Peaceful World

What are the reasons for war? War is waged, in its most basic sense, for the survival of a group of people who claim some form of sovereignty, unity, or right to power. Generally war is thought of as occurring between nations, but in instances like the war on terror, the definition is more difficult to apply. In a civil war, it is an internal conflict within a nation.

Survival of the group is the most general reason for war. War can be both defensive and offensive. It can be motivated by profit, a need for resources, or a move toward territorial or strategic gain. It can be motivated from a desire to destroy or punish those who are considered to be fundamentally different and whose beliefs are so at odds with another nation, that it is believed by that nation that they must be destroyed.

In each case, when war is waged it is seen as the best option for the perpetuation of a group of people or a nation state. It is a self interested act, where the word "self" applies either to a handful of an elite class or war profiteers who may not all be from the same country, or it applies to a group or nation as a whole. Due to the nature of intentional propaganda, media oversimplification and omission, and state secrecy, official reasons given for waging a war may be different from the motivations of those who declare it, therefore those who fight do not always have the same motivations of those who send out the orders to engage. The move toward war is also furthered greatly by the ignorance of populations who are not adequately educated in world affairs and conflict resolution, and therefore don't fully understand the problem and have a narrow and skewed view for the potential solution.

What must be understood, however, is that war at its core is an act of human self interest. Nations, or groups of people who wage war, are made up of individuals who act selfishly, but who also have, as individuals, the capacity to act morally as well. The formation of larger governing bodies and nation states, however, is done solely for the interest and preservation of the group as a whole, and therefore the responsibility of protecting a self defined group will always trump a distaste for war, if war is seen by the ruling class as the most effective means of self preservation. Additionally, because nations are constructed for the purpose of self preservation, there is already built into them a notion of an outside threat which must be kept at bay. Therefore nations by definition are oriented toward war.

Since nations are formed for the purpose of protecting and preserving a defined group of individuals, the formation and continuation of nations essentially guarantees the formation and continuation of militaries. The formation of militaries creates a culture of warriors, which is propped up by a sense of national identification among the average citizenry, whose taxes pay for the common defense. The average citizen, who is not always directly involved in the common defense, but who pays for it with a portion of their earnings in pursuit of their own acquisition of material goods, fuels an unending competition for wealth, power, prestige, and material possessions, which is defended militarily through the capital or credit generated by that competition. In a world of self interested nation states composed of working, competing, tax paying citizens who on the micro level appear to be doing nothing "wrong", war is basically a given, even necessitated by our collective actions and collective agreements.

Anyone who looks deeply into human nature and the nature of war understands that the problem is very entrenched. War is seen by so called realists as an unfortunate and unavoidable condition. This belief in itself actually helps to create that reality, although those who call themselves realists are implicitly and erroneously saying that the belief doesn't create the reality, it reflects it.

In order to have peace, we have to believe that it is possible. But we do have to be realistic, and understand that within the warring nations of the world, beyond the politicians and military personnel, beyond the average citizen that funds war, there are people who oppose the study of peace, people who strongly believe peace is not possible, people who hate those who insist on a peaceful planet for being weak or unpatriotic, and wealthy and well connected people who directly profit from war and conflict, and therefore have strong vested interests in making sure that there is no peace on earth.

So if we want to bring peace into the world, we have to begin by making peace in the place we are most directly involved in: our own lives. We must do so with our eyes wide open to a world that is filled with both beauty and horror. By learning to look unflinchingly at the conflicts within ourselves and our larger societies, we can gain strength, wisdom, and begin to lay the foundations for peace.

It is easier to be peaceful when one immerses oneself in the contemplation of large concepts like the interconnection of all things, the incomprehensibly vast universe, or the quality that exists in nature that all things change over time. Others might will also benefit from contemplating the sheer mystery of existence, and feeling the presence of God or the pulsing universe as a whole.

The effect of each of these focuses of contemplation for me has been to reduce the pull of my own personal traumas, selfish tendencies, prejudices, and anxieties because by putting them into the context of something so vast, beautiful, mysterious, and awe inspiring, much of what appears to be critically important begins to melt away into insignificance. This is very different from learning a moral formula, a social norm, a national law, or a religious dogma that instructs one on a proper form of conduct. The outward solution of prescribed regulations often brings about more tension and inner conflict. By turning inward, however, with the observation of larger truths and mysteries, one can begin to transform the very roots of conflict. By observing the larger truths and mysteries of existence, one is not saying to oneself, I should be peaceful, I am not peaceful enough, and thus creating conflict. One is simply connecting to something larger and allowing that process to transform oneself, a process which can have the effect of bringing about peace.

The result of this, if practiced over time, is that the individual will literally change and be able to bring a more peaceful presence to their interaction with others. A frantic or dogmatic approach can obstruct one from observing the situation as it is actually unfolding, making the individual less flexible and less responsive to the reality of the situation. In matters of peace, it is of utmost importance to be aware of reality and bring an authentically peaceful presence from which to build upon. Such a presence, if grounded in a strong inner peacefulness, rather than clinging to a need to avoid conflict and disagreement or a desire to appear morally superior, can inspire and reorient others. This is the power of meditative contemplation, which allows a person to cultivate this type of presence.

