welcomeactive bloggerslink exchangeRecent sites with which propeace.net has exchanged links:
Would you like to exchange links with propeace.net? Contact us! propeace global
Webmasters: start a propeace community site in your country! Here's how. |
Peaceful solutionsIt seems more and more like effective solutions to our current sad quandary cannot be had through our existing governmental structures. Yet, to abandon those Constitutional structures would be to concede the failure of the American democratic-republic model, leaving a black social hole into which we have no new theory of governance to shed light and hope. Must we then continue to seek to influence existing failed structures toward peaceful action, knowing that the exercise is largely futile? I like to think that if there were concerted and organized movement toward truly embracing peace and a theory of social justice that cared for all people, that the corrupt, entrenched bureaucratic behemoth which is modern American government would be compelled to yield; but I am fairly resigned to the unfortunate reality that the American people will not move toward such a result until their own skins are at stake, by which point it will be too late to effect change without revolution and anarchy. Any thoughts?
|
propeace quoteOur lives do not belong only to ourselves; each life belongs to the world. This is a time when there is such a call for human unity - when we realize that the plea of "all for one and one for all" needs to be elevated to an understanding that all IS one and one IS all. daily omrecent blog postssimilar postswho's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 9 guests online.
who's newsupport this communityHelp keep propeace.net online and spread the word at the same time. Make a donation of US$5 or more and receive a propeace.net button. The button is a 2" X 3" (5.1cm X 7.6cm) rectangle that looks like this:
subscribe |
Comments
Re: Peaceful solutions
Peace will come only, as Peace Pilgrim said, when we get past our own self-centered perspectives and begin to get the vision of who we really are and what our mission is in life. I like the sign in front of our local middle school that says, "Service is the rent we pay for our space on this planet."
Ever been to Mexico? Cool, isn't it? Well, did you know that a Mexican man working full time in one of the American maquiladoras on the border makes about $60-65 a week, and that is before they take out money for his uniform and transportation. I went on a week-long mission to Rio Bravo, Mexico to help build little concrete block casitas to replace leaky, termite-infested huts damaged from previous storms. Some of us went to the local big store to buy supplies there. Baby diapers and formula are so much more expensive than in the U.S., it is shocking. Oh, did you say things are cheaper in Mexico, so their low-paying jobs are okay? Do the math.
With no running water or electricity and with outhouses for toilets, the women there struggle with the daily tasks of cooking on small two burner propane stoves and washing clothes and children in cold water in tubs and buckets. Children often go for days and weeks without baths. Their noses run green mucus and they sometimes get sores on their bodies from all the sick dogs around. Women who have no supporting men in their lives are often overwhelmed and give their bodies and sometimes their children's bodies just for food. Going to work at the maquiladora costs money; you have to know how to read to work there; going to school costs money. There's no welfare in Mexico. Did you say, "Well, they're use to it." No, it is heartbreaking! The Peace Corps, "America's Peace Ambassadors," doesn't even go to Mexico; it appears to be an eleventh finger of our government with very little support for its own volunteers. And there are other countries in the world where conditions are even worse.
When Peace Pilgrim was asked to go to India, she declined saying that she was called to America, the most powerful nation in the world. I'm sure she thought that if Americans would get the message of peace, it would impact the rest of the world in a natural flow of sharing resources and benefits for all, for this is the only way to reduce violence, and we have the power to do that. But, alas, our greed led us to an isolationist stance, and the main source of America's giving has come from sources with a guilt-gilded message.
Most Americans can't stand to look at the suffering in other countries, much less call it their own. But until the people of other countries begin to feel something other than guilt or greed from America, we will never know peace in this country--not anymore. We have turned our deaf ears and our blind eyes to their plight too long, and we have been all too ready to import cheap goods at the high cost of their health, lives and limbs. They need to feel the presence of Americans who love and care about them as we do for ourselves.
