing as a necessary and unrealized obligation for individuals in the world today. This
paper will also examine the effects of unresolved traumas on the collective consciousness
and worldview. From there, two current cultural healing methods will examined: The
Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission (GTRC), which has prioritized a need
for transforming the collective consciousness in their community; and Education for

11

Peace (EFP), which has seen much success in developing a Culture of Healing after Civil
War in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Finally, a definition and process will be developed for a
Culture of Healingand an examination of how a Culture of Healing may replace the
dependence on violence, and replace it with a new outlet for creative, nonviolent
solutions.

12

Trauma and the Effects of a Traumatic Event

Trauma is most commonly defined as any injury both of body or mind caused by
outside means (Judith Herman, as cited in Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 17). Trauma
occurs when an event creates an unresolved impact on an organism (Levine, 1997,
129). Trauma, which is prevalent worldwide, includes all individual traumatic events
that affect a persons normal way of living: childhood abuse, incest, rape, car accidents,
job loss, and family problems; and those traumas that occur on a larger scale such as
genocide, war, and natural disasters. A traumatic event can be caused by many types of
physical or emotional pain; even feared death or a perceived pain can cause such a
reaction. More recently, the definition of trauma has expanded to also include and
acknowledge the recurring reactions to previous trauma that one may have experienced
at an earlier age.

Traumatic events occur every day and practically every person at one point in his or her
life will be subjected to a trauma that will affect him or her in some way. Peter Levine, a
psychologist and researcher notes that, trauma has become so commonplace that most
people dont even recognize its presence . . . each of us has had a traumatic experience at
some time in our lives, regardless of whether it left us with an obvious case of posttraumatic stress (Levine, 1997, 41).

Many individuals have healthy ways of dealing with their symptoms of trauma; these
tactics sometimes include family support, journal-writing, or other coping techniques.

13

However, as Levine notes, even if a person is able to cope with their traumatic event in a
healthy way, effects linger for some time. The difficulty is that most of these effects are
not obvious to the traumatized person, and thus psychological symptoms are not
recognized. Additionally, many people do not ever fully heal from trauma. The event
affects them for the rest of their lives whether they realize it consciously or not.

Individuals will have varying reactions to similar traumatic events, and as such, the
effects of such an event will have different outcomes for each person. Trauma can come
in all shapes and sizes and the effects will often change throughout ones life. What may
simply be an uncomfortable occurrence to one, will be traumatic and unremitting for
another, depending on the persons history, coping abilities and other outside events in
his or her life.

The way a traumatic event affects a person depends as much on how one experiences the
event as the actual trauma itself. Individuals can experience the same incident, but
handle it differently, and therefore heal from it differently. Despite this, in all cases,
trauma has lasting effects that are not always obvious and may linger for long periods of
time. For instance, rape victims often express fear, or the inability to have intimate
relations with others after his or her trauma. It frequently requires years of therapy and
healing to deal with the emotions associated with the trauma, and subsequently, the
reactions that the person has towards other people and relationships.

14

Human beings are designed for survival. If placed in a situation that is dangerous,
individuals often react instinctively without reflection or evaluation. A traumatic event
immediately triggers a series of reactions in an individuals body, often called a fight-orflight response. This type of response is usually discussed in relation to traumatic events
that cause individuals to exhibit extreme, unexplainable strength. Human beings have
these responses as a defense mechanism against pain from trauma. These instantaneous
reactions are one of the bodys methods for survival. The body prepares a person by
sending a flood of chemicals that hasten the reaction of the body and focus attention to
the crisis. Individuals react immediately in ways that are sometimes extremely surprising
or confusing. These reactions can be categorized into four groups: physical, mental,
emotional and behavioral, and they include responses such as the momentary extreme
strength mentioned above, and quick-thinking (Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 20).

Many physical reactions such as rapid heartbeat, nervousness, and dizziness are simply
these immediate reactions to the trauma. In healthy bodies, these reactions will diminish
fairly quickly. Other common symptoms of trauma linger for longer, but will also
diminish within a short period of time. These can include: depression, anxiety and stress,
anger, sadness, fear, difficulty relating to loved ones, or even immediate reactions as
severe as suicide attempts. Furthermore, although an individuals immediate responses to
trauma are not usually conscious, they differ broadly from person to person.

Most reactions fall into two acute stress responses; individuals either explode into
extreme emotional action or collapse into psychological shock (Johnson, 2006, 75).

15

Both reactions can have dangerous results in addition to the ultimate shock or pain from
the actual traumatic injury. The second of the two responses, a state of stagnant shock, is
common but less obvious, and is often more dangerous to the trauma victim. This state
frequently leaves the person psychologically wounded without anyone being aware of
it (Johnson, 2006, 75). This type of response often results in future delayed stress
symptoms, including individuals that thought they were not negatively influenced by the
event. These differing reactions to trauma can be observed in a myriad of normal, everyday experiences. When a parent dies, one child may cry profusely and be depressed for
weeks; while the other child may seem removed from the heartbreak, but may suddenly
begin having difficulties in school. Similarly, differing responses can be seen in other
traumatic circumstances.

Many of the abovementioned psychological or bodily effects of trauma will fade away
shortly after the event. Other responses to trauma or tragedy are more complicated and
also differ from person to person. Long-term effects include loss of memory (or the
inability to take in more information), long-term depression, and physical ailments such
as a weakened immune system (leading to likely increases in infections to the body or
even increased risks for diseases like cancer) (Bremner, 2005, 268). There are many
more possible long-term effects, which cause damage to the mind, brain and body.

In addition to the more common short and long-term effects, one trauma survivor,
Matthew Sanford notes, how we carry trauma forward throughout out lives can be the
real injury (Hart, 48). Some trauma survivors see the world as being completely

16

different than it was before the event, and consequently the survivors perception of his
or her association with the world around them changes. Family and work-related
relationships as well as connections to strangers are often strained or damaged with no
clear understanding why (Hart, 48). Some experts refer to this long-term process as the
recovery phase of healing from trauma. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
defines this phase as the prolonged period of adjustment or return to equilibrium that the
community and individuals must go through
(http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/disasters/fs_phases_disaster.html). This phase moves
past the basic survival techniques for healing from the trauma, and begins the process of
returning to a normal state of living. For some, especially those that experienced the
traumatic event first-hand, this progression never leads to full healing and many
individuals may develop Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, which will be discussed later.
Traumatic Stress, defined as leftover reactions (lasting emotional scars) from
overwhelming events continues long after the actual event; some people may experience
traumatic stress reactions for their entire lives (Johnson, 2006, 70).

The long-term results of trauma can be confusing and frightening, mostly because an
individual does not usually associate the symptoms with the trauma experienced.
Because a traumatic event can have ramifications for the rest of a persons life, it is
common for individuals to be experiencing problems that are complicating their lives
without any explanation of from where these problems are coming. These difficulties can
include anxiety, panic, disorientation or overwhelming impulses to do things that are
completely out of character such as drinking excessively (Johnson, 2006, 59). Johnson

17

notes, Nothing occurs in a vacuum; the troublesome events that are occurring in ones
community, in ones family, and in the world, can affect the way someone handles the
problems in their life, and can release feelings and emotions that are caused by previous
experiences (Johnson, 2006, 59).

Responses to TraumaThe Need to Heal

Much of a persons reaction to trauma depends predominantly on the way he or she

processes the situation. Although traumatic events will almost always have difficult sideeffects on an individual, outside factors in the persons background will determine the
overall effects of trauma and will influence the severity and duration of problems. An
individuals response depends on family experiences, age, relationships, and even
previous coping strategies (Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 18). Even things like
religious beliefs and cultural background and perspectives will affect if and how an
individual or group will heal. The meaning of a traumatic event will be shaped by an
individuals history and background (Rosenbloom and Williams, 1999, 18). Their
understanding of what occurred will depend on their previous experiences.

As previously mentioned, trauma can change the way people think about themselves and
the world around them. Many factors are taken into account when determining how to
help an individual heal from a particular trauma including what a person sees, hears,
smells, and feels during a traumatic event; how this information travels through the
system of perceptions and is modified by prior memories, emotions, and beliefs; how it is

18

processed by the nervous system; and how it is ultimately translated into a neurological
response and a new set of memories and cognitions (Bremner, 2005, 272). The ways in
which societies are taught to deal with trauma is an important part of the ultimate healing
process.

Continuous research has been conducted on Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)a

mental illness that affects many people around the world, but is most commonly
recognized in war veterans. PTSD is the result of massive trauma that is not fully dealt
with at an individual level. The methods for healing from PTSD will be examined later
in this paper, as an example of healing from long-term effects of trauma. What is clear
from research done with trauma survivors, who differed in scope of trauma and in
cultural background, is that the impact inflicted by a traumatic event can leave negative
consequences for decades (Hamber, 2003, 79). Many researchers note, as might seem
obvious, that multiple traumas, or traumatic events that occur for an extended period of
time, will have severe outcomes, especially if the sufferer has not learned how to heal
from them. This occurrence, called Complex Trauma is a layering of traumatic events
(Johnson, 2006, 70). Some individual responses to complex trauma are:

Deep questioning about your character and your adequacy

Distrust of yourself and your intentions

Unnecessary skepticism toward the motives of others

Deep and abiding distrust of the world in which you live (Johnson, 2006, 102).

19

Many of the above effects of traumatic events are also observed at a collective level from
traumas that affect an entire society.

Societal Trauma and Healing

Traumatic events significantly impact individuals and it is necessary for each person to
heal fully to avoid negative long-term effects from trauma, but trauma does not only
occur at an individual level. Entire populations or cultures can also experience a
collective trauma that will impact them in much the same way as individual traumatic
experiences. One example would be the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon
in the United States on September 11, 2001. This event traumatized much of the U.S.
population in many obvious ways, and also in many undetermined and less apparent
ways. As one observer notes, after September 11, 2001, our collective trust in the world
and the security of the nation got shattered (Sanford, 49). As news reports around the
five-year anniversary of this traumatic event report, 9-11 was not just an event; it is an
ongoing process of healing.

Although it is difficult to find scientific research that proves a link between past societal
traumas and problems that exist today, Bremner acknowledges that many different types
of stressors whether extreme or not, can have effects on our minds, brains, and bodies
in ways that we dont yet fully understand (Bremner, 2005, 145). He further recognizes
that scientists are just beginning to understand how extreme stress can have lasting
effects on ones mind, brain, and physical health (Bremner, 2005, 144). Many studies

20

have been conducted, analyzing the long-term psychological effects of natural disasters,
mass violence, war and other traumatic events that affect entire populations. Much of the
research looks at individual psychological responses to the trauma, and methods for how
those individuals healed (or did not heal) from it. Much less research has been done on
the overall effect to entire populations, but many psychologists and counselors have
noted the link between large-scale traumatic events, and a cultures negative change in
health and identity (Johnson, 2006, 59). As will be seen in the next section, the overall
impact on the identity of a traumatized culture can be much larger than typical
psychological effects on individuals because the pain will linger in the consciousness of
the culture. These trauma symptoms become integrated into the collective worldview of
the traumatized society, changing the identity of the culture. These new opinions and
beliefs are supported and reinforced by the changed identity, making the new behaviors
seem normal and inherent.

In 2005 a report was released by Research Education Disaster Mental Health (REDMH),
an organization co-sponsored by Dartmouth College and the National Center for
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. The senior project director of REDMH and author of this
report, Dr. Fran Norris, examined disaster survivors from 34 countries. Catastrophes
studied included natural disasters, transportation accidents, nuclear and industrial
accidents, and war and peace-time terrorist attacks. The study examined previous
research and compiled the data from outcomes of 132 different disasters. One finding of
the report was that the severity of exposure [to a particular disaster] also predicted
declines in social relations and increased conflicts with family members (Norris, 2005,

21

10). This response is typical in individual trauma survivors; however, when entire
populations are affected by a large-scale trauma, these reactions become a societal
dilemma that is sometimes not an obvious effect.

Since entire populations of people are often affected in similar ways from the same
trauma, collective ideas are developed about the trauma. Memories of the event are
shaped by other individuals memories; responses to the trauma are shaped by others
responses, or by how other survivors responded; and a collective healing process is
consciously or subconsciously begun. Shared concepts such as these are normal and
ideas and perceptions of the world constantly change. Rarely, however, is full healing
from the trauma collectively achieved. Thus the event leaves the same common sideeffects as individual trauma, and lends to a collective consciousness negatively affected
by the unhealed trauma. It becomes important to recognize the pain and subsequent
collective consequences of societal traumas, and to consciously work towards healing
from them.

The need for cultural healing has been recognized in many places. One example
concerning the United States and Europe, was in an editorial in the Wall Street Journal
Europe on May 3rd, 2006 by Shelby Steele. It was entitled, White Guilt and the
Western Past. The article concluded that the West has yet to come to terms with, and
move on from, its past sins and that this white guilt is now causing even more
problems:

22

Today, the white westlike Germany after the Nazi defeatlives

in a kind of secular penitence in which the slightest echo of past
sins brings down withering condemnation . . . people stigmatized
with moral crimeshere racism and imperialismlack moral
authority and so . . . struggle, above all else, to dissociate
themselves from the past sins they are stigmatized with (Steele,
2006, 13).

Steeles prognosis, however, diverged here from realizing the entire problem. He
resolved that the United States fear of stigmatization causes a retreat into
minimalization and thus never fully deals with the countrys problems (i.e. not using
full military capabilities to defeat the insurgency in the 2003 ongoing Iraq war). Whereas
Steeles statement that the white guilt which imposes so much minimalism and
restraint that Americas [the United States] worst problems tend to linger and deepen is
correct, his conclusion that moral transformation has already been made and must
simply be incorporated into the public life in the United States is misleading.