In America, one often hears phrases like, freedom isn't free, which is a notion that there are heroes who have fought and died so that we can have the freedoms we enjoy. It creates a link in people's minds between freedom and war. Those who seek peace, therefore, are seen to be weak because they either don't understand what has been fought for, or they don't believe it was worth it, or would rather live in slavery than risk fighting, or or some version of that.

But the word freedom is used in a curious way. People say that they enjoy their freedom. But freedom is not something in and of itself. Freedom is the negation of something else. Freedom of the press is the ability to print what you want without restriction. Caffeine free means without caffeine. To be free means to not be restricted, or to not have a certain condition be present, like being cancer free. Buy one get one free means get something without paying for it. So freedom can be whatever you want it to be. It just so happens that Americans have collectively defined freedom in such a way that it implies certain conditions, like freedom from an oppressive government which comes in the form of being able to vote and say almost whatever you want, while excluding other things like the right to have food labeled if it contains genetically modified products, or the right to not have to pay taxes for your labor.

So when someone says freedom, the question is, freedom from what?

How about freedom from war.

Freedom from war would make us more free in a variety of ways. We wouldn't need to pay as much in taxes, meaning the thirty percent of our incomes that get sucked into federal programs and military budgets would be greatly reduced. Some people might say that by giving away thirty percent of your income, you are actually not free at all. You are forced to give away a significant portion of the fruits of your labor to a body that you may feel is incompetent, or even criminal. Is that freedom?

Freedom can mean freedom from the trauma of war, freedom from the fear of nuclear annihilation, or even freedom from environmental destruction. Freedom to breathe clean air and drink clean water. Understand that freedom is something everyone says they want, but it can be defined in different ways to suit different agendas. In the case of the US, it is being defined in a way that prevents peace from seriously entering into the discussion.

And if you are not actively defining what freedom is, are you really free? If a government can write a law or create a policy which you don't agree with, and then you have to comply or go to prison, are you free? The government owns passports, so it owns your movement outside of the country. It obligates you to pay taxes on your work, so it owns your labor. It obligates you to an education with standardized tests, so it owns your mind. Can anyone be 100% free, and if not, then what defines freedom?

Of course Americans currently enjoy a better standard of living than citizens of many other nations, but prosperity is not the same thing as freedom. And if it is prosperity that is most important, what happens to freedom when you are impoverished? Is being beholden to the pursuit of material wealth as a lifetime obligation freedom? Indentured servitude would rarely be seen as freedom, but what is the difference between an indentured servant, and a person who, like most Americans is deeply in debt? Freedom from debt is another type of freedom, but cancellation of debt is not worded as such, because that would contradict some people's understanding of freedom. It is instead thought of as socialism, which in the US is an enemy of freedom, and perhaps even worthy of fighting a war over.

It becomes apparent, then, that it is important to look at what it means to be free as a topic related to peace. People who oppose the peace movement often talk about freedom, therefore it is important to consider what freedom means, who is defining freedom, and for what purpose.

What makes people bristle about peace as a policy, however, is the notion that it impinges upon their freedom to defend themselves. In this sense, the pursuit of peace would seem to be a direct contravention of one's right to life, as one never knows what someone else will do.

The answer in today's world, however, is not so simple. With vast concentrations of wealth and destructive power, and some of that power leaking out on the black markets, it would seem that an unending pursuit of a strategy of defense is making the world scene more perilous.

The US has been engaging in wars with Iraq and Afghanistan and having very limited if any success, unless success is counted in the deaths of civilians. This is a sad report card for the world's greatest military, which has been locked in combat with essentially third world nations for five years. The situation is both obscene and absurd.

Pursuing peace on the eve of combat may not achieve much. It is only through a strategy of perseverance over time that things will change. If I make a real effort to be authentically peaceful today, I may not have to fight in a war tomorrow. This is also a form of self defense, but in this case, the "self" ends up being more than just your own nation.

Being authentically peaceful for me means not being ruled by anger or fear, but instead feeling connected to the universe as a source of strength, courage, direction and perhaps even faith. It means being able to communicate disagreements assertively without being insulting or arrogant. It means being able to listen to the other side and consider what is being said, yet maintaining your own stance if you feel it is what must be done. It means taking responsibility for your own words and actions, rather than being fixated on domination, power plays, and alliances.

In the end, however, if you are confronted with violence, it is up to you to choose what to do. Pursuing peace is a decision that you alone can make, and depending on your level of commitment, that decision may change. Someone with stronger convictions and a stronger grasp of peace and the human condition may be able to avert violence that a more defensive oriented person may not. The more defensive person may use his own failure to bring about a peaceful solution as evidence for the unfortunate need for war, whereas the peaceful individual may get no recognition for his achievement at averting conflict in a culture that views history as a series of wars and heroes as soldiers and not peacemakers.

