Activism Must be Based on Truth

During the days following the presidential election, I heard numerous people express how glad they were the election season was over. They were tired of the negative and misleading political ads, and of the 24-hour news channels that aired the continual chatter of political pundits offering their skewed version of the candidates.

All the media coverage that was given to the political candidates and related issues is a form of activism. In our stormy political culture, we tend to like activism as long as we agree with its cause. When it runs counter to our views, we usually resent its message and wonder what the world is coming to.

In my book The Spiritual Power of Nonviolence, I point out that a world without war would not be a world without conflict. Rather, it would be a world where humanity has learned to deal with conflict using effective strategies of nonviolence. Such strategies include media distribution and political free speech of all types.

If we look at the political speech from this past election, we see that certain activism failed to achieve its goals. What we should be asking ourselves is, “Why did much of the activism which came from political action organizations supporting Republican candidates, fail?”

The answer lies in Mahatma Gandhi’s definition of satyagraha, which was Gandhi’s term for active nonviolence.

The word satyagraha begins with the Sanskrit syllable “Sat” which refers to truth. What is implied by satyagraha is that activism must be grounded in truth if it is going to succeed. The problem with the activism of many Tea Party politicians and political commentators is that the views they were advocating were often not based on truth.

Todd Akin was the Republican senatorial candidate running against Democrat Claire McCaskill in Missouri. Last August, Akin claimed that, if a rape was “legitimate,” a woman’s bodily system would “shut down,” preventing pregnancy. In Indiana, Democrat Joe Donnelly defeated Republican Richard Mourdock after Mourdock asserted that a pregnancy resulting from rape was “intended by God.”

Even more out of touch was Judge Tom Head of Lubbock, Texas who said President Obama would send United Nations troops to Texas if re-elected. Ironically, he used this claim to support his rationale for a tax hike to pay for more deputies and attorneys! The voting public does not view such claims as based on truth.

What the Republican party needs to rebuild itself are candidates, media commentators and political action leaders that are better educated and informed.

In a world without war, we are going to see more activism, not less, and the activism will undoubtedly continue to be intense. Nonviolent activism is not passive. It is actually a form of fighting, and it is by far a more honorable way to fight than by settling our disputes with guns and bullets. But to succeed, activism must be grounded in reality, not in fabricated beliefs.

———————

George Wolfe is the Coordinator of Outreach Programs for the Ball State University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies. He is also a trained mediator and the author of The Spiritual Power of Nonviolence: Interfaith Understanding for a Future Without War.

Will the light overcome the darkness?

–previously published in The Star Press.

The fall season is the time of year when the days become shorter and the nights longer. It is as if the light of day and the darkness of the night are engaged in an unending battle. During the fall, as the nights lengthen, it appears the darkness is winning.

Philosophers of the ancient world, the Persian prophet Zoroaster being one example, used light verses darkness as an analogy for the struggles that plague humanity.

Light became a metaphor for wisdom and knowledge, whereas darkness symbolized ignorance and delusion. To walk in darkness was to lose one’s way. To this day, the great religions of the world make the same associations. “God is light in whom there is no darkness” says the 1st Epistle of the apostle John. The Qur’an, which avoids using metaphors to explain God, makes one exception when it says: “God is the light of the heavens and the earth.”

In addition, the word light is found within the term enlightenment which in the West, refers to an age (ca. 1750 to 1800) when reason was valued over blind faith. In today’s political climate, one could add to blind faith the unwillingness of congressional leaders to compromise their blind partisan ideologies.

As if to help the light emerge victorious over the darkness in this allegorical cosmic battle, three of the major world religions that evolved in the northern hemisphere celebrate festivals of light.

These holidays occur at slightly different times during the months of November and December. Hindus observe Diwali, those of the Jewish faith commemorate Hanukkah, and Christians celebrate Christmas.

In doing so, each of these traditions teach us something about the light we seek. And we must not leave out those who look to science to guide humanity. Astronomers have determined the universe was dark for the first 400 million years after the Big Bang. Yet somehow, out of that primordial creation event, and subsequently through biological evolution and the growth of human consciousness, light eventually asserted itself.

The lawlessness of the jungle and the survival of the fittest submitted to the rule of law, moral order and social justice.

On Dec. 14, the last day of school before the Christmas holiday break, a great darkness descended upon our nation. A young man, filled with societal hate and no doubt in mental turmoil, methodically planned and used an assault weapon to murder 20 kindergarten and first-grade students, the principal, school psychologist, and four teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He then committed suicide, suggesting that this misguided 20-year-old had no awareness of a Higher Power that would hold him accountable for his actions after he died.

The town of Newtown, Conn., and indeed our entire country, will never be the same.

What actions will we now take to avert such tragedies?

Will we embrace the light of wisdom and reenact past legislation that bans military-style assault weapons, re-institutes background checks and a waiting period before someone can purchase a gun?

