War-like motifs permeate our lives, appearing in seemingly innocuous terms used in daily work and academic settings (e.g., “task force”). More alarmingly, they manifest on our streets through police forces equipped with military-grade weapons and tactics used during peacetime against fellow citizens. These are manifestations of a “culture of war,” a terminology that extends the perceptions of warfare beyond active military engagements and defense spending to capture how it is embedded into the social and political fabric of contemporary societies. This bellicist culture is evident from the glorification of combat in sports to the use of militaristic rhetoric in politics; from historical narratives that instill pride in battlefield endeavors to extreme measures enacted to combat terrorism or infectious diseases. There we have it: war in the absence of war! Such a scenario may paint a dismal picture for those who dream of a peaceful world, but there is hope.

Elise Boulding’s Cultures of Peace: The Hidden Side of History (2000) reveals that examples of peace are also ubiquitous around the world. Much of our everyday life—nurturing families, celebrating events, and expressing human creativity—embodies examples of peace culture that rarely, if ever, appear in the mainstream channels. By drawing inspiration from these instances, Boulding argues, we can transform prevailing cultures of war into cultures of peace. Societies just need to (re)learn the importance of cultivating practices that foster peace through understanding, tolerance, and dialogue among different groups and communities.

The work of Boulding challenges the typical portrayal of human history as predominantly a history of wars. She uncovers the “hidden side” of history by shedding light on peaceful societies that have flourished through cooperative practices and nonviolent conflict resolution. If these societies have succeeded in sustaining peace, why not explore the potential for a global culture of peace? According to Boulding, the route to such a culture involves education, the recognition of the role of families, the provision of active voice to marginalized groups, like women and children, community building, and the deliberate promotion of peaceful mechanisms of conflict solving.

Boulding is part of a rich intellectual tradition initiated by Johan Galtung (1985, 1996) and focused on the possibilities of peaceful societies. Galtung introduced the notion of structural violence, a type of violence embedded in social structures or institutions. Different from direct violence, it does not cause harm via overt physical aggression, but covertly by depriving individuals of the ability to meet basic biological and social needs. This framework proved instrumental for Elise Boulding’s perspective of peace as a holistic conception that includes social justice, rather than just the absence of war.

Kenneth Boulding (Elise Boulding’s husband) was another significant figure in this academic circle. He was trained as an economist, yet his work focused on images and how they shape individuals’ and societies’ perspectives and behaviors (Boulding 1956). Betty Reardon (1999) later used this notion to assert that if societies are to become more peaceful, peaceful images need to become more common rather than exceptional. Elise Boulding’s scholarship is precisely an effort to widen the lens through which history and current affairs are viewed. She advocates for a perspective that recognizes the potential for peace amidst peaceful aspects of human culture, to be found even in bellicose societies.

Peace studies has been historically influenced by pragmatic accounts. For example, Gene Sharp’s (1973) proposition that political authority depends on the consent of the ruled, which can be withdrawn through nonviolent acts, is a simple yet powerful idea that has had a profound influence on both academic and activist movements worldwide. Correspondingly, several notable activists have laid the groundwork for scholarly theories in conflict resolution. Mahatma Gandhi, though not an academic, had a significant impact on peace studies through his practices of nonviolence. Similarly, Martin Luther King Jr.’s leadership of the Civil Rights Movement, along with his writings and speeches on nonviolent resistance, has also been widely influential.

The contributions of these thinkers and their influence on Boulding’s research do not detract from Boulding’s originality. Cultures of Peace came to light in the early 2000s, a period of significant shift in global politics at the end of the Cold War. The sudden dissolution of the bipolar world order triggered new possibilities and challenges in international relations. Hence, Boulding dared to address peacebuilding in an era where the breakdown of the ideological conflict between the superpowers led to a rise in ethnic conflicts, regional wars, and the re-emergence of old tensions previously overshadowed by the U.S.-Soviet rivalry. More so than in previous works, Boulding engaged with emerging international organizations and multilateral efforts to prevent conflict, including the expansion of the European Union and the strengthening of the United Nations’ role in peacekeeping. With its merits and limitations, the outcome of this endeavor has aged well and continues to be relevant more than twenty years after its publication.

The next section of this review essay outlines the contrasting cultures of war and peace, what they mean, and how they manifest in society. Then, I briefly analyze the main mechanisms proposed by Boulding to achieve sustainable peace. I then focus my discussion on several key parts of her thesis that may be problematic, especially her elastic definition of peace. In the conclusion, I will return to the general question of why this work is imperative for peace studies in current times.

KEYWORDS: Elise Boulding, Cultures of Peace, Moderation