The white guilt as Steele calls it, has very deep roots that have not been fully faced.
The United States, as is the case for many other countries around the world, has many
traumatic experiences in its history. These cultural traumas are deeply embedded in the
historical construction and fabric of the country, but have not, on a societal level, been
healed. Some of these very significant traumas include the violence against and
subjugation of the original inhabitants of the United States, the Native Americans; the
violence committed in the structures of Slavery; the violence exacted upon the citizens of
Japan; the severe losses in the Vietnam War; or, as mentioned before, the shocking events
on September 11, 2001, all of which have traumatized U.S. citizens in a way that is not
fully acknowledged and from which it has certainly not fully healed.

23

The United States is not the only country that suffers from these symptoms; many nations
across the globe are dealing with serious outcomes from societal traumas. One somber
realization is that these unhealed traumatic societal events lead directly back into a cycle
of violence. As Levine explains,

When people are traumatized, our internal systems remain aroused. We

become hypervigilant but are unable to locate the source of this pervasive
threat. This situation causes fear and reactivity to escalate, amplifying the
need to identify the source of the threat. The result: we become likely
candidates for re-enactmentin search of an enemy (Levine, 1997, 226).

This need for an adversary is just one of the many dangerous problems. Other common
long-term side-effects of such unhealed traumas are phobias, racism, prejudice, violence,
and a legacy of fear (Levine, 1997, 225). Acknowledging and healing from past
traumas will help end the need for violence as well as the other negative effects of
unresolved trauma. Levine says there will be serious consequences if the cycle of
violence is not broken, lasting peace among warring peoples cannot be accomplished
without first healing the traumas of previous terrorism, violence, and horror on a mass
scale (Levine, 1997, 222).

Some psychologists even suggest that collective structures are damaged by trauma
(Hamber, 2003, 77). The city of Greensboro, North Carolina was impacted by a protest
and march that resulted in citizen deaths. Greensboro is working towards healing from
this collective trauma in its recent past and notes, The passage of time alone cannot
bring closure, nor resolve feelings of guilt and lingering trauma (GTRC, 2006, 17). The

24

entire culture and identity of a population affected by a traumatic event can be negatively
changed if there is not a conscious effort to heal from it. Psychologist Duane Elgin
proposes, If we can bear witness to the reservoir of unresolved pain that has
accumulated through history, we will release an enormous store of pent-up creativity and
energy (Elgin, October 1997, 28).

Interestingly, recent research has been done on individuals with chronic fear, a state
where a person is in a constant state of anxiety. Chronic fear is one of the many results of
trauma; a case where the survivor is unable to turn off the responses to danger, keeping
the body in a constant state of arousal (Johnson, 2006, 76). This type of trauma
response can lead to many problems such as high blood pressure, stomach ulcers and
impaired memory, while at the same time diminishing an individuals capacity to respond
safely to traumatic events in the future (Johnson, 2006, 76). Crisis-Management
Consultant, Kendall Johnson, describes the consequences of chronic fear, When you are
constantly on guard, you easily blow things out of proportion. Relatively minor incidents
can trigger full-blown acute stress responses. These episodes of acute stress reaction can
undermine your life (Johnson, 2006, 77).

Ironically, after September 11, 2001, citizens in the United States were in a constant state
of fear of future terrorist attacks (partially in part from the immediate anthrax attack
following 9-11). The U.S. government helped to supplement the fear by raising terrorist
threat warnings while the media continuously reported the supposed threat, enhancing the
fear of many U.S. citizens. It is, of course, not precisely known whether this chronic

25

fear after the 9-11 attacks resulted in a societal deterioration for future trauma-handling;
however, the similarities to individual traumatic responses is uncanny. Accordingly, it
would seem necessary to incorporate a healthy way of healing from chronic fear as part
of a regimen for healing from societal traumas.

This paper is not about the effects of large-scale trauma (i.e. war) on individuals
(although that is part of it), rather, it is about how these traumas affect the collective
identity of the culture that was traumatized. Certainly large-scale trauma affects
individual people, but of equal importance is the change in the collective consciousness
of the traumatized society as a whole, since this new consciousness will ultimately
influence individual reactions to future trauma. It is necessary to heal the entire affected
society and to teach that collective how to heal so that individuals within that culture can
learn to heal in a healthy manner. Equally important is learning to recognize how
societies are affected so that individuals negative responses will be mitigated. As has
been observed, much of our normal response to specific crisis is charged with deeper
meaning because of social and global events that are unfolding around us (Johnson,
2006, 37). It is for this very reason that individuals must learn as a collective how to
heal from the traumas with which they are affected.

Nations have not yet determined a healthy way for dealing with and healing from societal
traumas that occur. This lack of healing in the immediate wake of the attacks on
September 11, 2001 led the United States once again to hostile and aggressive means; the
governments solution was to violently attack the aggressors. Not surprisingly, a recent

26

2006 report1 released by the United States Intelligence Agency, suggests that this
resolution acted as an instigator for even more violence and terrorism. The United
States reaction to 9-11, its traumatic event, was not surprising in light of the realization
that trauma such as this is the result of past unhealed traumas, in this case the attackers,
and, as was shown in the Intelligence Report, will spawn future violence and trauma, the
obvious example being the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. response to its
collective trauma, and the subsequent upshot from the violent reactions was significant in
creating a global realization that a violent reaction was probably not the best solution, and
that a more structured healing process may have had more positive results. Regardless of
whether or not fighting a war was the right solution after September 11th 2001; it serves
as a painful example of the nature of trauma, which if not healed, reproduces itself in a
cyclical fashion. It is necessary to develop new healing tactics for moving individuals
and nations away from this cycle of trauma and violence and helping societies fully heal
from the pain of these events.

Declassified Key Judgments of the National Intelligence Estimate Trends in Global Terrorism:
Implications for the United States from April 2006 can be found at:
http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/Declassified_NIE_Key_Judgments.pdf

27

TraumaWorldview Collective Consciousness

The feelings associated with violence, whether a one-time trauma or
continuous violence, often become the status quo and any lasting change
can only follow a transformation of the various dynamics underlying that
status quo. . . victimhood becomes a fundamental aspect of the identity of
affected societies, such as Catholics in Northern Ireland, Anatolian
Armenenians, European Jews during World War II, Palestinian Arabs
after 1948, Poles and Ukrainians (Montville as cited in Lerche, 2000, 2).

This section will focus on the idea of collective consciousness, or group awareness. It
will examine how collective consciousness is formed and what the impact of collective
consciousness is on individuals. Finally, it will examine how trauma influences the
collective consciousness. The following two definitions, of collective and
consciousness are from T.R. Burns, in his Journal article, The Social Construction of
Consciousness. T.R. Burns, professor at the Centre for International Environment and
Development Studies, NLU in Norway, has written extensively on socio-cognitive and
consciousness studies. These two definitions will help to develop a preliminary idea of
collective consciousness:

Collective a collective is understood as a group or population of individuals (or

collective agents as members) that possesses or develops collective representations of
itself: its values and goals, its structure and modes of operating, its strategies,
developments, strengths and weaknesses, etc (Burns, 1998, 67).
Consciousness a type of reflective activity: observing, monitoring, judging and reorienting and re-organizing self; considering what characterizes the self, what self
perceives, judges, could do, should do (or should not do) (Burns, 1998, 67).

Consciousness is the manifestation of ones worldview. It is shaped by the way an

individual looks at the world around them, and thus influences the way a person acts and

28

reacts to the world around them. Consciousness is often studied at an individual level,
but individual consciousness is simply a reflection of the collective consciousness of a
particular culture:

all consciousness is basically group consciousness. An individuals

awareness, attention, memory, etc. is socially constructed. Without group
interaction, an individual would never achieve identification with anyone
or anything.
From this viewpoint, group consciousness is the
fundamental matrix from which individual consciousness emerges
(Stanley Krippner as cited in Elgin, October 1997, 4).

Since a cultures collective consciousness is socially constructed, it ensues that societal

trauma would help create the consciousness of the effected society. The normal,
commonly negative, effects of trauma are manifested in the consciousness of the
collective that was traumatized, whether consciously or not. Before it is possible to
understand the impact that trauma has on the collective consciousness of a society, it is
necessary to understand the meaning of consciousness and worldview, and how both are
influenced and transformed.

Worldview

How could a traumatic event possibly have such a long-lasting, insidious effect on entire
societies? Many factors contribute to the makeup of a cultures worldview. Ones
worldview is, simply put, the way an individual or society looks at the world. It is the
pedestal supporting every culture, a subconscious expression or framework for all our
life processesour thoughts, feelings, choices and actions (Danesh, 64). The
composition of that worldview is complicated and constantly changingdetermined by

29

many different factors such as spiritual, philosophical, and political beliefs, historical
background, and particular life experiences and environmental characteristics (Danesh,
2006, 65). All of these pieces construct a common worldview in each particular society;
shaping the way individuals think, believe, understand and react to situations around
them.

Societies are constantly changing their worldviews as part of the normal changes in each
culture. Culture is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as:

1 the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement

regarded collectively. 2 a refined understanding or appreciation of this. 3
the customs, institutions, and achievements of a particular nation, people,
or group.

The Latin origin of culture is cultura, meaning growing, cultivation (AskOxford,

2006). Thus, culture is, by definition, a continuous, collective progression. Cultivation
implies a nurturing and fostering of certain ideas, theories, and ideals, literally grown
from stimuli such as language, music, religion, and even architecture. Culture is not a
stagnant phenomenon that is evident from the initial, founding of a nation. Culture is
built, fostered and encouraged. This means that the subsequent worldview of a society is
also constantly changing and being influenced by outside factors.

30

Collective Consciousness

The possibly dangerous aspects of any culture lie below the superficial identity, existing
at a deep-rooted level where some characteristics of the culture are hidden. Aspects of a
cultures worldview are institutionalized and become ingrained in each individuals
identity as normal and accepted: so called human nature. These natural
characteristics are converted into the cultures collective consciousness and are reflected
in all that we say and do.

Consciousness has been described as the ability to know that we know; mindfulness;
and the capacity for awareness of self and others, reflection and reaction (Elgin, October
1997, 4, 12). Consciousness subsumes all categories of experience, including
perception, cognition, intuition, instinct, will and emotion, at all levels (Jonas, 1). It is a
phenomenon that is created, cultivated and changed, often completely subconsciously.
This collective identity is defined and constituted in terms of core symbols, organizing
principles, norms, etc. Some core principles are understood and relied on as natural, as
if they were not really social products or human constructions (Burns, 1998, 76).
Consciousness determines what is right and wrong, how one should behave in any given
situation, and what consequences will ensue from respective actions. Collective
consciousness is often institutionalized, encouraging (and enforcing) its seemingly
inherent nature, the binding quality of values and their symbols truth, beauty and
goodness comes from the power of collective consciousness (Wiley, as cited in Burns,
1998, 69). The cyclical quality of collective consciousness, develops a seemingly

31

obligatory sense of what is intrinsic in a particular culture. Each society develops its own
particular collective consciousness which is also reinforced by other cultures.

Awareness, which can be defined as focusing on or attention to . . . the state or

situation of ones own group, while only a small aspect of consciousness, plays a large
role in raising collective consciousness (Burns, 1998, 69). This transformation of
worldview is key to the overall maturation of a societywhich is ultimately imperative
for the health and longevity of a culture. As Dr. David Hawkins, a psychiatrist and
expert on consciousness, observes, consciousness is gullible; it believes everything it
hears. Consciousness is like hardware that will play back any software thats put into it
(Hawkins, 2002, 247). Hence consciousness can be changed or even improved. As a
fundamentally reflective action, consciousness can be transformed on a regular basis
through observation, monitoring and judging (Burns, 1998, 68).

Consciousness Upheld

Collective consciousness is not only created and formed through past traumas and
historical events; it is supported and maintained through many different methods.
Religion, food, architecture, language, monuments, and sports all advocate a particular
identity. Governments, the media and individuals consciously and subconsciously
sustain the identity and worldview of a culture through repeated messages and
reinforcement of power.

32

Ones collective consciousness teaches an individual how to deal with the troubles or
pleasures that he or she may encounter. It creates a basis for right and wrong behavior
and helps implement actions that are seemingly inherent. It also teaches individuals how
to psychologically handle the stress of everyday life. The process that societies embark
upon to handle the stress of a societal trauma is shaped by the collective consciousness of
the traumatized culture. The ensuing process of healing or not healing is a manifestation
of the way the society thinks it is supposed to heal.

Memory

Memory, a very important aspect of consciousness, can be defined as the process of

storing past experience and using it to understand present events (Johnson, 2006, 79).
Ones memory helps him or her to comprehend how to react in a certain situation and to
have a clear understanding of how to react in similar circumstances in the future. An
individuals memory helps her to make good choices. For instance, if a person grabs a
pan out of a hot oven without using something to protect her hand, the pain that she feels
will help her brain remember that situation in the future, so that she is protected from the
heat. Sometimes an individuals reaction to a situation can be confusing, because the
person is not conscious of the memory that is causing her to act in a certain way. Many
trauma survivors react strangely to seemingly harmless things, without remembering the
event that may have triggered the reaction.

33

Individuals memories are constantly being shaped and constructed by everyday

experiences. However, ones memory is not always completely accurate. In fact, many
times, the way a person remembers an event is shaped by how he or she reacted to the
event when it happened. A person may remember only parts of what happened, or may
remember it in its entirety, but have a skewed recollection of the actual sequence of
events. The way an individual is raised and experiences that he or she has had, help shape
the perception of an event as it unfolds. Although memory seems like it is concrete and
completely true, another person can experience the same occurrence in an entirely
different way, and thus his or her memory about the facts of the event will be very
different.