How soon we forget the need we once had for advocates to large corporations in the days of exploited labor in the mines and factories of America! At least we have a democracy and elect our officials. At different times in the not too distant past, when people in Chile and Guatemala had democratically elected leaders who stood against the exploitation of American enterprise in their countries, our operatives surreptitiously undermined that democracy "in order to protect U.S. interests." Is it possible that we are reaping what we have sown?
Americans still have the power to bring about changes. Apathy is a killer to all hope. We must stand up for the Peace bill Rep. Cucinich has introduced in Congress! We need to revisit Peace Pilgrim's simple, untainted message and promote it everywhere. The materials have been translated into many languages and are being sent upon request all over the world. But if we need community to help strengthen our own good paths, then others in other countries surely need them too. We have all the good in the world; isn't it time we begin to give back without thinking of it merely as "charity?" Isn't it time we start owning our part in making peace a reality with our brothers and sisters, their children and their old people? We all share the same planet, the same sun and the same life force. Compassion behooves us; it becomes us as conscious Human Beings.
the next place to go
Thank you for your comments, Jason. I too have experienced life-changing lows in my life. What is most important is that we continue to seek greater understanding about our journey. Without my faith, I often encountered despair or depression when I saw the horrible things of which man is capable. Now that I have found a simple yet challenging truth, I have my work cut out for me, for I will always be working to improve myself for the better. I have left so many beliefs behind me that were not helping but hurting me, illusions which once shed leave me more free to grow spiritually.
I will go next to wherever my journey carries me, and with God's will this will be on a path which allows me to (peacefully) share His promise with others. I will fight the missteps of the Bush administration with my full energy, not because I think I'll win such a battle, but because it must be fought. My hope persists even in the face of my or my nation's or mankind's failures: in some ways these failings embolden me, because they are evidence of the truth of God, without whom we have no moral compass and only a flickering, illusory hope. The Bible clearly predicts we will stumble as we are, and from that comes inspiration that God has a purpose and an answer.
next
John, thank you for your comments. I know that I have much to learn, which is why I continue to seek and to discuss. I choose to do this from a place of serenity and respect, as I have found that to be the most conducive place for learning. I like receiving input from others and reflecting on it, reflecting on how well it resonates with where I am on my life's path and on how well it fits with other lessons that I have learned on the journey. There is usually something to be learned from any input I receive from anyone.
I've been hopeless, depressed, in despair, empty. Looking back, I see how much I learned in such states, and I'm grateful for the experience of them and for the point of reference they provide. Emerging from that experience has shown me the immense power of perception, words and action. I have found that we do control what we perceive. I have found that right words heard, read, spoken or written in right ways can unlock doors. I have found that action carried out with pure intent can open those doors and create transformation in self, other and world.
There is so much available to us, including peaceful solutions. John, I think where you are is completely valid and appropriate. Where will you go next?
Peace to you,
Jason.
technological survival
Technology is not a part of the natural selection process, is it? I recognize that "technology can help us tremendously," but in actual fact it is used much more to hurt us: advances in weapons technologies make it easier to kill; the web is used more for porno and pedophelia than it is for any other purpose. (It is estimated that there are over 270,000 pedophilic web sites.) And your assumption/assertion that "it is not going away" reflects the very techno-faith I criticize -- it's doing worse than going away, for it leads us into ever-more-dangerous dependency, and when social and economic pandemonium disrupt our commerce and currency, it will surely "go away" for a period. And during that period, the dependency will be revealed, for our chickens come from Arkansas, our pork, from Idaho, and 40 % of our produce is imported and 90 % of domestic production comes from California and Arizona. Are you so sure the oil-powered trucks will keep delivering goods to your local grocery stores uninterrupted? That's a greater leap of faith than to trust in a higher power! Nature will indeed always challenge us, as you say, but isn't that a different set of laws than those which apply to the use and challenges of technology? You write that we're always "on the cusp of inevitable transformation," but really there is little transformation through history in man's capacity to do evil to others -- the means may transform, but the propensity to do evil is a constant (if not devolving).
