Westwood Unitarian Congregation

Nonviolence

Marguerite Robbins
February 11, 2007

Introduction and Reading

Good morning. February is Black history month and today's presentation topic is "Nonviolence." I kept both of these thoughts in mind as I selected a reading for today. These words were first used forty-four years ago on August 23, 1963, when Martin Luther King, Jr. stood near the large reflecting pool in Washington, D.C. with Abraham Lincoln's statue close at hand and 250,000 people standing in the hot summer sun. He delivered his famous speech, "I Have A Dream," and spoke of the vision of equal rights in the Emancipation Proclamation, and the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence of the United States. He said that in spite of these documents and their profession that all people had certain unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the people of color in the United States were not being given what had been promised and that it was time for them to claim what was rightfully theirs - equality with the white people of the United States. Then he said and I quote, "But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force." (End of quote)

Presentation

The word "Nonviolence" came into being in 1923, and - by the way - it is a single word rather than a hyphenated word. For some reason that is important to me. I think that is so because it symbolizes for me that the concept of nonviolence has its own independence and integrity without being dependent on another concept. And yet having said that, I think it is important to delve into the meaning of nonviolence by first knowing the definition of its opposite, the word "violence."

"Violence" is emotional, verbal, or physical behavior which dominates, diminishes, or destroys ourselves or others. Let me repeat that definition. "Violence" is emotional, verbal, or physical behavior which dominates, diminishes, or destroys ourselves or others.

So what are some characteristics of violence?

It is relational. It can occur within an individual (as in self-talk, self-hatred, or self-mutilation). It can occur between two or more individuals. And it can occur between an individual and the earth. It is relational.

It crosses boundaries without permission.

It is motivated by fear, shame, anger, greed, or an effort to address a perceived injustice.

It sets up a spiral of violence because violence tends to beget violence.

It promotes the eye for an eye value - that leaves everybody blind.

It is about control.

And what are some principles of nonviolence?

The first principle I want to share is a formal scientific statement, the Seville Statement, written in 1986 for the International Year of Peace sponsored by the United Nations. It was written by an international team of specialists for the purpose of countering the idea that violence and war cannot be ended because they are part of our natural biology. The complete statement had an introduction, five propositions, and this conclusion:
"We conclude that biology does not condemn humanity to war, and that humanity can be freed from the bondage of biological pessimism and empowered with confidence to undertake the transformative tasks needed in this International Year of Peace and in the years to come. Although these tasks are mainly institutional and collective, they also rest upon the consciousness of individual participants for whom pessimism and optimism are crucial factors. Just as 'wars begin in the minds of men', peace also begins in our minds. The same species who invented war is capable of inventing peace. The responsibility lies with each of us."

A second principle of nonviolence is that it is passive physically, but strongly active spiritually. (Remember Martin Luther King's words a few moments ago about meeting physical force with soul force?) Nonviolence is active nonviolent resistance to injustice. It is not lacking in energy, nor is it choosing to "do nothing," it is an active choice to use nonviolent resistance.

And a third principle: Nonviolence requires that we love our enemies. (Now there is a challenge for us!) It means that we make a commitment to respect all people, realizing that we are all part of the human species. This interpretation should sound familiar to you. Just take a look at the Unitarian Universalist Principles on the cover of your Order of Service. The first one recognizes the inherent worth and dignity of every person. The last one identifies respect for the interdependent web of all existence, of which we are a part. Loving each other means helping our oppressors to recover their humanity, and then to awaken to their belovedness within.

So we have looked at some characteristics of violence, and some principles of nonviolence. Now let's look at how the perspective of violence and the perspective of nonviolence are manifest in various dimensions of human life.

In the dimension of gender, a violent perspective would see superiority and inferiority. A nonviolent perspective would see equality.

In the dimension of power, a violent perspective would see power-over rather than power-with, win/lose rather than win/win, competition rather than cooperation, domination rather than partnership.

In the dimension of economics, the violent perspective would see exploitation or greed, while the nonviolent perspective would see sharing and sufficiency.