A few years ago, some coworkers and I witnessed a car accident during a walk to the post
office. During our healing discussions afterwards, and our subsequent discussions with
the police, we realized that we had different versions of what had happened. We all
observed the accident, but our memories of the event were slightly different. The facts
of the case, were that a woman was walking between two parked cars, when the car in the
rear suddenly drove forward, squeezing the woman between the two cars. One of the
recollections of the event was only of the woman, her obvious pain, and the actions after
the accident. Another version included a clear remembrance of the mans face before
running into the woman. This individuals view of the accident was that the man had
intentionally hit the woman. While we had all been bystanders to the accident, our
perceptions of the occurrences were different and contained different pieces of the story.
Possibly the individual that had viewed the accident as intentional, had previously been

34

the victim of a similar crisis, and the subsequent view of this occurrence had been shaped
by the other accident.

Kendall Johnson, an expert on crisis management, explains, that the human brain must
store many pieces of information, some important and some less so. Consequently, the
brain categorizes the intake of information in a way that it can handle. However, in a
traumatic experience, there is an excess of information that is received quickly, and the
human body has to react quickly. An individuals past memories help him or her to react
in the best perceived way possible. At the same time, the information received does not
always get incorporated into ones memory in a logical way (Johnson, 2006, 81). In a
normal situation, sights, sounds, and touches are . . . taken in, mixed with thoughts,
feelings, and reflections, and combined into a sensible order (Johnson, 2006, 81). These
events are incorporated into the map of memories in ones brain; most of which are repeat
occurrences that take their natural place in ones memory. Events during a traumatic
event are incorporated in a different way because they occur too quickly to be
immediately understood. An individuals future memories may be just snapshots of what
actually happened, or may occur out of sequence.

These traumatic memories often prompt confusing reaction or feelings that cannot be
explained. Sometimes, this is because an individuals brain has not processed the
disturbing images that it encountered during a traumatic event, causing the person to react
in similar ways to completely unrelated future events. Thus, any sort of reminder will
trigger the same response.

35

Impact of Trauma on the Collective Consciousness

The impact of trauma on a population, as previously discussed, can have detrimental

results that then become entrenched in the deep culture and collective consciousness.
There is a circular relationship between individual and collective trauma. Thus the
collective identity of traumatized cultures reflects the individual consciousness of
affected individuals. What is deemed accepted and natural behavior is in part, molded by
the effects of trauma. The traumatic event creates, enforces and manipulates the
collective consciousness that determines how a person will heal from these traumas, and
subsequently how he or she will approach future conflicts.

Couple a traumatic national event with a collective memory about the event, and the
consciousness of the society begins to function within the framework of a particular
worldview. Bremner notes that these traumas change the way we view the world,
ourselves, and our place in the world. The events surrounding a traumatic stress become
strongly engraved in memory, and sometimes certain details seem to become shrouded in
fog. (Bremner, 2005, 141). Trauma that has never been fully healed, results in
collective conflict-based thoughts, beliefs, and actions that seem inherent to a particular
culture. Roger Walsh say that the state of the world reflects our state of mind; our
collective crises mirror our collective consciousness (Walsh, as cited in Elgin, October
1997, 3). Violent behavior is just one of the consequences of an unhealed, traumatized
culture, whose consciousness is deeply impacted by the effects of the trauma, and is

36

reacting accordingly. The alleged need for violence could be reduced by alleviating the
symptoms of trauma.

Trauma has a ripple effect. The immediate victims, those that are directly affected, bring
their stress responses home to their families. The media constantly reminds the survivors
and their families, and then the communities of the trauma, and so on and so on. It
moves quickly and silently so that generations after the traumatic event, the aftershocks
are still being felt in ways that are not obvious or conscious. At a societal level, a culture
is negatively impacted by a certain traumatic event. One important and often detrimental
influence after a trauma is the pressure put on the family. Psychotherapist Kendall
Johnson notes that after September 11th 2001, his total number of clients rose
considerably, but surprisingly the majority was not individuals affected directly by the
trauma, but families that were experiencing new problems or old problems that could not
be reconciled (Johnson, 2006, 47). He suggests that this new age of anxiety puts even
more pressure on the already difficult tasks of living. After 9-11-2001, families simply
could not handle, or did not know how to handle, this added anxiety, and did not
recognize the new problems as reactions to the stress of the trauma.

The effects that a societal trauma has on the global family are similar. In the same way
that families in the United States felt the need for help and advice during the turmoil
following 9-11, the global family must find ways for healing from the collective
traumas. Certainly the nearly 3,000 individuals that were killed on September 11th 2001,
had children, husbands and wives, and parents that were immediately impacted by the

37

death of their loved one. The emergency personnel that arrived on the scene, even those
that were not physically hurt by the trauma, will have long-lasting memories of the
episode; they will bring these memories back to their families. Every citizen in the
United States will remember where they were when they found out about the attack.
They will tell their children and grandchildren the stories. Surely others around the world
will remember the eventand undoubtedly the citizens in Afghanistan and Iraq will
remember the consequences for their own countries. These memories and stories are
forever imbedded in the fabric of the global consciousness.

The collective identity of impacted countries is changed by the traumatic event. But this
changed identity is not stagnant. Collective identity is changed throughout history, and
will continue to be shaped by future events. Consciousness is continuously growing to
include the events that have been built into the collective memory. Consciousness
development can be described as, our responses to the current global uncertainty, to
threats to the safety of our loved ones, and to changes in our world [that] are colored by
our learned response to threat (Johnson, 2006, 99). The significant word in that
description is learned. Every worldview is the compilation of learned beliefs and
attitudes and if difficult experiences form toxic beliefs and attitudes, then, the result
will be a perpetuation of difficult experiences (Johnson, 2006, 109). Thus the collective
consciousness that arises from unhealed traumatic events in any culture is generally
reflected in the actions that the traumatized society feels are natural and inherent. It is a
cycle of learning from past experiences and regurgitating the responses that seem
acceptable and normal. Teilhard de Chardin describes this evolution of collective

38

consciousness, which he calls the noosphere as being inherited by each succeeding

generation of conscious individuals, and to which each generation adds something
(Chardin, as cited in Elgin, October 1997, 6).

It is vital to the maturation of a society that it is able to transform its collective

consciousness. Many researchers have warned that if humankind does not manage to
advance the collective consciousness, the result will be a never-ending cycle of violence;
a race between collective awakening and global catastrophe (Elgin, October 1997, 3).
Many cultures advance the notion of individual learning and improvement, but most
ignore the important role of functioning at a societal level. Duane Elgin notes, By
focusing primarily on the individual, East and West have neglected the integral role that
the awakening of the collective plays in both personal and cultural evolution (Elgin,
October 1997, 5). Throughout history societies have gone through a collective process of
maturing and evolving into different levels of consciousness. The process is normal and
natural. No stage in the process of evolution is better than another; each are simply states
through which the human mind naturally progresses; all are essential for providing more
depth and a broader scope of experience (Elgin, October 1997, 15). Each stage is a
necessary progression in the overall consciousness; however, each has its limitations and
as a result, the society usually manages to progress to a new level of understanding.
Elgin believes that none of the first three stages of consciousness evolution can allow for
a form of social organization adequate to provide a framework for the future, because
the less developed worldviews put an emphasis on violence (Elgin, October 1997, 15).

39

It becomes dangerous when a culture is unable to evolve in a positive way. There are
different theories about the outcome of a society that is unable to raise its collective
consciousness, but in all scenarios, the consequence is catastrophe. Alternatively, if a
culture is able to mature in a healthy, positive way, the result is unity and nonviolence.
Unity is the purposeful integration of two or more unique entities in a state of harmony
and cooperation, resulting in the creation of a new, evolving entity, usually of a higher
nature (Clarke-Habibi and Danesh as cited in Makortoff, 2006). Unity is one of the
prerequisites for a mature collective consciousness. The creation of consciousness is
continuous and can be influenced by many positive and negative factors. It is necessary
to help the collective consciousness of a society evolve in a way that will include the
principle of unity in order to transform the negative consequences of an un-evolved
culture.

Collective Consciousness Transformation through Trauma Healing

Traumatic societal events leave a negative impression on the collective consciousness

and identity of the impacted culture. Since it is important for any society to mature into a
new, constructive stage of collective consciousness, it is necessary for cultural healing to
take place after any traumatic event. If healing does not occur, the responses and results
of the trauma will feed back into the violent cycle, stalling the chances for maturation of
the consciousness. Larry Dossey explains, [w]e have for so long defined ourselves as
separate personalities that we have fallen into the hypnotic spell of believing that

40

separation, not unity, is the underlying reality (Dossey as cited in Elgin, October 1997,
6).

Elgin suggests that as a species, the consciousness of humankind has evolved several
times in the past, so it is not implausible to think that humans are again in the process of a
change. He acknowledges however, that when our capacity for collective consciousness
first awakens, what will probably emerge will be the deep psychic wounds that have
festered through humanitys historythe voices that have been unacknowledged and the
pain that has been unexpressed (Elgin, October 1997, 27, 12). It is necessary for human
beings to learn how to heal from the many collective traumas that are inevitable in each
society. If humankind cannot heal from these traumas, it will be in danger of continuing
in a never-ending cycle of violence. Human beings have the ability to create identities,
memories and worldviews, and must be conscious of the damage that traumatic events
have on the collective consciousness. With newfound knowledge of the negative
consequences of unhealed trauma on societies, a solution can be found. Elgin cautions,
Humanitys evolutionary success depends not only on awakening our collective
consciousness but also on promoting its health and healing (Elgin, October 1997, 4).

41

Healing from TraumaPosttraumatic Stress Disorder

There are many different methods for healing from trauma. By understanding unique
approaches for healing from traumatic events, techniques can be gained for healing entire
societies, and for creating a collective consciousness that incorporates healthy processes
for healing. One method that has been well researched and examined at many levels is
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Posttraumatic Stress Disorder has been
researched for many years, but the term PTSD was not coined by the American
Psychiatric Association (APA) until 1980 (Johnson, 2006, 92). The disorder had a long
history of misunderstanding and was diagnosed as many other disorders and problems
before finally qualifying as PTSD. The APA discloses that approximately 10 percent of
the U.S. population has at some point been diagnosed with PTSD, while many others
have exhibited similar symptoms without being diagnosed
(http://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm). Additionally, cases of individuals
diagnosed with PTSD seems to be increasing due possibly in part to new commonknowledge of the disorder, or to a new wave of individuals inflicted with post 9-11
trauma symptoms (Continuing Medical Education, 2002, 1). Finally acknowledging
PTSD as a disease that affects hundreds of people world-wide helped show the
connection between the suffering and problems that people were having and the event in
their past that was triggering these responses.

PTSD, most commonly associated with war veterans, and known as Da Costas
Syndrome during the Civil War, is now understood to be a disorder that affects both

42

men and women whether or not they were involved with war-trauma
(http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html). The effects of trauma
are often similar to those experienced by other trauma victims but are distinguished by
the fact that all of the symptoms are felt by individuals experiencing PTSD. The term
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder is used to define the collection of symptoms of trauma.
Symptoms of PTSD are grouped into three categories: avoidance (of friends, family and
colleagues), hyperarousal (a constant fear or belief that danger is near) and intrusion (or
intrusive flashbacks) (www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm).

The characteristic that defines these symptoms as PTSD is that all three of these
indicators occur together and interact with each other. Additionally, certain reactions that
are common with PTSD patients and will help distinguish PTSD from other results of
trauma are that:
[T]he traumatic event must be seen as life threatening [to oneself or to
others] and overwhelming; the person must experience the event; the
reexperiencing of the event must cause symptoms of withdrawal or
avoidance; reexperience must also cause overarousal symptoms (Johnson,
2006, 94-96).

In order to be diagnosed with PTSD, these symptoms must continue for at least one
month, however, in all patients with PTSD, these times vary greatly, and for some, the
symptoms will not arise for six months or more, making it very difficult for individuals to
connect their current troubles with the past traumatic event.

For most victims of PTSD, memories of their trauma strike without warning. Many of
the same feelings and emotions experienced during the traumatic event accompany the

43

flashbacks unpredictablysometimes as extreme as feeling as though the actual

trauma was occurring again. Other symptoms can include nightmares, difficulty
sleeping, and feelings of estrangement which have severe effects on the persons entire
life (www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html). Some of these symptoms
may seem unconnected to the previous trauma, including, fear, nightmares, feelings of
helplessness, depression, relationship troubles, difficulty relating in social settings,
anxiety and alcoholism or drug abuse. A diagnosis for PTSD helps many individuals
understand that there is a reason for these seemingly strange and uncharacteristic attitudes
and actions.

Treatment for PTSD

Although trauma healing is often a complicated and protracted process, it is possible to

heal the symptoms of trauma. Now that PTSD is more often recognized as a real and
serious disorder, research has been conducted on treatment and healing. Many different
procedures have been developed and have been largely successful at treating PTSD. Five
different practices are identified by the APA: Behavior therapy, psychodynamic
psychotherapy, family therapy, discussion groups, and medication. These treatments
cover a variety of different practices for healing all aspects of the traumatic experience,
from correcting the painful and intrusive patterns of behavior and thought to examining
personal values and how the experience of the event changed them. These healing
techniques involve relaxation and re-examining assumptions about the facts of the
trauma. Work is also done with family members and group counseling to help each
person realize that similar reactions during trauma are common and understandable.

44

Medication, including antidepressants, is also used to help control the negative effects
(www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm).

The objective for PTSD treatment has expanded beyond helping a survivor to forget the
trauma, but rather to facilitate re-processing and integration of the traumatic memory,
into the larger fabric of the persons emotional and psychological life (Continuing
Medical Education, 2002, 1). Another treatment not identified by the APA, but used by
some psychiatrists for anxiety disorders and panic attacks called, exposure therapy,
engages survivors in repeated reliving of the traumatic event under controlled conditions
to help him or her work through the trauma
(http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html).

