When we began this project, it seemed clear that while violence was ever present in our lives, it was altogether lacking in terms of sustained critical reflection at the level of everyday discussion. Too often we noted how the debate tended to either fall back upon the "humans are naturally violent" explanations or upheld positions of moral absolutism, which truly seemed to make conversation appear a lost art. 

​

Violence demands a conversation, as stated above. It cannot be "solved" by any single individual. Nor does any ideological or political project have a monopoly over its restitution. Central here is to take seriously the need to engage across multiple terrains, often with persons from very different walks of life, sometimes with those we profoundly disagree with. This has been the guiding ethos driving the conversations we have helped instigate in both the New York Times and the Los Angeles Review of Books, which have expressly invited the thoughts from many academics, cultural producers and policy makers.