Nonviolence

[Russell Kanning]

This is where I will post articles and thoughts about nonviolence.

[Russell Kanning]

Jamie Shane: The nature of non-violence, in thought and deed

By Jamie Shane (Contact)

Friday, February 2, 2007

Non-violence has been a path of great victory for such notables as Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They both claimed that it was the only path to a true, lasting peace.


For yogis, non-violence is a cornerstone belief of the practice. It is the primary building block of the yamas and niyamas, or the rules of spiritual living. We call it ahisma, and all other efforts are in its service.

To practice ahisma, one is asked to be non-violent in thought, speech and deed. No problem, right? How hard can it be? Don't take a baseball bat to someone's car. Don't smack your husband silly when he says something stupid. Don't zap your neighbor's dog with an electric cattle prod when it won't shut up at 6 a.m.

Easy stuff. If you only observe it on the surface. However.

Is it violence when you grab that can of Raid and unload it on the roach in your cupboard? Is it violence to wear leather shoes or eat a steak? Is it violence to drive a huge SUV that gets 8 mpg? These kinds of questions are just the beginning of a huge canon of debatable issues. It is an endless rabbit hole with no clear bottom.

The issue of ahisma gets even trickier when you move into the arena of non-violent speech. Again, it is quite easy on the surface: Don't scream obscenities at a rude stranger. Don't negatively reinforce your child. Don't tell lies for the sake of telling lies.

But here we go again, diving down into the murky depths of the issue. Is it violence to tell a lie that does good when the truth will ultimately harm? Is it violence to tell a truth that hurts even though your intention is good? Oh, messy ahisma! Messy!

And that's not even the worst of it. To fully practice ahisma, one is expected to be non-violent in thought as well. This is where I always fall off the philosophical wagon and sit on the curb thinking, "Now that's just ridiculous."

Thoughts are like hiccups — you never know where they come from or how to really control them. To expect yourself to be able to censor your thoughts before they arise is really too much to ask. How can one fully explore the depths of this practice if it is filled with so many booby traps?

The same way you handle everything else — one moment at a time. You just do the very best that you can and make choices that serve your own interpretation of what ahisma means to you. When a violent thought arises, you push it to the side and say, "No. I will no longer think that." When violence is on the tip of your tongue, stop and think. Does this really need to be said and what will be the ultimate result?

If it serves non-violence, then go ahead and speak. If it doesn't, hold your tongue and let the moment go by. Examine your actions and make decisions that help you practice ahisma. If something is too hard for you to manage, then it is a form of violence to yourself to force the issue. (With some notable exceptions like harmful addictions.)

In other words, be aware and be present with ahisma. I still eat meat. I still kill roaches. These are my choices. I do not use plastic bags. And I drive a fuel-efficient car. These are my services.

Non-violence is a series of guideposts on the road to peace, not a corral for you to circle endlessly and then ultimately give up.

Just remember to be kind to yourself and to others. Then the rest of it will fall into place.

[Raineyrocks]

This is where I will post articles and thoughts about nonviolence.

Well, you weren't kidding were you!  Lo and behold an article about nonviolence.

[TackleTheWorld]

Oh look at that:

If something is too hard for you to manage, then it is a form of violence to yourself to force the issue.

That negates the whole thing.
It's too hard for me to resist my homicidal urges,
so I'll murder people to keep from doing violence.

[Russell Kanning]

I don't get the idea of "violence to yourself".

[error]

I don't get the idea of "violence to yourself".

It is probably good that you don't. Consider for instance: http://www.kidshealth.org/teen/your_mind/mental_health/cutting.html I've seen people do this well into their 20s.

[Russell Kanning]

Military: No Gitmo guard abuse evident

By MICHAEL MELIA, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 11 minutes ago

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - An Army officer who investigated possible abuse at Guantanamo Bay after some guards purportedly bragged about beating detainees found no evidence they mistreated the prisoners — although he did not interview any of the alleged victims, the U.S. military said Wednesday. ADVERTISEMENT



Col. Richard Bassett, the chief investigator, recommended no disciplinary action against the Navy guards named by Marine Sgt. Heather Cerveny, who had said that during a conversation in September they described beating detainees as common practice.

In an affidavit filed to the
Pentagon's inspector general, Cerveny — a member of a detainee's legal defense team — said a group of more than five men who identified themselves as guards had recounted hitting prisoners. The conversation allegedly took place at a bar inside the base.

"The evidence did not support any of the allegations of mistreatment or harassment," the Miami-based Southern Command, which oversees Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in southeastern Cuba, said in a statement.

Investigators conducted 20 interviews with "suspects and witnesses," the Southern Command said. Bassett did not interview any detainees, said Jose Ruiz, a Miami-based command spokesman.

"He talked to all the parties he felt he needed to get information about the allegations that were made," Ruiz said by telephone from Miami.

Bassett's findings were approved by Adm. James Stavridis, the head of the Southern Command.

The investigation began on Oct. 13 and was expanded ten days later to include a similar allegation from a civilian employee who recounted a conversation between a female guard and a male interrogator, according to the statement. Following Bassett's recommendations, Stavridis said a "letter of counseling" should be sent to the female guard who allegedly initiated a "fictitious account" of detainee abuse.

