Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/07/13/rebelling-nonviolent-heart
I am so happy to see that there are people and movements that are not only non-violent, they reject violent communication. ‘War’ on poverty, or ‘attacking’ climate change or ‘fighting’ inequality or any of the other myriad ways that we have used violent imagery to express our desire to find healing, are, IMO, impediments to the results we are looking for. As long as we speak in language that includes militarism, we’ve diluted the peaceful impact our actions could have. Violent language necessitates an us vs. them mentality.
I don’t have the language I would prefer - its anathema to what I’ve grown up with, where we are encouraged to ‘fight’ for what we want. Thanks to those who are seeking the terms we need to promote healing.
We have become trapped in moralistic judgements implying wrongness or badness on the part of people who don’t act in harmony with our values.
Ick! My reaction to such Kumbaya pablum is revulsion. This kind of crap is why I absolutely can’t stand Yes! magazine. It’s not enough to be preyed upon by the worst omnicriminals in history, profiting from crimes carrying temporal consequences beyond the human imagination, we also have to remember to be nice. Whatever you do, don’t own up to your own anger and despair. No no, none of that negativity!
That word “moralistic” is a particularly vicious shot at anyone who thinks there’s a moral angle to the question of wiping out Life on Earth, as Pope Francis articulated in Laudato Si.
Monsters walk among us. Do you want expressions of concern for the sensitivities of slaveholders from the slaves? (“No, not like that, with sincerity.”) The initial criminals, from whose crime all other extinction threats emerge, are the fossil fuel extractors. Those psychopaths need to be named and arrested. Survival depends on deposing the powerful, not getting along with them.
I love you.