A Life Connected

One of the more common misperceptions in practicing Nonviolence is that one has to aspire to be Gandhi or King or Chavez or Jesus or Buddha or… If you can find yourself on that path, fantastic. But even the luminous religious leaders of Nonviolence gave greater weight to the question, ” Will it work? Will this action bring about social justice?”

Barbara Deming is one of the more brilliant Nonviolence theorists you’ve never heard of. She offered for many the first understanding that Nonviolence doesn’t necessarily need a religious basis. We don’t have to be saints to practice Nonviolence nor do we have to be perfect to use Nonviolence to win social battles.

A member of Nonviolence United forwarded to us this link from Chapter 12: Barbara Deming in the book “American Nonviolence: The History of An Idea” by Ira Chernus, Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Ira does a wonderful job bringing together some of Barbara Deming’s thoughts on Nonviolence. Here are a few quotes (including direct quotes of Deming) from that chapter:

“Just as Nonviolence gives more balance to those who use it, it also throws their opponents off balance. “People who attack others need rationalizations for doing so. We undermine those rationalizations.” The opponents expect a threat of losing everything, including their physical safety. When this ultimate threat is obviously taken away, they become confused; they hesitate in their response; they have to think before they act: “We undo their minds. And it is at this point that they become vulnerable to receiving a new idea.”

And…

“Balance and control come from healthy anger. This is just as aggressive as the unhealthy kind. But it is based on a belief and hope for change in social roles and institutions. Healthy anger demands change and creates the confrontations needed for change to occur. It also gives the other an opportunity to help make that change. “Our task, of course, is to transmute the anger that is affliction into the anger that is determination to bring about change. I think, in fact, that one could give that as a definition of revolution.”

And…

“To use this advantage, nonviolent activists must always oppose unjust actions rather than the people who do the actions. They must separate the unjust person from his or her role in society: ‘Seek to destroy not the abusers of power but the sources of that power, which are certainly not their particular bodies.’ By separating individuals from their roles, it is easier to establish communication with them. The more they are engaged in conversation, the more they can be influenced by nonviolent action. In all these ways, nonviolence makes the opponent the one who gets dizzy. And that gives the nonviolent activists more control of the situation.”

You may also purchase “American Nonviolence: The History of An Idea” from Orbis Books.

This article doesn’t require you be Christian to understand its relevance.  But our Christian friends and/or fans of Jesus might especially enjoy the lesson on the historical Jesus.

I thought it would be fun to offer a little clarification on what is arguably the most misused and abused reference to Nonviolence – Jesus’ teaching to “turn the other cheek.”  Pick a politician (Christian or not), pick a self-proclaimed revolutionary, pick even a weekend activist and you’ve probably heard them say something like, “I’m all for peace and Nonviolence, but if somebody threatens me or my family, I’m not going to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK!”

What they’re really saying is, “… I’m not going to DO NOTHING! I’m not going to IGNORE IT!”  But that is NOT what Jesus was saying.  This is so vitally important to understanding Nonviolence, what it is, its power, and its superiority over violence, not just morally, but strategically.

Author Walter Wink does a wonderful job of explaining this.  Here is a link to the more detailed text and/or you might learn more about Walter Wink and his work here.

But here’s an abbreviate explanation.  It involves history (not an interpretation of the Bible), and I know how painful history can be to some of us :) but read on – it’s a fascinating take on the true meaning of “turn the other cheek.”

First, let’s refresh our memory of the Bible passage:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.” —Matthew 5:38-42, NIV

Here’s the history (sorry if it hurts… it’s actually pretty interesting)…

Note that Jesus said the RIGHT cheek.  This is key.  In Jesus time and place in history, the left hand was used for “unclean” purposes (I won’t go into the details… but you can probably guess some of them — imagine a time with no soap and limited water).  You wouldn’t use your left hand to purchase food, shake someone’s hand, OR even strike someone.  It would be a shameful act to use your left hand for these things.

Also, if you were to strike someone, you would use your BACKHAND to assert dominance and authority.  If you instead used your fist or slapped with an open hand, this would mean the person you were striking was your equal (or even your superior!).

OK, did you follow that?  It might help to get a partner and act this out (don’t really slap them!).  Try pretend striking them while 1. not using your left hand and 2. using your backhand to assert your dominance.  You’d be using your RIGHT hand, backhanding your inferior and striking them on their RIGHT cheek.

Aha!  “If someone strikes you on the RIGHT cheek, turn to him the other also.”

Try it.  Now, only the LEFT cheek is exposed.  In order to strike your inferior on their LEFT cheek you have to either use your right forehand or punch them (this would make them your equal) OR use your left backhand (this would shame you in public).

Jesus’ call to “turn to him also the other” or as is often quipped “turn the other cheek” is NOT a call to simply ignore the insult.  It is telling us to DEMAND EQUALITY!  Stand up to your oppressor!  Don’t take insults and attacks lying down!

Nonviolence is a brilliant way to end the violence.  Retaliating in violence to a “superior” may have in Jesus’ day resulted in death or at least an escalation to the violence.  But, Jesus was a brilliant Nonviolent strategist.  A simple turn of the head refused the insult, demanded equality and justice, and ended the violence.  This is active Nonviolence.

