January 18, 2003
Today, people all around the world are gathering to communicate a simple message: PEACE. In fact, every day, nearly everywhere on earth, people have been doing the same thing for many millennia, though usually without needing to resort to massive rallies. Since at least the middle of the last century, our species has possessed the technical capability to ensure its own nearly total extinction--and yet the common desire for mutually beneficial coexistence has, for the most part, prevailed, and the worst-case scenarios have not occurred. As we face what appears to be an attempt to instigate a perpetual, ever-expanding "war against evil" by the current US administration, I find some comfort in remembering that most people want to live in peace, and will not consciously take steps that escalate the threat of violence to or violation of themselves or others.
The fact that we are still alive on this planet, after all the events of the last century that might have led us down the road to nuclear winter or another doomsday scenario, is, in some measure, a miracle--but it is a miracle that we the living, and those who have lived before us, have made possible. Collectively, we have always managed to tame the greatest excesses of passion, expression, and violence that prod deluded individuals and whole societies toward Armageddon; wisdom, compassion, and love of life have always proved to be the stronger forces. The world is still full of suffering, but, through some grace that we have allowed to manifest through us, we are still living together, trying to help one another, curious about one another, co-existing on this earth despite our differences.
Common people do not want war--do not want to inflict on others that which they do not want inflicted on themselves. Common people would rather celebrate, come together in community, build their homes and neighborhoods, find avenues to express what is important to them, share with and help one another, be awed and fascinated by their natural surroundings, develop understanding of their place in the universe, laugh together, make music, enjoy life. In one sense, peace rallies are huge block parties for those for whom life is too precious to spend plotting others' deaths.
Yet intuitive wisdom does not always prevail on the national and international political stages. Political figures at the highest levels of power do not lead lives that are even remotely normal within their societies. They meet no one outside of their inner circles without bodyguards present; they don't generally cook, clean, garden, or go on hikes. Most would never think of "baring witness" at a peace rally, and few get together with one another to play music, dance, and sing. As Bob Dylan once said, "This land is your land and this land is my land, sure, but the world is run by those that don't listen to music anyway."
How do we communicate with such people? In some cases, it may be more important to express ourselves, and be heard by one another, than to be understood by someone who is not yet capable of understanding. Someone able to utter (with uncharacteristic, chilling clarity) the sentence "We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth in defense of this great nation" (George W. Bush) is not at the top of my list of people likely to understand a message of peace. Luckily, one person or small group cannot make all the decisions about such matters for very long.
But communication does not come easily even to those committed to a path of peace. For one thing, we live in a culture where advertising, commerce, mass media, and high technology have changed what we think of and experience as "communication." As environmental educator David Orr notes in his excellent book The Nature of Design, the results of most advances in communication technology are "mixed at best": "more and more of us are instantly wired to the global nervous system with cell phones, beepers, pagers, fax machines, and e-mail. If useful in real emergencies, the overall result is to homogenize the important with the trivial, making everything an emergency and an already frenetic civilization even more frenetic. ... In our public affairs and our private lives we are, I think, increasingly muddle-headed because we have mistaken volume and speed of information for substance and clarity." (The Nature of Design: Ecology, Culture, and Human Intention, by David W. Orr. Oxford University Press, New York, 2002, p. 47.)
True communication requires that we slow down, come together with one another, and truly listen. Well-trained in less-than-optimal communication techniques, most of us need to learn how to restore this substance, clarity, and heart to what and how we communicate with one another. I'm sure all of us have participated in groups of supposedly like-minded people which melted down as a result of internal squabbles. The practices of council and compassionate communication described in this issue offer hope, especially when used within an evolving culture in which the voices of all parts of creation are listened to and respected. Ecopsychology, "reindigenation," permaculture, practical techniques such as haybox cooking, and the kinds of personal development and other workshops described in our center insert, all comprise pieces of the puzzle as well.
True communication, like deep wisdom, is not necessarily instantaneous or fast. In fact, the practical methods of effective communication--and of living in harmony with ourselves, others, and the earth-- are deliberate, slow, and nuanced. But they're the only things that can last, and they give us a much more promising future than war.
Thanks for reading TL.
©2003 Talking Leaves
Spring 2003
Volume 13, Number 1
Communication & Eco-Culture