Your "crucial point" about adaptation and survival misses the mark, for we are failing to adapt, on an unprecedented scale. We have not "routed around" our current quandary, but created it: our technologies produce "goods" of increased productivity or improved standards of living, but what "good" are those if technology creates toxins and pollution for which we have no adequate technological response because of our complacency and "faith" in Progress? We have depleted our farmland, turning it into suburban residential tracts with over-large houses and inefficient heating, all based on oil-dependency, a "faith" that there will always be an endless supply. We are in a fool's cul-de-sac, with no way out....
Similarly, nature is not divided between pessimists and optimists, as you state. Is a frog pessimistic or optimistic when it hibernates? Is a bird flying south for winter optimistic? In fact, Darwinian theory teaches that pessimism or laziness would be desirable if they improved one's chance of survival. These are moral judgments which you seek to impose on a natural order which is by definition immoral -- do you believe that good is better than evil? Why? Survivalism lacks the luxury (or logic) of moral reflection.
In this we see the glaring shortcoming of evolutionary theory to lend any useful gudance to our decision-making, and also the tautological nature of the "theory" -- that which survives is defined as the "fittest," and that which is fittest is defined as "that which survives." A few days ago, my 1800 pound draft hourse crushed the head of a two-month old puppy which was not even barking at her, but just sitting there panting beautifully. She was "surviving," and had no remorse or moral reflection whatsoever. But I was devastated, as were my children. The moral recoil which we feel to such actions of nature is what distinguishes us from other creatures (and there's no missing link in the evolution of morality, for there is no fossil record of such an evolution). We are moral beings with permutations of our morality which are as varied as snowflakes. To divide people (let alone animals, an absurd concept)into the pessimistic vs. the optimistic is to implicitly impose moral judgments on a process (survival) which has little to do with morality. If my only two choices were the simplistic ones you posit -- optimistic, good; pessimistic, bad: alive, good; dead, bad -- then you have overly simplified both morality and humanity. As modern times demonstrate, one can be alive without being free, and have wealth and surplus without being happy. Man has the capacity for war, torture, and the neglect of his fellow man, of killing or hurting for pleasure: are people who commit such crimes optimists or pessimists, and does it matter in your world view, so long as they "survive"?
Your faith that "we will solve the problems that we face" is only that -- faith. But it is a faith in self, in man, in technology: all of which fail, and are failing. The irony here is that I as a Christian have the greatest of all optimisms: that even in the glaring face of our failings, of our corrupt natures, I have "faith" that Christ will soon return to save us from ourselves. This is hope and optimism far beyond that which you propose -- a faith in self, technology, and Darwin, a faith doomed to despair.
Your coin metaphor is presented as logical, when it is not, for it assumes that physical survival is the only animating force for man's actions. I choose a coin side you don't offer -- optimism in the face of tragedy, wherein living my life with consciousness toward others and their suffering, and in full conscious awareness of mankind's failings, does not make me a pessimist, and is not judged by the simplistic standard of whether or not I survive. If I seek to "survive" into an immortal afterlife, my values and goals are completely different from those limiting options you propose. To live in faith in mankind and his technologies -- that is the ultimate pessimism, for it promises hopelessness and despair, fear and cynicism. To believe otherwise is to be on the wrong side of the spiritual coin. Man can toss survival aside in war, or in sacrificing one's life for the benefit of another -- even a stranger. Animals don't do this, and neither do pessimists....
solve problems to survive
As I said, technology will enable the cure. I don't suggest that it is the cure. In fact, it is certainly the cause of many ills. However we can't stuff our technologies back into Pandora's box. As you and I are now communicating and working on problems, and could not have had this opportunity without information and communication technology, please recognize that technology can help us tremendously. It will be part of the solution because it is not going away and there is tremendous potential for good use.
Also, I'm not suggesting that we look for some panacea that cures all ills in one speedy, sweeping stroke. Transformation may take generations. I think nature will always challenge us with problems to solve. Nature has never indicated that life without adversity is available to us or any other species. I think we will always be on the cusp of inevitable transformation.