I also included in the Bible passage above, “And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.”  Wink also gives us the historical significance of these – again, as you may have guessed, these are strategic Nonviolent actions, not acquiescence.

By offering also your cloak you would be reduced to nakedness.  But in Jesus’ time, the nakedness would be an embarrassment to the viewer, not the naked.  You would again claim justice by exposing yourself (literally) but also your oppressor.

And “walking the extra mile” – in Jesus’ time, Roman soldiers could under Roman law demand that inhabitants of occupied territories carry their equipment for them – up to one mile.  However, they were not to require someone to carry the equipment for more than one mile – if they did, the soldier himself would be subject to punishment.  So, “going that extra mile” isn’t about bending over backwards and bowing to an oppressor, it again goes above and beyond to Nonviolently reclaim justice.  It will take strength and it may take suffering, but Nonviolence can, if waged strategically, overcome violence and oppression.  It requires a refusal to be humiliated.

So, you see, this passage is a Nonviolence primer, NOT an excuse to do nothing in the face of wrong.  Whether you consider yourself Christian, or hold to another religion, or choose no religion at all, the power of Nonviolence is powerful, effective, and available to you.

The misuse of this simple phrase has been used to disregard Nonviolence, escalate violence, and cause unspeakable pain and suffering.  It’s well past time we set the record straight.  ”Turning the other cheek” is NOT passivity.  It is powerful.  It is the weapon of the strong.

This is Nonviolence.

It was fun for me to discover this little but important history lesson.  And it’s entertaining to show to others.  I hope you’ll see the lesson as fun and will share it, too.

All one,

:) matt

I usually don’t spend a lot of time refuting arguments against Nonviolence, because I believe there is more power and sustainability in building and talking about the positive. But I also know a few of you are looking for an answer to this enduring dismissive question.

If you’ve ever been in a debate with someone insisting that Nonviolence is impotent, it’s almost a given that they’ll raise this question when all others have been answered, “What about Hitler?” It’s the fall-back question. Hitler was “bad,” right? Can’t use Nonviolence because you have to appeal to an opponent’s inner “goodness,” right? Ha, there is such a thing as a “just war” – World War 2 proves it!

First, I have yet to meet someone arguing against Nonviolence who really understands Nonviolence. That isn’t meant to sound mean or condescending; in fact, I completely understand why most people don’t understand Nonviolence – we are immersed in violence. Nonviolence has been written out of our history and even out of our language. So, I try not to dismiss the questions (even if the questions are dismissive) because Nonviolence is very difficult to hear and understand when there is an ongoing deafening din of violence all around us.

So, here’s just a start of the answer to “What about Hitler?”

No, social advances through active Nonviolence do *NOT* rely on the “goodness within an opponent.” “Goodness” doesn’t even have to come into the equation.

First, there were plenty of examples where Nonviolence was working against Hitler (see examples of Norway and many more – please explore the work of Gene Sharp who’s spent a lifetime documenting successes of Nonviolence around the world). There were so many Nonviolent means not even explored during WWII because “when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

More importantly (and painfully for most), Nonviolence requires us to look at what role *we* play in the violence…

In the case of Hitler – his war machine could have been stopped and he should have been stopped before it even started. We (the US and the world community) knew what he was up to and we did nothing, in fact we BANKROLLED him! Before *and* during the war. Even after we were “doing something” (WW II), we (American investors and corporate profiteers) continued to bankroll the Nazi regime. Germany didn’t have the technology or the vast natural resources (oil) to run a war, so with the help of wealthy Americans, giant corporations and all the folks investing in the stock market to bankroll those corporations, the Nazi war machine kept storming forward. From Standard Oil to Ford to General Motors to ITT and IBM (which helped make it more efficient to exterminate Jewish people, homosexuals, Slavs, Black people, communists, political dissidents, and so many others on a mass scale); American/western hands are bloody.

We could have stepped in and stopped Hitler virtually overnight – by cutting the purse strings. But we didn’t because war is a money-making enterprise (not for the little folks who suffer and die, but for those bankrolling the evil venture). It continues today with our direct and very public investments.

The violence of WWII was unnecessary.  Nonviolence was simply not widely considered and executed.  Perhaps because it would’ve worked.

So, don’t be discouraged by arguments against Nonviolence. More often than not, they are simply misunderstandings and should be seen as opportunities. And remember how deeply immersed in and influenced by violence we all are – I liken it to being in a swimming pool surrounded by water. We don’t even think about being wet; but when we pull ourselves out of the water (violence) even for a minute, we suddenly realize just how wet we were/are and want to dry off and sit in the sun. Nonviolence offers that warmth and relief. Keep practicing.

Nonviolence is the weapon of the strong.  It takes a lot of practice, deep understanding, commitment, courage, strategy, and planning.  I know it’s difficult.

I’m so glad you’re on the path.

You might enjoy learning more about Nonviolence in our ongoing Nonviolence Guide.

Thank you for all that you do!

All one,

:) m