This is why I believe it is important to bring the effect of peace into one's life as a result of the process of meditative contemplation or some other internal process. Peace is not a dogma. It arises organically in the right circumstances. If you have looked deeply into the nature of existence and been fortunate enough to discover genuine and unforced peace, then you will be able to do extraordinary things that many would believe impossible.

Being peaceful means not using violence as an approach to conflict. It does not mean that you can't disagree, and it doesn't mean you have to give in to those with whom you disagree. It means seeking strategies that eliminate the need for violence, which can include critical thinking and self education, rational discussion, compassionate listening, and compromise when necessary. Generally speaking, it requires some form of communication other than, "we declare war," or, "unless you do exactly what we say, we will declare war."

If we conclude that war is a self interested act, where "self" refers to a body of people who identify with their larger collective, then we must as individuals begin to identify less with that national collective, and more with a larger humanity. Secondly, we must examine our own selfish tendencies, practices of consumption, jobs, habits, and internal as well as interpersonal conflicts, and ask if on a micro level these things are contributing to larger trends which fuel the need, feasibility,or desire for war. Taking stock of our own lives and making deep changes will not be easy, but it is one of the few things we can do, as unlike the powers that be, we cannot force others to do our wishes and at the same time remain true to our message. It is important, however, to realize that if you do these things and are able to excite and inspire others, rather than put them off, your new changes and discoveries can spread into other parts of reality. So beyond making changes in our own lives, communicating those changes in a way that is accessible to others is the second general step, which includes not only pointing to the downfalls of the old paradigm, but also the tangible benefits of the new one. Now I will suggest some specific ideas that can be implemented.

Setting up a practice of peaceful contemplation or meditation is a powerful way to create inner transformation. Other activities that build such inner peace may be discovered as well, such as creating music, cooking delicious and healthy meals, camping in nature, or viewing sacred art. Once you have realized that peace begins with the individual, realized that it is a personal commitment that only you can make, and discovered a practice or activity that brings more peace into your own life, you might want to add a few more pieces into the peace mix.

Start to communicate your message with others. A bumper sticker or t-shirt may start some discussions or connect you to others who share similar views. These types of things bring the discussion out into the open, as these issues are rarely discussed in schools or on mainstream television, music,or, movies. For most people, a thoughtful discussion of peace is a rarity. This, of course, means communicating beyond the slogans of apparel. Finding effective ways to talk to people about peace and building relationships with peaceful people can help to foster a movement.

Write a letter to the editor. Call your congressman. Go to a protest. Realize, though, that these strategies have been implemented for hundreds of years. We will have to do more.

Consuming less material goods is good for the environment, and may reduce the demands of your culture, lessening the pressure for further expansion. Growing your own food and producing your own energy means you don't have to go "somewhere else" to get the necessary components for your life. Becoming a vegetarian or vegan is not only good for animals, it is also good for the environment, as it takes much less land is far less resource intensive than producing meat.

In a nation like the US, the level of consumption is so high that in spite of overpopulated third world nations, we are still using more and creating more waste. Consider having less children, or encouraging your children to one day understand more about peace and how it ties into consumption and the environment than you do.

Think about the individual concepts of selfishness, selflessness, and self preservation as they effect you on a daily basis and as they tie into wider social and international tendencies. Consider at what level these things are healthy, and at what level they become destructive. Consider the concept of faith, and put it into the same contexts as above.

Learn about other peace makers in the world. Be able to talk intelligently to others about their real successes, while maintaining an awareness of their shortcomings in order to strengthen the cause for peace.

Identify less with individual nations and religions that exclude others, and identify more with a larger humanity. Learn another language and communicate with people from other cultures. Understand that if you are truly interested in creating peace, you may have more in common with someone who shares those same views and who lives across the world than your next door neighbor, but you will have to discover ways to bridge the gap between both of them.

Be conscious of what you buy and how your money is being spent. Buy locally made goods whenever possible. Find ways to reduce your tax burden, as taxes fuel the military industrial complex. Donate to peaceful organizations such as the Nonviolent Peaceforce, which actually goes to conflict ridden areas and tries to diffuse tensions without the use of violence. Financially support others who you believe are trying to do the right thing.

Get a degree in peace studies or take classes in conflict resolution.

Engage your creative side. Write a peace poem, make some peace art. Take some risks. Find or form a peace organization. Talk to kids about peace and discourage them from joining the military. Get excited about what you do. Believe in what you are doing and don't let others bring you down.

Come up with more solutions and share them with other people. Tell people what works and what doesn't and why. Talk to those who have been engaged with peace for a long time and can offer advice. Don't forget, this is going to take time and effort. Remember the people whose lives have been destroyed by war, and realize that what you are doing is worth it.

If you found the information on this page interesting, inspiring, or informative, please pass it along and keep the ideas rolling.