AFTER VIOLENCE: 3R, RECONSTRUCTION, RECONCILIATION ...

wounds to the spirit never, as psycho-analysis informs us.
Sexualized violence may leave no wound on the body, but
irreversible trauma on the spirit. The same applies to all forms
of violence to the body as any violence is violation, invasion of
the sanctum, the privacy of the body; sexualized violence doubly
so. To some extent this also applies to property as body
extension, and to burglary as invasion of the family sanctum.
The formula above opens for two additional approaches to
guilt release: denial of any evil intent, and reversibility
through restitution. Western jurisprudence seems to have
developed more in the former direction, with pleas of ignorance,
chronic and acute insanity in the moment of action, etc.
And this in spite of the fact that even if harm wrought by
crimes of violence and sexualized violence may be irreversible,
the harm wrought by property crimes is not. Money can be earned
and paid back, the house can be restored. There is the trauma of
having had the property violated, but to this the nihil violentum
durabile might apply. And destroyed cultural monuments might not
be restorable at all because damage is symbolic, not only
material. Is it because Christian repent your intent is that much
stronger than the capitalist produce-and-consume?
How does all of this change the moment X and Y are not
individuals but collectivities, at war? Actually, everything
mentioned above remains valid, with some terminology differences
as when "restitution" is referred to as "reparation" after wars.
But one difference is significant: a collectivity may be
divided over the violent acts, as when both German and French
troops mutinied against their generals at the end of World War I.
34