Which brings up another crucial point, which is that we humans, in fact all living things, are problem solvers at a very basic level. What we do for survival is to solve, adapt to or "route around" the problems with which we are confronted. In nature, optimistic problem solving is rewarded with the privilege of survival. Species that languish in pessimism, fatalism or simply laziness face extinction. Which side of that coin do you favor? That was a rhetorical question. While it is important to point out and study the problems, what do we accomplish by stopping there?
We will solve the problems that we face. We have to believe, or have faith, that we are capable of doing so. To believe otherwise is to be on the wrong side of the survival coin.
For a thorough treatment of this subject I recommend Barbara Marx Hubbard, a futurist and visionary thinker.
Natural*Faith
Fortunately for those interested in peace and unfortunately for those interested in continuing the ways of violence and war, nature will side with the peaceful solutions. However s’he will not be very peaceful from the current human perspective in the teaching of he’r lessons. A very small taste of what is to come has been seen most recently, expect this balancing action to grow by as much as 10 fold in the coming decades.
Nature will convert cropland, marshland, forests, rivers, waterfront, mountains and valleys back to a balance that is required to maintain the health of the planet. Choosing to continue standing and building in the way of earths progress will of course result in getting hit again and again until one decides to cooperate within the system, for that system is not about to be changed without dire consequence and thus the only solution or hope is to adapt to he’r superior knowledge and truth to the balance required.
All current man made systems of control and influence on both the natural environment and the social and political system of humans will be forced to make rapid and sweeping change if they are to survive. This change will be as a wave which will make the instant gratification model of business as usual very difficult to maintain, especially in the face of the decades it will take to rebuild the basic infrastructures and also in the true awareness of where, what and how the decisions are met.
The expense of wars against other nations will not be compatible with the rebuilding that is going to be required from the result of the war that man has waged on nature. Everything from his food supply to the basics of water, power and shelter will need to be retooled and rethought. None of this should come as a surprise, as nature has been giving he’r truth freely and warning of the outcome of pressing each new battle front to its limit.
The choice of alternative ideas and ideals abound in the realm of nature, technology, human resource and recourse. Unfortunately the will to move forward is at best a muddle of shifting denial and fear. However the adversary that man has most upset (Nature) has no fear, denial nor hesitation of what will be done to drive the lesson through the thick gray matter which rests so comfortably within the fragile constructions of man. The lessons will be given and the students will pay attention, all that remains is to learn and act accordingly.
©Bruce Larson*Moore
The 13-Establishments of Truth
Dark and difficult times lie ahead, soon we must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy.
 Albus Dumbledore
two to agree, but three will crowd?
I can open my mind to such a solution, but I cannot close my mind to recognition that "global information technology and communication" will not address the increasing global scarcity of natural resources. The world cannot begin to produce sufficient food supplies to feed modern populations using organic methods; and technological advances in agriculture have made us dependent for food on methods that destroy and deplete. Technology was the solution for many ills, but it has created greater evils. Improved information technology and communication does not restore lost rain forests, tillable land, or depleted oil fields.
The coming resource crisis will likely be the impetus for collapse, not for the adoption of some magic techno-cure. I don't mean to sound harsh or bleak, it's just that faith in a "notion" is exactly the type of nebulous "faith in the future" or "faith in progress" which has led us to defer addressing our consumption conundrum, instead ensuring that our options narrow. How do we "route around" hunger and violence? What will come from "outside the system" to feed the starving or replace disappearing oil? What will make people in America reform community ties in the face of decay, when they seem to have lost their minds (and compassion for one another) in comparative times of plenty? We have converted our most fertile farmland to desolate waste through overtaxing the soil; or to endless suburbs of oversized, inefficient single family residences. We cannot convert this land back to productive farmland overnight, even with "improved global information technology." Nor will such technology pay off the debt we've incurred deferring a solution. Faith is belief in things unseen -- I have faith in God, for I have seen the false promise of technology, in which I therefore cannot repose faith.
it only takes two to agree
My inclination is to look for solutions that simply transcend the massively complex system that is currently in place. Such a solution would seem rather obvious after it is discovered or invented. People would adopt it easily, although more conservative-minded folks would do so reluctantly. Such a solution would have appeal that cuts across ideological and cultural differences. Once adopted it would be taken utterly for granted, as if it always existed. People would not be able to remember how they got along without it. It would seem to create order out of chaos.