In addition to both the common and more unusual methods for treating PTSD, Douglas
Bremner, a psychiatrist and researcher suggests that simply educating a victim of trauma
of the strange but normal ways that an individuals mind and body react to traumatic
events, and helping him to realize that his reactions are simply part of the process, helps
the ultimate healing progression. Bremner notes that he has found that education is
what helps trauma survivors and PTSD patients the most. You have to take responsibility
for teaching yourself as much as possible about stress and stress responses. Education
actually helps in the recovery process (Bremner, 2005, xv).

Difficulties with PTSD Treatment

45

Although PTSD is increasingly more common and understood, a perfect healing method
has not yet been created. One explanation for this is that every person reacts differently
to a traumatic event. The ultimate effects of a traumatic event can influence and distress
an individual in varying ways depending on the day, the mood, or even incidents around
the world. No healing process will be appropriate for treating every trauma survivor.

PTSD is not yet recognized as a large-scale societal problem, and accordingly, PTSD is
10 times more common than cancer, but our society spends one-tenth as much for
research on this disorder as for cancer research (Bremner, 2005, 146).

Another aspect of PTSD that makes treatment different is that most patients that have it
do not realize that they are affected by a past trauma. They have symptoms and problems
that they think are completely unrelated, but are in fact caused by the previous trauma.
This is important to acknowledge, because these traumas are in fact impacting
individuals decisions. Some of these not-so-obvious problems include trouble with
interpersonal relationships, problems with employment, and involvement with the
criminal justice system (http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html).
Furthermore, many doctors do not recognize the symptoms as stemming from a larger
problem. They will give treatments for the obvious symptoms such as headaches,
dizziness, chest pains, high blood pressure and other bodily problems, but will not be
familiar with the connection between these problems and symptoms of PTSD.

46

Lastly, but potentially most importantly, PTSD treatment does little to help distinguish
the societal effects on healing from trauma. Healing as defined by the World Health
Organization (WHO) is not merely the absence of disease and infirmity but a positive
state of physical, emotional and social well-being (as cited in Hamber, 2003, 77).
Because of the interconnectedness and complexity of the various effects of a traumatic
event, the healing process is difficult and lengthy. As discussed in the previous section,
the worry with all healing, and particularly with PTSD, is that simply concentrating on
symptoms of trauma is not enough to fully heal. In addition to dealing with the outcome
of trauma, the origins of violence and its meaning to those involved, as well as the social
and cultural context must be understood and addressed (Hamber, 2003, 79). Too often,
treatment for individuals affected by trauma focuses on the immediate and obvious
symptoms of the trauma but ignores other issues within the persons life that may create
difficulties during the healing process. It also ignores the possibly detrimental healing
methods used by the society itself. What is necessary is deal[ing] with the causes of the
distress and the symptomswhat needs to be healed is the multitude of individual,
political, social and cultural responses to a traumatic situation and its aftermath
(Hamber, 2003, 78). Many times the problems associated with individual trauma
survivors are, in actuality, problems created in the larger society that have not been fully
resolved (Hamber, 2003, 87).

Although the methods for PTSD treatment are continuously being examined and
perfected, ultimately the healing process must begin at a societal level, with the entire
population working towards incorporating methods for positive cultural healing into the

47

collective consciousness, so that healing is seen as a necessary and normal aspect of

dealing with lifes events.

48

Healing from TraumaTruth and Reconciliation Commissions

Many researchers and practitioners have recognized the vital necessity of developing a
method for healing from the adverse effects of traumatic experiences. A great deal of
work has been done in countries around the world to find and cultivate these methods.
This paper has already looked at techniques that are used for healing individuals with
PTSD. This is a fairly widespread and increasingly well-known disorder and
subsequently, treatment for the disorder is progressing continuously. However, as has
been shown, the work that is being done to heal individuals with PTSD is not fully
appropriate for all traumatic situations and individuals.

Another process for healing from traumatic experiences that has undergone much
scrutiny is the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and other less
commonly known Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. The most celebrated TRC
occurred in South Africa immediately following the Apartheid Era. Most people are less
familiar with the fact that between 20 and 402 Truth Commissions in different forms have
been conducted since 1974 (the South African TRC was appointed in 1995, although they
attempted other Truth Commissions in 1992 and 93) (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 37;
GTRC, 2006, 9). Although the dozens of past commissions varied in many ways, they
held in common a belief that shared truth was essential for social reconciliation
(Lerche, 2000, 1). The following is an alphabetical list of Truth Commissions identified

Different sources define Truth Commissions differently and thus do not qualify some of the past
commissions as TRCs or Truth Commissions.

49

since 1974 by Avruch and Vejarano, with additions from the United States Institute for
Peace:

Argentina (1983-1984), Bolivia (1982-1984), Brazil (1986), Chad (19911992), Chile (1990-1991), East Timor (1999-2000), El Salvador (19921993), Ethiopia (1993-2000), Germany (1992-1994), Ghana (2001
ongoing), Guatemala (1997-1999), Haiti (1995-1996), Honduras (1993),
Nepal (1991), Nigeria (1999), Panama (2001), Paraguay (1976), Peru
(2000), Philippines (1986), Rwanda (1993), Serbia and Montenegro
(2001), Sierra Leone (1999-ongoing), South Africa (1992 and 1993; TRC
in 1995), South Korea (2000), Uganda (1974 and 1986-1995), Uruguay
(1985), Zimbabwe (1985) (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 37; USIP,
http://www.usip.org/library/truth.html).

Truth-seeking Commissions have also previously been attempted in the United States
after comparable community traumas, examining the events in Rosewood, Florida, in
1923, the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921, and the Wilmington Race Riot in 1898. Similar
efforts have also been made at a national level, investigating Japanese American
imprisonment during World War II and an apology and reparations were given by
President Clinton to the Tuskegee syphilis experiments victims after a period of research
and a final report (GTRC, 2006, 13). Additionally, later in this paper, a large-scale Truth
and Reconciliation Commission in Greensboro, North Carolina, will be examined as a
model for healing following the death and wounding of several protestors.

The premise behind many Truth Commissions is that in order to heal from mass trauma,
it is necessary to come to terms with the actual events as they took place. Generally, past
Truth Commissions have developed after a large trauma has affected a state. A body of
individuals is appointed to research the facts of the designated time period. Truth

50

Commissions allow perpetrators, victims, families and others to give accounts of the
events that took place. The theory is that shared truth-telling and understanding will help
the affected population understand the trauma that happened in an unbiased and factual
way. The South African TRC, in particular, aimed at helping to ventilate the evidence,
establish the truth and bring about reconciliation (Lerche, 2000, 8).

It is commonly thought that the TRC process would stand to reestablish a baseline of
right and wrong, to humanize the perpetrators and to obtain and disclose previously
hidden information about what happened, who gave orders, [and] where missing persons
ended up (Minow, 1998, 338). Ultimately, the theory behind Truth Commissions is that
the shared acknowledgement of past wrongs and a common understanding of the way
forward will heal the country better than past methods for simply dealing with the
problem, commonly through a form of retributive justice. Truth Commissions attempt to
allow victims to share their pain, perpetrators to explain their view of the facts and for the
affected population as a whole to collectively heal from the deep impact of trauma.

Earlier, this paper discussed the effects that trauma can have on the consciousness of
individuals and how memories can actually encompass facts that did not really occur
during the event. The pieces of the trauma are compiled in the victims brain in
sometimes haphazard ways. The same is observably true in entire societies affected by a
common trauma. Thus Truth Commissions can exist as an opportunity to find clarity and
ultimately to help the population heal and move on. Martha Minow, a Harvard Law

51

professor, explains that Truth Commissions can, cut through myths, rumors, and false
pictures about the past (Minow, 1998, 337).

Many TRC mandates also require the commissions to write a report or other written
document that will be used to verify the findings. This is often a crucial aspect of the
groups work, since historical evidence of the trauma will then be clarified for future
generations (USIP, http://www.usip.org/library/truth.html).

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, though differing greatly in scale, resources, timeframe and level of trauma, all seek the same thing: the truth about their shared past,
reconciliation in the community, and an opportunity to move into the future with an
increased level of unity.

Treatment through TRCs

Truth Commissions differ considerably in their approach. They have been established by
international organizations (such as the United Nations), and nongovernmental
organizations, but the majority have been initiated by the national governments in the
countries where the trauma occurred (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 37). Although the
trauma differs in every situation, most commissions have revolved around an issue of
severe human rights abuses.

52

The South African Truth and Reconciliation Commissions mandate, following the
period of Apartheid, looked for accounts of the many abuses, identification of
perpetrators, and even reasons why such violence and mistreatment was allowed to
happen. The South African TRC was started by the Promotion of National Unity and
Reconciliation Act of 1995, which was approved by former president Nelson Mandela.
It specifically allowed for the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission through
three committees: Committee on Human Rights Violations, Committee on Amnesty, and
a Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation. The act expressly called on the TRC to
accomplish the following:

the investigation and the establishment of as complete a picture as possible

of the nature, causes and extent of gross violations of human rights
committedthe granting of amnesty to persons who make full disclosure
of all the relevant facts relating to acts associated with a political
objectiveaffording victims an opportunity to relate the violations they
suffered; the taking of measures aimed at the granting of reparation to, and
the rehabilitation restoration of the human and civil dignity of, victims of
violations of human rights . . . the making of recommendations aimed at
the prevention of the commission of gross violations of human rights
(Federation
of
American
Scientists,
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/rsa/act95_034.htm).

Most truth commissions, like the South African TRC, have a specific time period for the
research to be conducted and also stipulate the exact time frame that will be examined.
The commission works to heal the traumatized nation by compiling an accurate account
of the events that took place, and suggesting or enforcing methods to address the abuses
that occurred, thus moving forward and healing from the pain inflicted on all individuals.
It is understood that until there is public acknowledgement of what has happened, no
healing process will be able to have long-term positive results (Avruch and Vejerano,

53

2001, 41). Truth and Reconciliation Commissions are able to help raise the awareness of
such atrocities.

Many methods are used to understand the truth about the past trauma. Two aspects seem
to be shared by most of the previous Truth and Reconciliation Commissions: public
testimony and granting amnesty. Trauma survivors are invited to share their stories with
the hope that it will bring individual suffering . . . into a public space to be shared by all
(Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 41). This process of bringing individual suffering to the
collective was also promoted by the South African TRC through their use of the media to
publicize the hearings on television and radio. The second aspect of the Truth
Commissions, granting amnesty, is a process by which perpetrators of the human rights
crimes can come to the public hearings and share information about their involvement in
the tragedies. Perpetrators are able to apply for amnesty after confessing, in entirety, the
human rights abuses in which they participated or had knowledge.

Both survivors and perpetrators of the trauma are asked to help understand the situation
that took place, and find ways for repairing the damage that was done. Martha Minow
suggests that the TRCs strive to redefine the victims as the entire society, and redefine
justice as accountability. Seek repair, not revenge; reconciliation, not recrimination
(Minow, 1998, 341).

54

Difficulty with TRC Treatment

Since Truth and Reconciliation Commissions have received so much publicity, they have
also been subjected to much scrutiny and criticism. A constructive aspect of so much
skepticism is that many research projects have produced Lessons Learned reports,
outlining various positive and negative aspects of the TRC efforts. The South African
Truth and Reconciliation Commission has undoubtedly received the most attention,
owing to its large-scale, comprehensive attempt at healing the nation. The findings from
this very recent endeavor have yielded many constructive observations. Kevin Avruch
and Beatriz Vejarano, in their outline of previous TRCs, entitled, Truth and
Reconciliation Commissions: A Review Essay and Annotated Bibliography, critically
examine both the positive and negative aspects of the struggles of these commissions.
Some of these difficulties or problems associated with both the South African TRC and
other Truth Commissions are outlined below. The hope is that as nations in need of
healing, the lessons that have been learned from these past efforts will be developed or
improved upon to be used for collective trauma healing. The following complications
and struggles are grouped into six categories: Truth, Justice, Granting Amnesty, TopDown Approaches, Time and Resources, and Long-Term Healing.

Truth

Understandably, defining Truth is complicated and subjective. As has been seen,

trauma survivors often subconsciously create their own memories and versions of the

55

facts of the traumatic event. When an entire society is affected by trauma, especially
prolonged or extremely severe trauma, it is completely reasonable for different
understandings of the truth to exist. Unfortunately, this also makes it extremely difficult
to attain concurrence of the truth. The task of Truth Commissions is thus inherently
complex and susceptible to misperceptions regarding the underlying goal. Additionally,
it is one thing to establish the facts, and quite another to establish a society-wide
consensus on what they meanshared facts do not necessarily conduce to shared truths
(Avruch and Vejerano, 2001, 40). However in order to heal from the negative societal
impacts of trauma, it is necessary to fully acknowledge the events that happened without
denial. This means helping the entire nation to develop an awareness of, and an
understanding about the effects of the trauma.

Furthermore, in order for Truth and Reconciliation Commissions to gather the facts and
ultimately the truth, they must have legitimacy in the eyes of the people. Unfortunately
TRCs are sometimes established by the very governments or people that were in control
when the atrocities occurred, making it extremely difficult to gain the trust of the
traumatized population.

Justice

It is debatable whether there is any right form of justice, but often the most commonly
known methods include some form of retribution, usually punishment or prison
sentences. The form of justice that is acted out by TRCs is very different and

56

understandably seemingly unfair for some people. The appalling human atrocities
committed during the types of trauma that most TRCs are attempting to heal from are
overwhelming. It is sometimes simply too difficult to conceptualize justice that does
not encompass revenge, pay-back, or other types of punishment when confronted with
such severe human-rights abuses, but Truth Commissions cannot by their nature deliver
this sort of justice (Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 39). Such commissions provide a type
of justice that moves from retributive towards truth seeking and reconciliation
(Avruch and Vejarano, 2001, 39).

