-Matt Crager
Yesterday really made me think.
At the Selma Community Church, our group participated in an introductory workshop on nonviolence training with Pastor Ronald Smith. We learned about the basic ideas of both violence and nonviolence – what they mean, what they portend, and what we can do to discourage one and encourage the other. It was an engaging, fun, and truly uplifting experience.
Ron told us that Martin Luther King, Jr. defined violence as “physical and emotional harm” – a simple description when we consider the danger and destruction implied by the term. In turns out, however, that the idea of nonviolence is not so simple.
Ultimately, there is a difference between “nonviolence” and “non-violence.” One, non-violence, represents negative peace; it’s simply the absence of violence. The other, nonviolence, connotes positive peace; it’s not just the absence of violence, but the presence of love and justice, as well.
If you ask me, one is clearly the better option.
When Ron taught us the Six Principles of Nonviolence, the idea became even more attractive. Hearing things like, “Nonviolence is a way of life for courageous people,” and “Attack forces of evil, not persons doing evil,” further revealed the nobility of those committed to nonviolence and enhanced our understanding of this peaceful approach to social change.
After learning so many fantastic things about it, I couldn’t help myself from wondering what the world would look like if everyone committed themselves to a life of nonviolence. How would life be different if people sought to impact and influence one another without the use of physical force and emotional abuse?
A packet we received during our session described the problem of violence in our society today:
Violence has been lauded as the supreme solution and consistently has been excused as acceptable behavior for human beings. The tentacles of violence stretch into almost every aspect of our lives: our homes, work places, recreation, sports and music, just to mention a few… In almost every aspect of our lives, we have been trained to respond to conflict with violence.
Today, I’m wondering what the world would be like if all of this were to change, if everyone were to cast off the “tentacles of violence” and live lives fully committed to the principles of nonviolence.
I challenge you to ask yourself the same question.
Perhaps the solutions for many of today’s social ills lie in nonviolent direct action; perhaps that wouldn’t work at all. Either way, we know that nonviolence has the potential to bring about profound change - Gandhi’s efforts in India and the Civil Rights Movement are testaments to that fact.
In the end, our society should see that with nonviolence, we have the potential to accomplish great feats in a respectfully peaceful manner. Moreover, it’s more than possible for this tactic to incite the most meaningful of changes. After all, as the sixth nonviolent principle states, the universe is on the side of justice.
Yesterday really made me think.
At the Selma Community Church, our group participated in an introductory workshop on nonviolence training with Pastor Ronald Smith. We learned about the basic ideas of both violence and nonviolence – what they mean, what they portend, and what we can do to discourage one and encourage the other. It was an engaging, fun, and truly uplifting experience.
Ron told us that Martin Luther King, Jr. defined violence as “physical and emotional harm” – a simple description when we consider the danger and destruction implied by the term. In turns out, however, that the idea of nonviolence is not so simple.
Ultimately, there is a difference between “nonviolence” and “non-violence.” One, non-violence, represents negative peace; it’s simply the absence of violence. The other, nonviolence, connotes positive peace; it’s not just the absence of violence, but the presence of love and justice, as well.
If you ask me, one is clearly the better option.
When Ron taught us the Six Principles of Nonviolence, the idea became even more attractive. Hearing things like, “Nonviolence is a way of life for courageous people,” and “Attack forces of evil, not persons doing evil,” further revealed the nobility of those committed to nonviolence and enhanced our understanding of this peaceful approach to social change.
After learning so many fantastic things about it, I couldn’t help myself from wondering what the world would look like if everyone committed themselves to a life of nonviolence. How would life be different if people sought to impact and influence one another without the use of physical force and emotional abuse?
A packet we received during our session described the problem of violence in our society today:
Violence has been lauded as the supreme solution and consistently has been excused as acceptable behavior for human beings. The tentacles of violence stretch into almost every aspect of our lives: our homes, work places, recreation, sports and music, just to mention a few… In almost every aspect of our lives, we have been trained to respond to conflict with violence.
Today, I’m wondering what the world would be like if all of this were to change, if everyone were to cast off the “tentacles of violence” and live lives fully committed to the principles of nonviolence.
I challenge you to ask yourself the same question.
Perhaps the solutions for many of today’s social ills lie in nonviolent direct action; perhaps that wouldn’t work at all. Either way, we know that nonviolence has the potential to bring about profound change - Gandhi’s efforts in India and the Civil Rights Movement are testaments to that fact.
In the end, our society should see that with nonviolence, we have the potential to accomplish great feats in a respectfully peaceful manner. Moreover, it’s more than possible for this tactic to incite the most meaningful of changes. After all, as the sixth nonviolent principle states, the universe is on the side of justice.