Will we strengthen mental health and counseling programs in our communities? Will we institute workshops and courses in our schools that teach civil communication, active nonviolence and conflict resolution?

Or will we ignore the root causes of extreme anger in our society, continue to foster a culture of violence and allow anyone who chooses, to arm themselves with assault rifles?

It is time we take decisive action against gun violence. Failing to act will let the darkness win.

George Wolfe is the coordinator of outreach programs for the Ball State University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies. He is also a trained mediator and the author of “The Spiritual Power of Nonviolence: Interfaith Understanding for a Future Without War.”

Let’s Practice Civil Discourse Every Day! by George Wolfe

Mediation is a process that can be used to resolve disputes between parties in conflict. The approach stipulates certain ground rules that can also be applied to our daily conversations with friends, colleagues, rivals and strangers. If these simple rules are observed and practiced when we engage in interfaith dialog, personal conversation and group discussion, rhetoric that can lead to misunderstanding and conflict is minimized. Our problem-solving efforts will then be far more constructive, increasing our chances of finding common ground. What follows is a list of mediation ground rules that I have modified to fit the forums of personal and public discourse.

1. Focus the discussion on the issues, not on the people involved in the discussion. Critique the idea or issue without attacking the person or individuals arguing for or against the issue.
2. Refrain from judging another person’s motives for supporting or criticizing an idea. Evaluate the issue or behavior, not the person.
3. Refrain from name-calling. Such language does not contribute to constructive discussion.
4. Abstain from using offensive language and metaphors. You are much less likely to persuade your opponents and their supporters if you offend them.
5. Avoid exaggerated statements or accusations in the form of broad simplistic generalizations when addressing the issues. Such statements are usually inaccurate and come back to haunt the person making them. Remember the Chinese proverb: “Words of exaggeration are not words of truth.”
6. Refrain from stereotyping. Avoid such statements as, “ All liberals are. . .” or “All conservatives are. . .” or “All ____________(you fill in the blank) are. . . ,”  etc. There are invariably a variety of nuanced opinions within virtually all political, social, ethnic and religious groups.
7. In addition to criticism, offer constructive alternatives. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Being a peace-builder takes practice. Review this list of ground rules every morning, then consciously apply them to your interaction with friends, colleagues, or anyone with whom you might have the opportunity to interact. All it takes is consistent practice. You’ll soon find your life will have fewer frustrations, and your success rate at averting and resolving conflicts will increase substantially!

George Wolfe is Chair of the Muncie Interfaith Fellowship Cooperation Circle. He also serves as Coordinator of Outreach Programs for Ball State University’s Center for Peace and Conflict Studies, is a trained mediator, and is the author of The Spiritual Power of Nonviolence: Interfaith Understanding for a Future Without War.

Prof Wolfe is URI in North America contact at Muncie Interfaith Fellowship in Indiana, a URI CC.  Here is the link to his 15 minute lecture, which is both thoughtful and hopeful – well worth watching.

And here is a link to the text of the lecture in case you might want to quote or follow along.

Science, DNA and Revelation
by George Wolfe of URI CC Muncie Interfaith Fellowship

We live in an age when DNA analysis is used in many high-profile court cases. I never imagined it could help solve a mystery within my own family.

This past winter my brother had his DNA analyzed. The analysis triggered a series of astonishing revelations about our family history.

My father, Harold George Wolfe (1897-1987), was a public school principal for most of his career. He always said he was of German ancestry. His father’s family emigrated from the Rhineland area in the northern part of France known as Alsace Loraine. Their journey to the United States occurred years before he was born. His family settled in Varysburg, New York where they attended the United Methodist Church.

It turns out my brother’s DNA reveals that our predominate line of ancestry on our father’s side of the family is not German but Ashkenazi, which is a European Jewish population that resided in the Rhineland. Based on an interview with my father that I recorded in 1977, as well as other memories of conversations, it appears he took steps to conceal his Jewish heritage.

Our last name, Wolfe, was originally spelled W-O-L-F. My dad claimed the addition of the “e” to the name resulted from a mistake on a copy of his birth certificate. He said he liked the addition of the “e” so he chose not to correct it. Now that I know my brother’s DNA analysis, I can’t help but question his explanation. Wolf without the “e” added is a common Jewish spelling, as is also the spelling W-O-L-F-F. Wolfe with the “e” is characteristically English, Irish or German.

This change in spelling occurred sometime between 1920 and 1930. We know this because my father’s name was spelled W-O-L-F on his military discharge papers from Paris Island where he served in the marines, and on his bachelor’s degree diploma from Cornell University in 1920. His Master’s degree diploma from the University of Rochester in 1930 listed his name as W-O-L-F-E. This addition of the “e” occurred at a time when there was rising anti-Semitism in Germany and the United States.