Similar to the problems with truth-seeking, another difficulty with achieving justice is
that the very same governments that implemented the human-rights abuse policies are
those that seek to heal the nation. In this regard, it becomes difficult to find the truth, and
also to implement a form of justice against those that are still in control. An example
from Latin America shows that the military and police apparatus survived the scrutiny
with their legitimacy undermined but their power largely intact (Avruch and Vejarano,
2001, 42). Therefore, gaining accountability from the perpetrators of the crimes, one of
the prerequisites for a transition to healing and forgiveness, is unlikely. In transitional
governments made up of individuals that previously participated in human rights abuses,
the individuals responsible for such reprehensive acts are known, but because of his or
her position of power it is unlikely that those guilty of crimes will be held accountable.

Granting Amnesty

57

Directly related to the issue of justice is that of granting amnesty to those individuals or
parties that were inflicting violence and pain upon others. This is arguably the most
controversial aspect of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. For the South African
TRC, amnesty was not granted to every perpetrator. Individuals had to apply for
amnesty, and not all requests were granted. People whose appeals for amnesty were met
had disclosed fully the facts of misdeeds that could be fairly characterized as having a
political objective (Minow, 1998, 322).

For some, granting amnesty was seen as the price for allowing a relatively peaceful
transition to full democracy (Minow, 1998, 322), but at the same time, granting amnesty
could ultimately lead to an increase in an underlying hate and desire for revenge.
Although this process did seem to work in South Africa, it is too soon to see what the
long-term effects will be, and whether granting amnesty did serve to heal the country.

Top-Down Approaches

The violent trauma from which many TRCs are spawned has often been inflicted by a
political regime or government that is afterwards transformed. However, many of the
changes that are made do not necessarily entail removing or replacing those that were in
power during the atrocities. Moreover, the majority of previous Truth and Reconciliation
Commissions have been mandated from governments or leaders in power; a top-down
approach enforced upon the people afflicted with the pain of the trauma. As many critics
have warned, the attitude that it would be proper for everything to be forgiven and

58

forgotten by those who were wronged is expressed by the party that committed the
injustice (Theodor Adorno as cited in Lerche, 2000, 5). This adds to the question of
ultimate legitimacy of the work done by the Truth Commission and the subsequent
success or failure.

Time and Resources

Truth Commissions are given a mandate that specifies the length of time that they have to
conclude their work. Often it is two years or less to conduct the necessary research and
write a report with suggestions. This is simply not enough time to fully understand the
impact of traumatic events, which sometimes spanned decades. South Africas TRC had
two years to work on the trauma from Apartheid which was a system that lasted over 30
years.

Long-term Healing

Possibly the most important issue is that of long-term healing from societal trauma. Have
the past Truth and Reconciliation Commissions been able to enact healing that will be
sustainable past the long-term effects of trauma? Will the process of healing that occurs
over the commissions mandated time period, be enough to fully heal?

Truth Commissions believe that, although imperfect, the process of healing engaged in by
their work will be adequate for a nations coming to terms with its past (Avruch and

59

Vejarano, 2001, 41). It is questionable whether TRCs can fully heal a damaged nation as
well as healing the individual psychological wounds from trauma.

It has also been mentioned, that Truth Commissions may not be able to erase the previous
animosity that may have existed within the country, and therefore may not be able to
sustain long-term healing (Minow, 1998, 339).

Because of time constraints or lack of participation, many commissions are unable to

produce a final report of the events and recommendations for reparations or further
healing. Additionally, when final reports are created, do the recommendations that are
suggested come to fruition? It is likely that many of the ideas generated by the work of
the Truth Commission will never be finally carried out. This is not to say that the process
itself does not help to heal the nation, but it could be conceivably as dangerous to allow
the public to trust in a process that will never be executed.

60

A Case StudyThe Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission

Many groups have attempted different methods for societal healing, but have either not
tried, or not been able, to change the collective consciousness of citizens. For the most
part, these groups have been unable to find a long-term, sustainable method for healing
from the trauma inflicted on their societies. One group in the United States has recently
tried to compile the best practices and lessons learned from both Truth and Reconciliation
Commissions and other methods of healing from trauma for application to their own
unique situation. The group, the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(GTRC), utilized the lessons learned from past TRCs to work toward healing their own
community. The Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission took an interesting
extra step with its effort. The commission realized the importance for not only healing,
but also the necessity to transform the consciousness of the people in its city and tried to
incorporate those realizations into its work. It is for this reason that the GTRC is an
interesting case study.

Background
On November 3rd 1979 a tragedy occurred in a mid-sized town called Greensboro, North
Carolina in the Southeastern United States. During a state-wide rally and conference for
racial, social and economic justice, organized by the Communist Workers Party (CWP),
members of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) and the American Nazi party opened fire on the
rally, killing five people and wounding ten others. Greensboro police had been assigned
to protect the protestors, but were engaged with an early lunch, and so, were not present
during the killings. Four television crews witnessed and recorded the crimes. Although

61

the killings had been captured by several television camera crews, the people responsible
for the deaths were acquitted twice before finally, the guilty individuals from the KKK
and Nazi party, as well as the negligent police officers, were held jointly responsible for
one of the five deaths. Many different perspectives of the event existed, making the
truth difficult to distinguish. Much of the community was affected in different,
negative ways; and the many myths surrounding the details of the event exacerbated the
pain and suffering of the community and made healing impossible. The Greensboro
Truth and Reconciliation Commission recorded many negative results from this unhealed
trauma. These damaging consequences were demonstrated through the increase in
obvious racism, anti-Semitism and anti-labor feelings in the community as well as
increases in rates of poverty. As has been observed in other traumatic events and will be
examined later, the collective consciousness of the Greensboro citizens was deeply
impacted and harmed.

In 1998, nearly 20 years later, two organizations in the area realized that much pain and
suffering had occurred because the 1979 incident was never fully resolved. These
organizations understood that without a full acknowledgement of the event and a process
of healing from the resulting guilt and pain, the community would never be able to fully
recover. In response, the two organizations: Greensboro Justice Fund and the Beloved
Community Center, initiated the Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation
Project (GTCRP). The GTCRP, with inspiration from South Africas Truth and
Reconciliation Commission, then wrote a mandate for the instigation of the Greensboro
Truth and Reconciliation Commission (GTRC). The GTRC mandate states,

62

The passage of time alone cannot bring closure, nor resolve feelings of
guilt and lingering trauma for those impacted by the events of November
3rd, 1979. Nor can there be any genuine healing for the city of
Greensboro, unless the truth surrounding these events is honestly
confronted, the suffering fully acknowledged, accountability established,
and forgiveness and reconciliation facilitated3 (Mandate for the GTCRP,
www.gtcrp.org/mandate.doc).

The GTCRP embarked on a community-based initiative to look deeply into its past in an
effort to heal from the pain resulting from the citys tragedy. Through the establishment
of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Greensboro was able to impartially examine
the facts of November 3rd 1979 with the goal of clarity rather than recrimination. Similar
to other truth commissions, the GTRC utilized public truth-telling and education to shed
light on the actual events of November 3rd and to explain why they might have occurred.

The Observable Impact on the Unhealed Community

Following the terrible events on November 3, 1979, many negative ramifications were
noticed in the community. Despite the fact that some community members wanted to just
push the memories under the table and continue living their lives, it was obvious that the
trauma had left behind many harmful consequences. Naturally, after the trauma, the level
of fear in the community increased considerably. Immediately following November 3rd, a
curfew was set, and citizens in the neighborhood where the shooting occurred were
prevented from protesting. As is common after a traumatic event, rumors and stories
spread about continuing violence, spurring fear and anger. Furthermore, populations of
3

For full text of the Mandate, see Appendix I.

63

people connected to those traumatized (communists, African Americans, and others)

were fearful of future attacks and concerned by the lack of follow-up and justice for the
violence (GTRC, 2006, 309). The entire community was wary of economic retaliation
and future hostility. During the GTRCs research and testimony-gathering, the following
detrimental consequences (besides death and physical injuries) were reported:

Individual psychological trauma, depression, anger and fear;

Strained relationships, broken marriages and estranged children;
Economic retaliation and social isolation against CWP members and
their associates, including loss of jobs and economic hardship,
surveillance and a feeling of being under siege;
General distrust of police, the justice system, elected officials and the
media;
Exacerbated race and class tensions;
An upsurge in racist violence and hate group activity;
Chilled organizing and political activism;
Increased distrust of outsiders, denial of responsibility for problems;
Tacit approval of violence against political dissenters (GTRC Final
Report, 2006, 311).

Because these problems were increasingly damaging to the community of Greensboro,

the Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project (GTCRP) realized that
without a conscious effort to heal from the trauma inflicted on their town, the subsequent
problems would never cease.

The GTRC Mandate

The GTCRP, acknowledging the need for a common understanding of the events that
took place on November 3rd, 1979, created the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation
Commission and wrote a mandate outlining the goals and processes for its efforts. In

64

Greensboro, citizens recognized that because there is no common understanding about

this painful episode in Greensboros history, it continues to serve as a basis for fear,
division and distrust (GTCRP, www.gtcrp.org). With that important acknowledgement,
the GTRC worked to fulfill its mandate, which states as its intentions:

a) Healing and reconciliation of the community through discovering and

disseminating the truth of what happened and its consequences in the lives of
individuals and institutions, both locally and beyond Greensboro.
b) Clarifying the confusion and reconciling the fragmentation that has been caused
by these events and their aftermath, in part by educating the public through its
findings.
c) Acknowledging and recognizing peoples feelings, including feelings of loss,
guilt, shame, anger and fear.
d) Helping facilitate changes in social consciousness and in the institutions that were
consciously or unconsciously complicit in these events, thus aiding in the
prevention of similar events in the future (Mandate for the GTCRP,
http://www.greensborotrc.org/mandate.doc).

The GTRC's mandate helped guide the healing process within Greensboro and also
substantiated a certain level of legitimacy for the project in the community.

Process for Healing

The GTRC was guided by similar, previous Truth and Reconciliation Commissions;
however its work was also innovative and, as expected, adapted to fit the communitys
particular situation. Many previous TRCs were functioning in a society with a
transitioning government and much less democratic processes for positive change;
however the GTRC acknowledged that similar healing work was still necessary in
Greensboro despite the fact that the existing institutions were supposed to have helped

65

resolve the trauma. Furthermore, the GTRC clearly recognized its own limitations and
suggested that all Truth and Reconciliation Commissions might be seen as one piece of
overall development of healing within a society. Most importantly, the GTRC expressed
the need and right of every citizen to have an honest and truthful account of the events in
the citys history.

Most steps that previous TRCs had used to implement their mandate were also used by
the GTRC, including public testimonies, media publications, and a final written report
with recommendations.

Other specific goals for the project were to:

a) educate the public about our the [sic] work;

b) encourage public dialogue about the truth and reconciliation process;
c) mobilize community residents to offer statements;
d) provide a non-threatening and supportive platform for people to share their
relevant stories;
e) facilitate the hearing of the various perspectives and stories; and
f) contribute to the communitys collective understanding of what happened and
why (GTRC Final Report, 2006, 32).

Like other TRCs, the GTRC makes a distinction between retributive justice and
transformative justice. Whereas retributive justice seeks to punish or enact revenge on
the perpetrator, transformative justice facilitates exchange of diverse perspectives on
why these wrongs occurred and what should be done (GTRC Final Report, 2006, 309).
Instead of simply disciplining the people responsible, it attempts to take a more complete
look at the situation to gain a better understanding of the reasons why the event may have

66

happened and what the effects on the community will be. It does not replace the judicial
system, but rather compliments the process, and works towards a fuller, more long-term
community healing. Additionally, whereas retributive justice looks at the perpetrators
crimes and punishes them, Truth and Reconciliation Commissions focus more on the
victims, allowing individuals to share their stories, gain clarity about the events, and to
hopefully help them to heal. The GTRC is quick, however, to clarify that they are not
victim biased, the whole purpose of the Commission is to find the whole story without
any partiality (GTRC Final Report, 2006, 15).

Another positive trait of the truth commission is that it is able to look at the event within
a wider context. As opposed to only treating the victims and survivors of the trauma,
or only punishing the perpetrators of the violence, it is able to look at the community as a
whole and understand what previous events could have led the community to this point,
and at the same time, approach the healing process from a community level rather than an
individual level. Through this process, the commission can also make recommendations
that will hopefully prevent similar events from happening in the future.

Transforming the Collective Consciousness

An important distinction between the GTRC and previous Truth Commissions initiatives
was that the GTRC was very cognizant of the important and hurtful impact that the
trauma had inflicted on the collective consciousness of the citizens of Greensboro. While
other commissions have also recognized this problem, the mandate for the GTRC

67

specifically mentioned this as a necessary part of healing. The mandate states that an
essential part of the events examination will be, helping facilitate changes in social
consciousness and in the institutions that were consciously or unconsciously complicit in
these events, thus aiding in the prevention of similar events in the future (Mandate for
the GTCRP, http://www.gtcrp.org/mandate.doc). While it is not possible to know with
certainty if these efforts have been successful, it is significant that the acknowledgment of
the importance of transforming the collective consciousness was made, and that an effort
was put forward to work on changing the destructive impact on the identity of the
community. One exemplary effort made by the GTRC in attempting to transform the
consciousness of the people of Greensboro, was to examine how the identity of the
community had been formed and what attitudes and behaviors were already inherent in
the culture. As will be seen in the next section, many previous traumas in the community
had already helped to shape a particular consciousness in Greensboro, which directed the
actions that took place, and also the way the community reacted to the trauma on
November 3rd.