Bassett also accused Cerveny of filing a false statement during a brief meeting with her at the Marine base at Camp Pendleton, Calif., her boss, Marine Lt. Col. Colby Vokey, said last week.

Vokey, who had filed the complaint about possible detainee abuse to the inspector general's office that included Cerveny's affidavit, could not immediately be reached for comment Wednesday.

[Pat K]

Oh look at that:

If something is too hard for you to manage, then it is a form of violence to yourself to force the issue.

That negates the whole thing.
It's too hard for me to resist my homicidal urges,


so I'll murder people to keep from doing violence.

I think this falls under patience my ass I am gonna kill something.

[Russell Kanning]

I promise .... the future articles will be better. I just realized that some of my posts under "civil disobedience" fit better under general "nonviolence".

[Russell Kanning]

Pope speaks on Christian non-violence 


Vatican, Feb. 19, 2007 (CWNews.com) - At his Angelus audience on Sunday, February 18, Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) explained the Christian response to violence as an effort at "responding to evil with good, thus breaking the chain of injustice."

In his reflections on the day's Gospel, the Holy Father said that Jesus gave his disciples a radical model of love, exhorting them to love their enemies, in "one of the most typical and powerful phrases of Jesus' teaching."

This Gospel passage, the Pope said, could be considered "the Magna Carta of Christian non-violence." The approach that Jesus recommends is not a surrender to evil, the Pontiff explained, but a response to injustice that relies on God's grace rather than human strength.

The Christian approach, the Pope continued, "takes into went on: "In reality, Christ's proposal is realistic because it takes into account the fact that there is too much violence in the world, too much injustice, and that, therefore, this situation cannot be overcome without the counterbalance of extra love, extra goodness." That extra impetus must come through God's grace, he said. Thus Christians who accept the Lord's challenge, "are not afraid to face evil only with the arms of love and truth.

Loving one's enemies, the Pope continued, is a revolutionary approach, "which noiselessly changes the world" when it is put into practice.

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=49339


'Love your enemies' (Lk 6:27)." He asked: "But what is the meaning of these words of his? Why does Jesus ask us to love our enemies, that is, a love that surpasses human capacity? In reality, the suggestion of Christ is realistic because it takes into account that there is too much violence, too much injustice in the world and therefore the situation cannot be overcome unless it is countered by more love and more goodness. This 'more' comes from God: it is his mercy, which became flesh in Jesus and alone can 'turn the balance' of the world away from evil towards good, starting from that small and decisive 'world' that is the heart of man."


The pope continued: "This gospel page is rightly considered to be the magna carta of Christian nonviolence, which consists not of giving in to evil – according to a false interpretation of 'turning the other cheek' (cfr Lk 6:29) – but in responding to evil with good (cfr Rm 12: 17-21), thus breaking the chains of injustice. Then it is understood that for Christians, nonviolence is not merely tactical behaviour but rather a personal way of being, the attitude of one who is so convinced of the love and strength of God that he is not afraid to face evil armed with just the weapons of love and truth. Loving one's enemy constitutes the nucleus of the 'Christian revolution', a revolution based not on strategies of economic, political or mediating power. The revolution of love, a love that ultimately does not depend on human resources but is a gift of God that is obtained by trusting uniquely and without reservations in his merciful goodness. This is the news of the Gospel, which changes the world without making any noise about it. This is the heroism of the 'little ones' who believe in the love of God and spread it even at the cost of their life".

http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=8040

[Russell Kanning]

Christian non-violence is not merely tactical behaviour but "the attitude of one who is so convinced of the love and strength of God that he is not afraid to face evil armed with just the weapons of love and truth."

The Holy Father said: "Loving one's enemy constitutes the nucleus of the "Christian revolution" which changes the world "without making any noise about it."

http://www.indcatholicnews.com/nonvio759.html

[Russell Kanning]

The overwhelming success of the Mejlis in preventing the spread of violence rests on its exclusive reliance on negotiations, international support, and nonviolent public protests. When Tatar rights are denied or provocation occurs, Mejlis leaders step in to mediate. And the Mejlis actively preventsthe formation of independent militias, recognizing their detriment to any negotiation process.

Despite many roadblocks, peaceful Tatar activism has achieved what was previously inconceivable: repatriation and citizenship for 250,000 Tatars, quasi- recognition of the Mejlis by the central government, and seats within Ukrainian and Crimean legislatures.

The Crimean Tatar experience proves that there is indeed a nonviolent prophylactic for ethnoreligious conflict. Giving official recognition to the political aspirations of indigenous minorities helps address popular grievances through peaceful negotiation instead of street violence. That's the lesson of the Mejlis and Muftiyat in Crimea. And it's the lesson that should be applied to other conflict zones, from Muslim minority populations across the former Soviet Union, to the Kurds in Syria and the Moros in the Philippines.

Fostering local participatory movements isn't just about keeping democracy healthy. In the global war on terror, it's one of the best defenses against transnational fundamentalism.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0220/p09s02-coop.html