In addition, my brother Walter, who was born in Corry, Pennsylvania in 1937 at a time when Jews in Europe were being condemned to concentration camps, was not circumcised. Since it was customary back then to circumcise male babies regardless of their religious or ethnic background, we always wondered why my brother was left uncircumcised. We now believe it was due to my father’s continued efforts to hide our Jewish heritage.

My father’s mother was indeed German. This Jewish line of ancestry, now confirmed through DNA analysis, comes from my paternal grandfather’s side of the family.  Given that Dad lived through the anti-Semitism of the 1920s and 30s, we believe we have solved the mystery of why he rarely spoke about his family history.

Residing in the United States well before WWI, my father’s situation was not one of having to survive Nazi persecution. Yet, certainly part of the reason he concealed his Jewish heritage was to elude the scourge of anti-Semitism, as well as hate groups in the U.S. like the Ku Klux Klan. I suspect he was also trying to protect my brother should fascism ever reach the shores of America.

Knowing my father’s reputation as a supportive and well-respected school administrator, I believe his awareness of his Jewish roots sensitized him to the evils of discrimination. In his own private way as an educator, he combated ethnic prejudice by treating his students and faculty colleagues with fairness and equality.

This was his leadership style. I know this from teachers who served under him and spoke fondly of him as a school of administrator. His total rejection of his Jewish ancestry certainly went too far, but we can understand this denial given the rise of fascism in Europe.

In our country today, there are people who are reluctant to be open about their religion or their ancestry. Let us strive to create a world where no one will ever feel the need to conceal their ethnic or religious heritage.

George Wolfe is the Chair of the Muncie Interfaith Fellowship which is a cooperation circle in the United Religions Initiative. He is also a trained mediator and the Coordinator of Outreach Programs for the Ball State University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies.

 Why They Hate US: Reasons We Do Not Want to Hear

by

George Wolfe

Every time there is a terrorist attack directed at the United States, articles appear attempting to answer the question: “Why do they hate us?” The answers usually focus on the resentment of U.S. political, economic and military power. The terrorists hate us, so the pundits claim, because they envy our wealth, our military dominance, or our freedom.

I assert that these reasons do not constitute the root cause of their hatred. It is not our power, our freedoms or our political system terrorists resent. They resent our intrusive secular values and the numerous civilian casualties the U.S. has inflicted on Islamic countries during our “War on Terror.”

The infusion of Western multinational corporations into Eastern and Middle Eastern countries has had a disrupting cultural impact. This is most blatantly expressed today through the media, the clash of religious conservatism with liberal social values, and the rejection by Islamic nations of radical feminism, permissiveness, and the pursuit of happiness through material excess.

In the 1980s, Iranian religious leader Ayatollah Khomeini called the United States the “Great Satan,” a label meant to condemn Western secular values. Americans, however, generally misunderstand this expression. In mystical religious traditions, Satan signifies that force in human life that draws the senses outward into the physical world and away from the inner spiritual life. This distraction deceives one into believing that lasting happiness can be found in materialism and the gratification of sexual desires. Khomeini’s “Great Satan” metaphor has its equivalent reference in the biblical book of Revelation which uses the phrase “Babylon the Great” to refer to a materialistic and hedonistic empire (Rev. Ch. 18). From the perspective of fundamentalist Muslims, as well as conservative Christians and other religious groups, Americans and Europeans have been guilty of cultivating a materialistic, sex-crazed culture.

Many of us in the West fail to realize how some countries see the worldwide web as an intrusive instrument of cultural imperialism. Western multinational corporations have been insensitive to the cultural values of Islamic countries, especially when using provocative images in commercial advertising and on Internet websites.

The laws labor unions fought hard for in the U.S. and Europe in the mid-twentieth century are ignored by U.S. corporations in countries where labor is cheap, resulting in abusing labor practices, sweatshops, dangerous working conditions, child labor and long work hours.

Globalization has peace-building potential, but it must not be an excuse for exploitation.

In addition, our drone warfare has resulted in the killing of innocent civilians, many of whom have been women and children. This is especially devastating in poor countries where there is no social safety net and one’s family is the only protection against economic hardship, homelessness and insolvency. It is no coincidence that Al-Qaeda strongholds are found in countries with pervasive poverty.

The more we define our power in terms of economic influence and military might, the more we deceive ourselves into a false sense of security. Our military strength has made us vulnerable to the deep-seated motivations of revenge, and our affluence has resulted in a narcissistic culture obsessed with materialism.

With freedom and affluence comes responsibility – the responsibility to share our wealth, invest ethically in developing countries, honor the traditions of other cultures, and respect human life.

Therein lies the means to diffuse hatred.

George Wolfe is the Coordinator of Outreach Programs for the Ball State University Center for Peace and Conflict Studies and the chair of the Muncie Interfaith Fellowship which is a cooperation circle in the United Religions Initiative. He is also a trained mediator and the author of The Spiritual Power of Nonviolence: Interfaith Understanding for a Future Without War.