Previous Trauma in Greensboros History

The GTRC took great strides toward building the large, over-all picture of not only what
happened on November 3rd, but what events had led to the trauma of that day. As has
been observed, trauma tends to follow a cyclical pattern. Those traumatized without fully
healing, tend to act out in ways that mirror the trauma inflicted upon them leading
others to act similarly. In Greensboro, it was reasonably feared that the resulting actions

68

from the events on November 3rd, 1979, would lead to future violence and hate (indeed
related behavior was already being observed in the community at the time the GTRC was
initiated). In addition to the fear of future troubles in the community, the GTRC also
reasoned that previous unhealed traumas had led to the events on November 3rd.

As has already been acknowledged, the GTRC was very concerned with the
consciousness of the community. They realized that not only was Greensboro impacted
by the events on November 3rd, but that previous trauma had also negatively influenced
the collective consciousness, and that this most likely caused not only the reasons for the
violent events, but also the subsequent reactions by the leaders and community members
in Greensboro. The GTRC specifically mentions and examines a few events that are
likely in the collective memory of the community. These include, the importance of
the United States history of Constitutional rights, slavery, white supremacy, key labor or
civil rights organizing efforts and geopolitical conflicts (GTRC Final Report, 2006, 23).

More locally, several occurrences in Greensboros history, likely had an impact on the
events of November 3rd. In Greensboro, racial equality was far from being equal.
Schools, housing, and government services were extremely insufficient for African
Americans, and unemployment was high. Racism was rampant, and although African
American community leaders were beginning to make important changes for Greensboro,
by 1979 there was still lingering hostility by police forces towards the African American
community. Previous slow-to-change segregation led to sit-ins, protests, demonstrations,
strikes, and other acts, which sparked difficult relationships between advocates of

69

equality (racial, economic, and others) and leaders in the community. In 1979, tensions
still existed between activists and the law enforcement in the community. Almost
certainly, these relationship strains had an impact on the way the traumatic events of
November 3rd were played out.

Lessons Learned

It was imperative for the GTRC to find the full facts of the tragedy that occurred, and
portray that story to the community of Greensboro, while at the same time, suggesting
methods for healing from the trauma, in conjunction with the healing aspects of truthtelling. The GTRC recognized that in addition to physical injuries, many citizens and
groups were morally and psychologically harmed by the trauma and were unable to heal.

In the GTRCs final report, they make several recommendations for healing. The
recommendations fall into the following categories: General Reconciliation, Institutional
Reform, Criminal Justice and Civil Remedies, and Citizen Transformation/Engagement.
The recommendations seek to not only acknowledge the historical events and pain
resulting from the tragedy and to reconcile the wounded community, but also to address
issues that most likely led to the events on November 3rd. The recommendations include
issues like paying workers a fair wage (one of the reasons that the protest occurred), and
changing the media structure (who, after the trauma, helped spread myths and rumors
about the facts). The GTRC recognized that the structures bearing responsibility for the

70

incident and its repercussions must be replaced by methods for building sustainable
peace.

Unfortunately, like some other TRCs, many factors made the GTRCs efforts more
difficult. Time, resources and lack of perceived legitimacy made the task less effective
than it might have been. A deep reluctance and fear of the GTRC process dissuaded
many individuals and businesses from helping to fund the effort. Additionally, because it
was a non-profit organization created by local citizens but not commissioned by the
Greensboro city government, the GTRC lacked the power to force recommendations to
be taken or to persuade people to engage in the truth-seeking and public testimonies.
Furthermore, fear of social or economic retaliation forced many people to make private,
anonymous statements, or kept them from participating at all. The city of Greensboro
was also uneasy about the reconciliation process and was much more inclined to ignore
the November 3rd trauma as if it never happened. Some of the citys responses to the
commissions efforts, as identified in the GTRCs final report, were:

City Council voted 6-3, with the three black members dissenting, to oppose the
truth and reconciliation process;
Council members promoted rumors about the GTRC intimidating opponents and
sowed confusion about our funding and our relationship to the GTCRP;
Information known only to the GTRC, police and city officials was leaked to the
media, jeopardizing the public hearing testimony;
Police officials met with representatives of Mount Zion Baptist Church without
GTRC staff about a GTRC event planned there;
Prospective statement givers and community dialogue participants indicated
being discouraged to participate (http://www.greensborotrc.org/overall_conc.pdf).

71

What became painfully obvious for the GTRCs participants was that many of the
citizens of Greensboro did not realize the effects that the trauma had inflicted on the
community, and felt that delving deeper into the events would cause disunity. The truth
is exactly the opposite; the more dangerous consequences were the pieces that had sunk
into the collective consciousness of the community, increasing the likelihood that similar
problems would occur in the future. The GTRC final report notes, The mayor once
commented to us that he found it unappetizing to engage in a process that speaks openly
about issues of poverty, labor, capital, race and hate. It appears that many in our
community share his distaste. This discomfort and its roots must be honestly examined by
individuals and the community as a whole (GTRC Final Report, 2006, 311).

The Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission achieved some positive shortterm results from its work and was able to begin writing a clearer historical perspective of
the events on November 3rd, 1979. The commissions realization that in order to move
on from the trauma the community must both heal from the tragedy and transform the
collective consciousness of the community was profound and innovative. The final
report with conclusions and recommendations was finished in 2006. It is certainly too
early to determine whether or not the work of the GTRC will have sustainable healing
benefits for the community. Certainly, the steps of rebuilding the truth and
acknowledging the pain and suffering of the community will make a difference for the
future of Greensboro, but whether or not the cycle of trauma inflicted on the community
will be able to be broken is yet to be seen.

72

We hope that our modest examination of a difficult chapter of Greensboros history and
how those events shape the community today may serve as a profound and timely
reminder of the importance of facing shameful events honestly and acknowledging the
brutal consequences of political spin, calculated blindness and passive ignorance.the
truth about the past will help us build a better, more just and more inclusive future (The
Final Report, GTRC, 2006, 15).

73

A Culture of Healing
If we cant envision alternatives, then we dont want alternatives: we cannot cultivate
that which isnt available. We dont order a dish that isnt on the menu. We dont vote
for a candidate who isnt on the ballot.We rarely select whats scarcely available,
seldom emphasized, infrequently presented.what prevents our frustration from shaping
new institutions is the inability to perceive alternatives, resulting in the absence of desire,
hence of demand, for those alternatives (Gene Youngblood, as cited in Elgin, October
1997, 26).

Copious amounts of research have been conducted on methods for healing. As has
already been examined, doctors have established some successful healing methods for
individuals with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder; and societal healing has been attempted
through Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. Both of these initiatives, and others like
them, continue to expose newer ways of healing, and are constantly being updated and
healing techniques perfected. Efforts like the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation
Commission divulge innovative methods and new ways of thinking. Greensboros
initiative incorporated the realization that a transformation needed to occur in the
collective consciousness of citizens in order for sustainable healing to occur. However,
there is still a shortage of concerted efforts to incorporate all of the healing techniques
that have been learned into the collective consciousness of communities and into todays
cultures. Thus, when individuals in a society are not able to heal from their trauma, the
culture is not able to support the healing process, and is often detrimental to sustainable
healing. Furthermore, healing a societal trauma that affects a large population is an
overwhelming task. Methods for thinking about trauma, reacting to its pain and other
consequences, and ultimately for positively processing the trauma for use in the future

74

has simply not progressed enough to heal individuals in a sustainable way.

Consequently, entire societies continue to live with and be tormented by previous
traumas, constantly and subconsciously impacted by the effects. This has had unhealthy
consequences for generations. Violent trauma inflicts pain, confusion, and a whole
gamut of other harmful consequences and is acted out time and time again in future,
violent re-actions.

This paper has examined the very detrimental outcomes that societal tragedies inflict on
traumatized communities. It has shown how trauma works its way into the collective
consciousness of the affected individuals or populations and lends to a cyclical pattern of
more trauma. Subsequently, it has been noted that it is necessary to heal from trauma to
avoid its negative, long-term impacts. Healing methods have been examined through
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Truth and Reconciliation Commissions; a specific
TRC in Greensboro, North Carolina was examined for its attempt to heal and transform
the collective consciousness of its citizens. However, the GTRC was also met with fear
and apprehension and therefore may not have achieved its goals of healing from the
November 3rd tragedy. This section will introduce the concept of a Culture of Healing.
This approach promotes a structure in which methods for healing are incorporated into
the culture and collective consciousness of societies, thereby making healing an inherent
aspect of individuals lives.

The Culture of Healing framework has been created and expounded on by psychiatrist
and educator, Dr. Hossain Danesh. Daneshs concept of a Culture of Healing is founded
on an understanding that ones worldview shapes the way in which the world is

75

perceived and notes that it is by developing ones worldview that more peaceful societies
may be built.

A persons worldview influences the way he views reality, his ideas about human nature,
his understanding of the purpose of life and his view of human relationships (Danesh,
July 10, 2006). Worldview is developed in several ways without individuals ever
acknowledging that it even exists. As has been examined in this paper, this worldview
occurs not only in individuals, but in entire societies and can be developed and reinforced
by others within the society. The considerable impact that worldview has on ones
thoughts and actions lends credibility to this as a starting point for creating change.
Danesh explains, [w]orldview construction is an inherent aspect of the development of
human consciousness and is therefore an inevitable and essential aspect of development
of human individuals and societies alike (Danesh, 2006, 64). Danesh identifies three
categories of worldview that can be found at different levels in all human societies and
reflect the development stages of each individual or society. The three categories of
worldview are: survival-based, identity-based and unity-based (Danesh, 2006, 66).

A combination of all three categories of worldview can be seen in many cases, but most
societies will be dominated by one particular worldview. The survival-based worldview
is normal at the earlier stages of human development. Societies with this worldview are
inclined to seek power in their quest for security and the proclivity to use force and/or
conformity to achieve ones objectives is strong (Danesh, 2006, 66). The second type
of worldview, identity-based, is associated with the coming of age of individuals and

76

societies (Danesh, 2006, 67). This stage embraces the idea that overcoming obstacles and
succeeding overall is of the utmost importance: the survival of the fittest (Danesh,
2006, 67).

Neither of these two worldviews is conducive to sustainable, peaceful societies because

they lack an essential piece of consciousness: unity. Danesh describes unity as the
process of bringing diverse elements together. Unity is the one-ness of humanity; the
operating force for creating civilizations based on peace, equal, just, progressive, moral,
diverse and united (Danesh, 2006, 68). The notion of unity suggests that unity is the
fundamental core of reality, and that if the concept of unity is understood and established,
the need for conflict will be decreased and eventually eliminated. (Danesh, 2006, 67). In
a unity-based paradigm it is recognized that the greatest challenge facing humanity is to
establish its unity worldwide, while maintaining its diversity (Danesh, 2004, 17). Unity
is not conformity, but rather a process of bringing together diverse elements into a
cohesive new entity. It is this fundamental reality of unity in diversity which makes a
unity-based worldview sustainable.

In most societies the survival- and identity-based worldviews are predominant. However,
worldview evolves and transforms through ones maturing consciousness and has the
possibility to change. The adoption of a unity-based worldview provides individuals with
a new framework for understanding and processing trauma and healing. As Danesh
explains, a unity-based worldview is imperative for creating a Culture of Healing.

77

Although still an innovative idea for societal healing, the lessons learned from Daneshs
work, indicate a positive and sustainable path for cultural healing. As was previously
shown, culture is not stagnant; it is constantly growing and changing. The result is that
positive adjustments can always be made. As cultures around the world try to deal with
the traumas that have been inflicted upon them, they develop new ways for handling the
feelings, reactions, and consequences associated with those traumatic events and their
consequences. Current methods for healing are not comprehensive enough to provide
long-term, sustainable health at a societal level. Thus, unhealed traumas lead to future
trauma and violence; creating a necessity to consciously transform the way one thinks
about healing, so that the prevalence of violence and the subsequent cycle of trauma can
be eliminated.

Individuals dealing with the effects of trauma have many means for attempting to heal
from their suffering. However, entire traumatized societies have few outlets for release
and healing from their pain. It is difficult to imagine whole populations of people going
to a therapist together, but in essence, this is what needs to be done. Unfortunately, there
is no collective counselor to help cultures heal, thus new methods must be developed for
self-healing. Developing a Culture of Healing within the foundation of a unity-based
worldview would be a constructive method for societal self-healing.

In light of the obvious negative consequences of unresolved trauma, a Culture of Healing

would be a positive approach to tackling this world-wide problem. A Culture of Healing,
as defined by Dr. Danesh, would create environments in which the psychosocial, moral

78

and spiritual wounds and trauma sustained as a result of severe conflict, violence and war
are gradually healed (Danesh, 2006, 73). Although conceptually new, this idea has
already been implemented in school systems in Bosnia and Herzegovina as one of the
educational strategies for helping children heal from the trauma of the war for
independence from Yugoslavia, while simultaneously transforming their preconceived
ideas to incorporate unity and peace. This idea can be expanded to help traumatized
communities incorporate unity in the context of diversity as a foundation for cultural
healing.
Culture of Healing as Implemented in Education for Peace (EFP4)

The theory of a Culture of Healing has been implemented in a program in Bosnia and
Herzegovina (BiH). The program, Education for Peace (EFP), was initiated after the
country was attempting to return to normal after large-scale civil war. It was realized
that amongst the quite devastating effects of the war, including extreme poverty,
insecurity and psychological trauma and social dislocation amongst adults, children
were understandably and noticeably, also being impacted by the war (Danesh, 2006, 69).
Children were learning dangerous stereotypes about other ethnic groups. These stories
were building deep-seated, negative prejudices and distrust for people of other ethnic
backgrounds and beliefs. The schools had become segregated and each school system
was helping to promote the negative myths and biased histories. Additionally, resources
at the schools for both teachers and students were virtually nonexistent, as most of the
schools had been bombed or damaged during the war.