I don't think such a solution can come from inside the existing system (for example, through electing progressives or enacting legislative reforms). I think it will be something that comes from outside the system that changes the fundamental relationship between the people and the system. It will allow us to "route around" what is failing and obsolete, while amplifying what is functional and productive.
I have a notion that global information technology and communication will be the enabler of that solution. The coming resource crisis will be the impetus for its adoption. Romantic clinging to nationalism and so-called democracy will resist it. But it will, in the end, simply supercede what we have now.
What is that solution? I don't know. But that's the kind of thing I am looking for, or better put, opening my mind to.
Agreeing to begin
As I say, I certainly hope you are right (I have three minor children, who I'd like to see have a shot at it). However, my concern is that, even if we were to have an improved model for government and social justice that would unquestionably work, can our American society "get beyond its desire for instant gratification" without major social and economic upheaval. Our transition away from oil has not even begun, and the shift may be required at shocking speed. We must also shift away from debt, and dependence on government. All of these will be dramatic and sudden shifts, for I don't see any real movement toward weaning. As admirable as are the efforts of this web site and other similarly-intentioned groups, the number of people who are fully aware of the magnitude of the daunting challenges that face America is miniscule: most Americans are not even reflecting on these problems with a view toward resolution, and have "faith" in government, technology, or free-market business interests to respond to every crisis. The decline of oil supplies in the face of rapidly-increasing consumption is imminent, and a country deeply in debt and dependency is the least-well positioned for effective response. In fact, the lack of psychological/emotional preparedness for this calamity is America's greatest vulnerability. In 1929 (the advent of the Great Depression) there were 100 million Americans, some 90% of whom lived in rural environments and knew how to raise food. We are now techno-dependent, think all food comes out of a truck (or a restaurant), and our 300 million residents live primarily (90%) in urban or suburban areas. The more deeply we move into this condition, the more rude will be the awakening.
As to a desired civic structure, it strikes me that there have been several failings which need to be redressed. I find the representational republic with separation of powers to be the best model mankind has yet designed, but we have several problems: 1) candidates should not rely on private interests for campaign financing, because then ultimately their masters are not the people whose votes they seek: the voters have become a sort of commodity, an account to be won for one's bosses 2) unbridled capitalism always leads to wealth disparity and eventual economic shock, so government must function to impose moral restraint on these forces, most effectively through a progressive tax structure 3) government must also act as counterweight to some of the free choices its citizens make, particularly the choice to ignore current affairs or government: free market forces yield vapid news reports, an uninformed public, and politicians who are rewarded for lying. A government-sponsored news source (or privately operated but publicly funded), like Britain's BBC, at least ensures that some intelligent information will be disseminated. Paris Hilton and Tom Cruise can take care of themselves....people need to remain informed beyond high school and college for democracy to function. Remember Thomas Jefferson....
There are other changes that could be embraced if we get past gridlock. But without some substantive adjustments, we will repeat this cycle again, as our founding fathers knew. Loyalty to our country is not saluting the flag (a symbol without substance) or singing the Star Spangled Banner (which noone knows the meaning of, other than more flag worship). For democracy to survive, people have to be involved, not just seeing who can collect the most toys, or who's going to win on American Idol (is that show about a flag, or a dollar bill?).
Comments, please.
begin by beginning
Many have come to the same conclusion that you have about the failure of the current civic structure. This has been a topic, now and then, on, this, website and others. I'm optimistic that we can move toward something that better fits with the realities of a globally interdependent, resource constrained, culturally and ideologically diverse world. This will, of course, take a very long time to accomplish nonviolently, probably several generations. But we have to get beyond our desire for instant gratification and begin anyway. And it's going to require many, many people to get beyond their complaints and come up with forward-looking ideas about what kind of civic structure we should have. Thoughts?