In relationships, the violent perspective would see ranking rather than linking, and we/they rather than us.

In the area of transformation, the violent perspective would go for force, for war, and for suppression of conflict, rather than nonviolent confrontation, negotiation, and inclusiveness. (I will refrain from contributing an excellent example of violent transformation by the United States over the past few years!)

Related to ecology, the violent orientation would use exploitation, control, and contempt rather than harmony, cooperation, and respect.

Related to logic, the violent orientation would go to an either/or mentality rather than a both/and possibility.

In the educational dimension, a violent orientation would choose indoctrination rather than enablement.

These comparisons are the work of Walter Wink who in his book 'Engaging The Powers' works to raise consciousness about the difference between a domination society and a domination-free society.

Who are some of the great role models for nonviolence? Jesus of Nazareth, Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Schweitzer, Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, Margaret Mead. Who would you add to this list? [Let the congregation respond to this question.] The point is that there are models to inspire us, people who have demonstrated that life-enhancing leadership does no need to be of the kind George W. Bush has modeled. Great changes in society have been made as a result of nonviolent leadership. May we not forget this fact and the models available to us.

So what can we do as individuals to facilitate nonviolence in our world? There are of course many answers to that question. But in the time remaining, I want to name and explain a bit about "nonviolent communication." This is an area in which I have recently become very interested, and I encourage you to take a look at the work of Marshall Rosenberg in his book 'Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life'. In this book, Rosenberg emphasizes the importance of what he calls empathy and what most UUs identify as compassion. Over and over in the book, Rosenberg gives real life examples of how deeply listening to another's perspective can change a violent energy into a receptive, hopeful, engaging, positive energy. And he sets forth four foundational aspects of nonviolent communication that each of us can learn and practice in our lives.

The first aspect is Observation. When something distressing to us is occurring (within ourselves, with ourselves and another, or between others in our presence), we need to articulate what is going on without judgment in our words. For example, I might observe "the announcements in our services go on so long that they consistently prevent the entirety of the presentation from occurring, or they cause the service to last longer than an hour which is the intended length."

The second aspect is Feelings. After an observation, we then need to express the feelings that are being generated in us by what we have observed. For example, "I feel frustrated when my presentation part of the service has to be cut short because the announcements are so long."

The third aspect is Needs. After stating our feelings, we then name our needs that are at the basis for our feelings. "I need to know that I will have adequate time to give the 20 minute presentation which I have been asked to prepare without going over the one hour boundary established for our services."

And the fourth and final aspect is a Request. We make a specific request identifying what we want from another - or others - that will enrich our lives. "I would like to find a way to limit the length of the announcements in our service to 8 minutes."

And then after listening with empathy and compassion, those who feel differently need to reciprocally articulate what they observe, feel, need, and request, while receiving deep listening from the other or others. The four-point content that Rosenberg suggests, along with the practice of compassionate, empathetic listening, can dramatically change the energy of a distressing situation without adding verbal, emotional, or physical violence to it. Respect can be maintained. Healing can occur - often through simply the power of understanding. And the potential for the co-creation of a win/win solution has the opportunity to emerge. Of course nonviolent communication requires that people show up and make themselves available for honest, open interaction. And as the technique is employed and the co-creation of a win/win solution occurs, there needs to be commitment by each person to take responsibility for following through on the new, agreed upon approach.

So I encourage you to give nonviolent communication a try. When emotional, verbal, or physical violence are occurring - or have the potential to occur - observe the situation and articulate what is going on without judgment. Express the feelings that are invoked in you by what you have observed. Realize and articulate the needs in you that are creating your feelings. And then request what will enrich your life. Perhaps when you try this and concurrently extend your compassion and an invitation to another to try this, together you will discover what Neale Donald Walsch has concluded (and I quote): "There are no 'rotten apples.' There are only people who disagree with your point of view on things, people who construct a different model of the world…No persons do anything inappropriate, given their model of the world."

What a wonderfully compassionate and nonviolent frame through which to see others, and through which to practice nonviolent communication, nonviolent thinking, and nonviolent behavior.

Marguerite Robbins