See Appendix II for a diagram of the prerequisites and components of an effective program of Peace
Education as developed by H.B. Danesh.

79

In May 2000, EFP was introduced into six primary and secondary schools, as a pilot
project after a workshop prompted all parties to formally invite EFP into their schools.
Halfway through the first year, education officials decided to implement EFP, if possible,
in all BiH schools. Currently, the program is being run in 112 schools, with plans to
implement it in all BiH schools (reaching a total of 1.5 million primary and secondary
school students).

The EFP program, based on the Integrative Theory of Peace Education developed by
Danesh outlines four conditions for successful peace education: development of a unitybased worldview; creating a culture of peace; creating a culture of healing; and using
Peace Education as the framework for all educational activities (Danesh, 2006, 71).
Initially started in schools, the EFP program eventually becomes a part of the entire
community through student/parent interactions, public community events, and school
trips to the cities of former enemies. Through the curriculum, students and teachers
build trust and incorporate the ideals of unity and peace into their every-day
conversations and activities.

Although the success in Bosnia and Herzegovinas schools is due in part to developing all
four of these requirements, it is the third, creating a culture of healing that will be
examined more thoroughly here. During the process of implementing the theory of a
Culture of Healing into BiH schools, they developed three characteristics of this type of
culture:

Mutual trust in and between the members of participating school communities;

Satisfaction of the tripartite human needs for security, identity and meaning;

80

Hope and optimismhope for a better future and optimism for the ability to
overcome future conflicts without recourse to violence (Danesh, 2006, 73).

Through this process, unity is seen as the healing remedy for the past traumas. A
Culture of Healing is thus understood as a process by which unity would be incorporated
into the collective consciousness of all societies, providing a framework with which to
understand, as a culture, how to heal from trauma.

Although the EFP program is much more complex than has been described here, the
participants attest to the overall success of Education for Peace and specifically, their
success in developing a Culture of Peace between previously hostile cultures:

The populations of these schools communities have begun to gradually

shed their fears and mistrust of those belonging to other ethnic
populations, have started to re-establish their bonds of friendship that they
had before the recent war, and have visited each others cities (Danesh,
2006, 74).
EFPs success in Bosnia and Herzegovina suggests that the concept of a Culture of
Healing could effectively be implemented on a larger scale. Additionally, the fact that
the program helped to transform the collective consciousness of the participating school
communities in BiH suggests that similar work would help to transform the collective
consciousness of other traumatized communities.

Relevance of EFP's Culture of Healing to Other Communities

While a Culture of Healing may look different depending on the cultures in which it is
being introduced, three aspects are common across all cultures: understanding the longlasting, detrimental impact that unhealed societal traumas have on affected populations;
acknowledging the previous traumas that may be causing violence and problems; and

81

understanding how collective consciousness is created and sustained, and how trauma
affects the collective consciousness. While other methods used for healing, such as Truth
and Reconciliation Commissions and treatment for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder have
been beneficial in caring for survivors of trauma, without changing the worldview to one
that encompasses unity, these methods have not proven sustainable for continued societal
healing. This section will examine those three necessary aspects for developing a Culture
of Healing, while also incorporating some methods for resolving conflict as identified
during a workshop on reconciliation given by peaceworker, Kai Brand-Jacobsen (on 21
April 2006).

Societal Trauma has a Long-Lasting Impact

The first step toward a Culture of Healing is understanding that societal trauma has a
lasting impact on entire cultures. Traumatic events, often the result of previous unhealed
traumas, will cause future trauma and violence if the victims and society do not directly
recognize and examine the causes. The Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation
Commission, one such model for scrutinizing past trauma, defined the process of
becoming a culture of healing as such: Once the people of a community have gone
through a process of discovering the whole truth about a hurtful event in their past, they
will be more aware of the signs that problems exist. In the future, they will be more able
to prevent people from doing harm (GTRC Final Report, 2006, 20). A Culture of
Healing is begun by realizing that some of the existing problems and violence within
society may be attributed to collective traumas of the society.

82

Acknowledging Past Trauma

Having recognized the insidious nature of trauma, the society must then look at traumas
in the culture that remain unhealed and are festering. Not always obvious, the effects of
trauma spring up when least expected. Because of these delayed or unexplained
symptoms, it is difficult to connect a traumatic event to feelings or actions that might
occur years later. Even understanding this does not necessarily define the problem that
exists. Most countries have been built on difficulties and traumas that they may be
inclined to forget. The United States discovered their new nation and wiped out
masses of people native to the country. While events such as this are part of history, it is
not enough to blame others and move on. Traumas such as this (and many, many others)
have left lasting impacts on both the perpetrators, victims and future generations.
Millions of people live with the results of this unhealed trauma, which negatively
transforms the consciousness of the entire nation. The mandate for the Greensboro Truth
and Reconciliation Commission acknowledges, There comes a time in the life of every
community when it must look humbly and seriously into its past in order to provide the
best possible foundation for moving into a future based on healing and hope (GTRC
Final Report, 2006, 16).

Lerche suggests that in order to speak of helping individuals and society to heal we
must have at least [have] a working definition of the ailment or injury; we must be sure
the cure leaves the afflicted individual or society better and not worse off (Lerche,
2000, 4). A cultures existing problems must be acknowledged, and the connections that
these problems have to past traumas must be realized. Additionally, this serves as a call

83

for individuals around the world to conduct research that will examine the connections
between past unhealed traumas and the current cyclical traumas that are occurring.

Societal trauma causes the affected community to develop a societal identity based
around a facts or myths about the traumatic event. This collective memory, all too
often written by the victors, the oppressors, or the individuals in power becomes
historical fact. These stories get passed on to future generations in a method that
coerces a mutual understanding of events and stifles approaches for critical thinking and
further research into the truth. Recently, many historians have attempted to rewrite
history with a more honest examination of the actual happenings. The most famous in
the United States is perhaps Howard Zinns, A Peoples History of the United States.
Zinn writes his book, not necessarily to criticize the United States or place blame on any
individuals or governments, but to simply raise awareness about the bias of current
history books and to acknowledge the reality of the historical events in the United States.

Reconciliation attempts are often begun directly after a large-scale, traumatic event has
occurred. However, all too often, the needed healing stems from previous events that
were never fully acknowledged. Some were even seen as a necessary means, such as to
build a new, free, united nation. Therefore much reconciliation and healing must begin
with recognizing and admitting the existence (and wrongdoing) of these past events and
an acknowledgement that these traumas were not essential for building a new nation.
The GTRC recognized this necessity and as part of the commissions work,
acknowledged past problems that may have led to the November 3rd tragedy.

84

Tina Rosenberg, a journalist who has written extensively on collective violence, observes
that individuals need to tell their stories to someone who listens seriously and who
validates them with official acknowledgement.individuals must be able to reintegrate
the narrative of atrocity into their whole life storiesif the whole nation is suffering from
post-traumatic stress disorder, this process would be appropriate for the whole nation (as
cited in Minow, 1998, 326).

In any nations history, the citizens have undergone many ordeals that have caused
suffering and damage. Unfortunately, however, the exact history is oftentimes forgotten
or rewritten to cast certain events in a different lighteither because of embarrassment or
a denial of the true impact of such events (i.e. the abovementioned traumas).

Although it may not be obvious, a harmful act implies not only trauma suffered by the
victim, but also guilt suffered by the perpetrator (Galtung, 2003, 28). This lingering
guilt is often disguised and may lead the perpetrator to future violence. It is necessary
when healing a society to give close attention to not only the individuals affected by the
traumatic event, but also to those perpetuating the violence. This means that the entire
culture must heal from the past traumatic events (and ongoing trauma) and then change
the respective identity that has been built around them to find new, creative ways of
moving forward. In Greensboro, North Carolina, hidden guilt may have been a reason
for the GTRC not being well accepted or for its recommendations and results not being
well received.

85

Understanding Collective Consciousness and its Impact on Individuals

The second necessary facet of a Culture of Healing is to understand how a cultures

collective consciousness is created and how the collective consciousness influences the
decisions and actions of individuals. Once this concept is understood, it will become
clearer, how the collective consciousness is negatively impacted by unhealed societal
traumas. One method for ensuring that the components for EFP were incorporated into
the schools was by helping the children to understand these new concepts. In BiH, the
children became well-versed in the concepts of worldview and peace. Once worked into
their normal vocabulary, it was easy for the children to discuss new concepts and new
methods for changing their previous assumptions. For many, simply realizing the
existence of a new way of thinking, helped to raise consciousness about the concept.
Students were helped to thoroughly understand the concepts being presented to them
(although many of them were new) and to become conversant with the new ideas and
theories. Since both the children and teachers were incorporating these ideas into the
normal classroom, this new way of thinking was also brought home into the families of
the children, so that the overall collective consciousness of BiH schools and communities
were incorporating these ideas about worldview. The same must happen for a Culture of
Healing on a larger scale. Societies must be educated about the concept of a collective
consciousness and understand how collective worldviews are created and maintained, and
the possible negative consequences of such.

Developing a Culture of Healing through a unity-based worldview would provide the

structure for individuals and communities to heal from their past trauma and to prevent

86

similar traumatic episodes in the future. Events and people in ones surroundings help to
shape and guide his or her opinions and beliefs. Collective consciousness is molded and
reinforced by others. As a result, without transformation at a societal level, individual
changes will simply be squelched by the overwhelming understanding of the way things
should be. If, as a culture, a seemingly inherent and natural method can be developed for
resolving and healing from collective traumas, individuals will have a chance of breaking
the cycle. Much of the difficulty with past healing processes has been the lack of
understanding of the impact that the community as a whole has on the individual. Often,
the trauma and its effects are examined, but, it is not only the traumatic event that
requires attention: most particularly, the way in which the individual (or community)
interprets the event is vitally important when considering a strategy for healing
(Hamber, 2003, 78). Therefore, if the collective consciousness can be transformed to
include that strategy for healing and to understand the methods for doing so, chances for
long-term healing will greatly improve.

Building Non-Violent Relations & Reframing Identity

The last two suggestions, building non-violent relations and reframing identity, are the
two aspects of healing that are so often not fully understood, or possibly just the hardest
to manage and implement. However, they are also the most important, because without
transforming the subconscious damage that was done, the traumatic effects will linger
under the surface of the collective identity. This is where a Culture of Healing would
focus. Understanding methods for healing are important, but incorporating those

87

methods into the inherent nature of the collective understanding, would prevent misshandling of future trauma and quell the resulting violent reactions that so often occur. As
EFPs conceiver proposes, peace in its essence is a spiritual state with political, social
and ethical expressionspeace must first take place in human consciousnessin our
thoughts, sentiments and objectiveswhich are all shaped by the nature and focus of our
education (Danesh, 2006, 62). Before healing can be fully absorbed, the process for
healing must be incorporated into the collective consciousness. The need to heal must be
realized at a deep level, and the negative consequences from unhealed traumas must be
understood inherently.

Several productive techniques for healing have already been developed. However, these
techniques do not incorporate both healing and transforming the collective consciousness
by adopting a unity-based worldview, and have thus not been fully successful in the longterm. The above three requirements for a Culture of Healing are imperative as a starting
point, but other techniques that have been learned from alternative healing methods
promote positive changes that would also need to be incorporated into a culture that
promoted sustainable, long-term healing. A Culture of Healing would be the foundation
for stopping the ingrained and idealized nature of violence. The above prerequisites for a
Culture of Healing would begin a cognitive and systemic approach to transforming
socialized ideas of trauma; while paving a path for a new collective consciousness that
incorporates knowledge of the necessity for healing from trauma.

88

Conclusion
A rather startling aspect of researching and writing this paper was the realization that
everywhere around the world entire populations are suffering from pain as a result of
unhealed traumas. Many people are working on a variety of methods for helping
individuals healing, but ultimately, as is all too apparent, these methods are either not
working, or are not working quickly enough, to stop the cycle of unhealed trauma. The
very negative consequences become all too obvious when witnessing the overwhelming
violence in the world today.

This paper serves not only as a conceptual look at creating a Culture of Healing and a
new path towards peace, but also as a call for some very necessary scientific research on
the connections between past unhealed traumas world-wide, and on the effects of
lingering suffering from such traumas on the people of all nations. This research will
help raise consciousness about the need to heal, and might assist in transforming
consciousness as to why the past methods for dealing with trauma are simply not enough
to fully heal the citizens of todays nations.

The world is fraught with an obsession based on a perceived need for violence and
militarization. This violent mindset, which allows countries to seek peace through
violence, has created a society where it has become acceptable to languish in a quest for
creative, new ideas for solving or transforming todays problems. This paper is not an
excuse for explaining away why humans are naturally violent, since many traditions and
belief systems encourage a belief that violence is inherent, but is a plea for a new

89

understanding of human beings actions, and an invitation for the creation of a new
method for fully repairing and transforming past traumas, a Culture of Healing.

Much of this paper researches the processes and effects of trauma and healing on
individuals and then attempts to extrapolate the data to better understand collective
trauma and subsequent healing. Several researchers have noted that there is not
significant data to fully propose that individual and collective healing are similar enough
to apply lessons learned from one, to help the other (Minow, 1998, 327; Avruch and
Vejerano, 2001, 41). As one researcher notes, it is precisely in trying to apply what may
be therapeutically effective at the interpersonal level to the collective level that
reconciliation often seems to lose clarity and become more ambiguous as an approach to
peacebuilding (Avruch and Vejerano, 2001, 41).

Although the connection between individual and societal healing is not necessarily the
same, psychologist Duane Elgin suggests that hard-won insights at the level of personal
healing may provide valuable insights for healing at the socio-cultural level (Elgin,
October 1997, 27). Similarly, scientists have observed the effects of collective beliefs and
actions on individuals in a society. The collective thoughts are often incorporated into an
individuals thoughts as his or her own. This suggests that, indeed, by transforming the
collective consciousness, human beings will be better suited to help the healing process in
the entire population of traumatized individuals. Additionally, Elgin further promotes
this theory by noting that, the collective and the personal go hand in hand. They arise
and develop together (Elgin, October 1997, 4).

90

Both the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Education for Peace in
Bosnia and Herzegovina apply the theories of cultural healing to the work being done in
their respective communities. These programs make a distinct connection between
individual healing and transforming the collective consciousness. Both the GTRC and
EFP have seen success at different levels and should be examined further to understand
the long-term effects of societal trauma on cultures and individuals.

The impacts of trauma are difficult to heal, but if ignored, traumatic events will
consistently be repeated. The insidious characteristics of trauma symptoms . . . are
hooked into the original cycle in such a way that they are also self-perpetuating. This
characteristic is the primary reason why trauma is resistant to most forms of treatment
(Levine, 1997, 150). As the research in BiH with Education for Peace has noticed,
every new generation matures with much greater familiarity, certainty and comfort with
the ways of conflict, competition and violence than those of harmony, cooperation and
peace (Danesh, 2006, 58). It is precisely for these reasons that new methods for healing
must be incorporated into todays cultures. The realization of a Culture of Healing would
employ a foundation for long-term sustainable healing, by understanding the long-term,
negative effects of trauma; acknowledging past traumas that are currently having an
effect on existing societies collective consciousnesses; and incorporating methods for
healing into the inherent worldview of all individuals. Without realizing the endemic
proclivity towards violence and other problems that result from trauma, and subsequently
developing a Culture of Healing, humankind will be forced to continue the cycle of
trauma.

91

APPENDIX I:
Mandate for the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission
There comes a time in the life of every community when it must look humbly and seriously into its
past in order to provide the best possible foundation for moving into a future based on healing
and hope. Many residents of Greensboro believe that for this city, the time is now.
In light of the shooting death of 5 people and the wounding of 10 others in Greensboro, North
Carolina on November 3, 1979, and
In light of the subsequent acquittal of defendants in both state and federal criminal trials, despite
the fact that the shootings were videotaped and widely viewed, and
In light of the further investigations, passage of time and other factors which allowed a jury in a
later civil trial to find certain parties liable for damages in the death of one of the victims, and
In light of the confusion, pain, and fear experienced by residents of the city and the damage to the
fabric of relationships in the community caused by these incidents and their aftermath,
The Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project, including the signers of its
Declaration, calls for the examination of the context, causes, sequence and consequence of the
events of November 3, 1979.
We affirm that the intention of this examination shall be:
e)
Healing and reconciliation of the community through discovering and disseminating the
truth of what happened and its consequences in the lives of individuals and institutions, both
locally and beyond Greensboro.
f)
Clarifying the confusion and reconciling the fragmentation that has been caused by these
events and their aftermath, in part by educating the public through its findings.
g)
Acknowledging and recognizing peoples feelings, including feelings of loss, guilt,
shame, anger and fear.
h)
Helping facilitate changes in social consciousness and in the institutions that were
consciously or unconsciously complicit in these events, thus aiding in the prevention of similar
events in the future.
This examination is not for the purpose of exacting revenge or recrimination. Indeed, the
Commission will have no such power. Rather, the Commission will attempt to learn how persons
and groups came to be directly or indirectly involved in these events; it will assess the impact of
these events on the life and development of this community. It will seek all possibilities for
healing transformation.
In addition to exploring questions of institutional and individual responsibility for what happened,
as a necessary part of the truth-seeking process we urge the Commission to look deeply into the
root causes and historical context of the events of November 3, 1979.
Members of this community, young and old, still find the events of November 3, 1979 nearly
incomprehensible. We owe it to ourselves and to future generations to explain what happened

92

and why. Many citizens and institutions of this city have acknowledged the wisdom of, and
necessity for, such a process.
It is in this spirit that we affirm the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commissions motto:
"Without Truth, no Healing; without Forgiveness, no Future."

Therefore, toward these ends,

1. The Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project (referred to here as the
Project) hereby establishes a Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission (GTRC),
charged with the examination of the context, causes, sequence and consequence of the events of
November 3, 1979.
2. The GTRC will consist of seven (7) Commissioners who shall be persons of recognized
integrity and principle, with a demonstrated commitment to the values of truth, reconciliation,
equity and justice.
The majority of the commissioners will be current residents of the Greensboro area; at least two
commissioners will be from outside the Greensboro area. All will be selected in accordance with
The Selection Process for the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission document,
which is attached. The Commission will designate its chair(s).
Commissioners will serve on an honorary basis and in their personal capacity, but may be
reimbursed for expenses incurred in the discharge of their responsibilities.
3. The Commissioners will carry out their mandate by reviewing documents, inviting people to
come forward with information, consulting with experts and by any other means, public or
private, they consider appropriate.
4. The Commission may decide to carry out some activities in private in order to protect, to the
extent possible, the security and privacy of individuals and the integrity of its ongoing truthseeking, but in general the Commission's activities will be carried out in a manner that is as
public and transparent as possible.
5. The Commission will issue a report to the residents of Greensboro, to the City, to the Project,
and to other public bodies, encompassing the items outlined in paragraph 1 and in keeping with
the intentions and spirit of the mandate. The Commission will ensure that its findings are fair,
based on the information compiled and reviewed, and adequately documented in its report. The
Commission may take steps to protect the identity of individual sources, if requested. The
Commission will also make specific, constructive recommendations to the City, to the residents
of Greensboro, and to other entities as it deems appropriate, particularly to further the intentions
set forth in the mandate.
6. The Commission will have no authority either to pursue criminal or civil claims or to grant
immunity from such claims. Its focus is reconciliation through seeking, understanding and
reporting the truth.
7. The Commission will convene a first meeting, as determined by the Commissioners, no later
than 60 days from the date on which the Selection Panel confirms and announces the selection
and acceptance of its members. From its first meeting, the Commission will have a period of 15
months to fulfill the terms of its mandate. This period includes initial planning and set-up, the
determination of its internal procedures and selection and appointment of its key staff. The
Commission may call upon the Project staff and other resources for administrative support during

93

its initial planning and set-up phase. If absolutely necessary, the period of the Commissions
mandate may be extended for up to 6 more months, with the permission of the Project.
8. The Commission will carry out its mandate while operating independently from any external
influence, including the Project. It may reach cooperative agreements with organizations,
institutions and individuals in order to strengthen its capacity and resources, in so far as such
agreements do not compromise the Commissions independence. The Commission will have full
authority to make decisions on its spending, within the limits of available funds, and may elect to
have a fiscal sponsor through another institution so long as that relationship is consistent with the
spirit of the mandate and the Commissions substantive independence.
9. At the completion of its work, all documents of the Commission, its notes, findings, exhibits
and other collected materials, shall be permanently archived in Greensboro in an institution
whose purpose and tradition is in keeping with the objectives and spirit of the Commission
mandate. The identity of this institution and the structure of the archive will be determined by
agreement between the Commission and the Project. If deemed appropriate, multiple institutions
and locations may be used for archival purposes. Such an archive shall, to the extent feasible and
respectful of any recommendations by the Commission with regard to the continued
confidentiality of records, be accessible to the public.

The passage of time alone cannot bring closure, nor resolve feelings of guilt and
lingering trauma, for those impacted by the events of November 3, 1979. Nor can there
be any genuine healing for the city of Greensboro unless the truth surrounding these
events is honestly confronted, the suffering fully acknowledged, accountability
established, and forgiveness and reconciliation facilitated.
Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project (GTCRP). (2003-2004) Available online at from http://www.gtcrp.org. (Accessed on 18 May 2006).

94

APPENDIX II
Prerequisites and components of an effective program of Peace Education

Danesh, H.B. (2006) Towards an Integrative Theory of Peace Education, Journal of Peace
Education, 3.1 (March), 55-78.

95

REFERENCES

APA Let's Talk Facts About...Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, American Psychiatric Association
(APA). Available on-line at http://www.psych.org/disasterpsych/fs/ptsd.cfm (Accessed
on 26 September 2006).
Avruch, Kevin, and Beatriz Vejarano. (2001) Truth and reconciliation commissions: a review
essay and annotated bibliography, in Social Justice: Anthropology, Peace, and Human
Rights. 2(12): 47108. OJPCR: The Online Journal of Peace and Conflict Resolution,
4.2 (Spring 2002), 3776. Available on-line at
http://www.trinstitute.org/ojpcr/4_2recon.htm. (Accessed 17 May 2006).
Brand-Jacobsen, Kai, (April 20-22, 2006) Reconciliation workshop, Stadtschlaining, Austria.
Bremner, J. Douglas. (2005) Does Stress Damage the Brain?. New York, NY: W.M. Norton &
Company, Inc.
Burns, T.R. (1998) The social construction of consciousness. Part 1: Collective
Consciousness and Its Socio-Cultural Foundations, Journal of Consciousness, 5.1,
67-85.
Clarke-Habibi and Danesh (2006) Unit One: Unity, Education for Peace Curriculum. Cited in:
Markortoff, Stacey. (May 2006) Why the Path to Peace is Often Paved in Conflict: A
Historical Examination of the Doukhobors of British Columbia. Available on-line at
http://www.aspr.ac.at/epu/research/makortoff.pdf. (Accessed on 18 July 2006).
Continuing Medical Education. (2002) Therapies for PTSD. Available on-line at
http://www.mhsource.com/expert/exp1040102b.html (Accessed 28 July 2006).
Culture as defined by the Compact Oxford English Dictionary. Available on-line at
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/culture?view=uk, 2006. (Accessed on May 18,
2006).
Danesh, H.B. (April 3-5, 2006) Conflict Free Conflict Resolution workshop, Stadtschlaining,
Austria.
Danesh, H.B. (July 10-12, 2006) Education for Peace workshop, Boulder, Colorado.
Danesh, H.B. (2006) Towards an Integrative Theory of Peace Education, Journal of Peace
Education, 3.1 (March), 55-78.
Danesh, H.B. (2004) The Concept of Worldview, Education for Peace Curriculum, Unit 2.
Director of National Intelligence. (April 2006) Declassified Key Judgments of the National
Intelligence Estimate, Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States.
Available on-line at
http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/Declassified_NIE_Key_Judgments.pdf. (Accessed on
30 October 2006).

96

Eisler, Riane. (1987). The Chalice and the Blade. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
Elgin, Duane. (October 1997) Collective Consciousness and Cultural Healing. Available on-line
at http://www.simpleliving.net/awakeningearth/pdf/collective_consciousness.pdf.
(Accessed on 25 May 2006).
Federation of American Scientists, Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (1995).
Available on-line at http://www.fas.org/irp/world/rsa/act95_034.htm (Accessed on 2
October 2006).
Galtung, Johan. (2003) After Violence: 3R, Reconstruction, Reconciliation,
Resolution: Coping With Visible and Invisible Effects of War and Violence. Available
on-line at http://www.transcend.org. (Accessed on May 17, 2006)
Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission (GTRC). (2006) Final Report. Available online at http://www.greensborotrc.org/. (Accessed on 26 July 2006).
Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project (GTCRP). (May 2003) Mandate for the
Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Available on-line at
http://www.gtcrp.org. (Accessed on 18 May 2006).
Hamber, Brandon. (2003) Chapter 6: Healing, in: David Bloomfield, Teresa Barnes, and Luc
Huyse (Eds) Reconciliation after violent conflict: a handbook. (Stockholm, International
Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance) pp. 77-88.
Hart, Joseph. (July-August 2006) Trauma? Get Over it. When to let go. How to Heal, Utne,
pp. 142-146.
Hawkins, David. (2002) Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human
Behavior. Carlsbad, CA: Hay House.
Johnson, Kendall. (2006) After the Storm: Healing after Trauma, Tragedy and Terror.
Berkeley, CA: Publishers Group West.
Jonas, Wayne. Healing and Consciousness: What is the Relationship?, Center for Spirituality
and Healing. Available on-line at
http://www.med.umn.edu/csh/programs/otto_schmitt_symposium/healing_and_conscious
ness/home.html. (Accessed on 21 April 2006).
Krug EG et al., eds. (2002) World report on violence and health. Geneva, World Health
Organization, pp. 346.
Lerche, Charles O., III. (2000) Truth commissions and national reconciliation: some reflections
on practice and theory, Peace and Conflict Studies, 7. 1(May), pp. 118.
Levine, Peter A. (1997) Waking the Tiger : Healing Trauma : The Innate Capacity to Transform
Overwhelming Experiences. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
Minow, Martha. (1998) Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: South Africa's Truth and
Reconciliation Commission, Negotiation Journal, 14.4 (October), pp. 319-355.

97

National Center for PTSD, Department of Veteran Affairs. Specialized PTSD Treatment
Programs in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Available on-line at http
http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/veterans/fs_treatment_programs.html. (Accessed
28 July 2006).
National Center for PTSD, Department of Veteran Affairs. What is Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder? Available on-line at
http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html. (Accessed 18 July 2006).
Norris, Fran H. (2005) Range, Magnitude and Duration of the Effects of Disasters on Mental
Health. Research Education Disaster Mental Health. Available on-line at
http://www.redmh.org/research/general/REDMH_effects.pdf . (Accessed on 13
September 2006).
Rosenbloom, Dena and Williams, Mary Beth. (1999) Life After TraumaA Workbook for
Healing. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Steele, Shelby. (May 3, 2006) White Guilt and the Western Past in the Wall Street
JournalEditorials and Opinion.
Truth Commissions Digital Collection, United States Institute of Peace, Available on-line at
http://www.usip.org/library/truth.html (Accessed on 3 October 2006).
Zinn, Howard. (2003) A Peoples History of the United States. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

98