by admin on May 19, 2011
by Kelly Byquist
I have gained a better perspective of the world this quarter. I have learned that the media can hide the truth, that people are willing to sacrifice their lives for what they believe in, and that hope can rise from a nation filled with anger and despair. Every day we read stories online and in newspapers about natural disasters, civil wars, rebellions, shootings, raids, and the like. These stories do not give us a feeling of comfort, confidence, courage or morality. Instead they fill us with fear and anxiety, and maybe even dread and depression. Despite these types of stories, there is good occurring in our world each day, and many newspapers do make it a point to share these stories with the public.
It is great to be aware of what’s happening in the world; in fact, you will be regarded as knowledgeable and intellectual if you read newspapers. What you don’t want to do is read the news and get bogged down by what it says. If you do this, you will be viewed as a pessimist, and no one wants to be viewed in that light.
Albert Einstein once said, “You cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it,” and he is very right. There is no way for problems to be fixed if the solutions are at the same level as the problems themselves. In order to find answers one must rise in consciousness, to a higher vision, and view the problems from a grander perspective. Now, if we take all of the tumultuous stories that we read in the newspaper and try to find a solution from the same basis as the problem, a solution will never be found.
We all want to make a difference in the world. We want to be a problem-solver, instigate change, and we may even want to turn our entire career paths around to fight for something we believe in. While many people want to do something, many do not know how or where to begin. Some may think they’re insignificant in the world and are therefore incapable of helping, and some do not know how to contribute any farther than raising awareness. Well, this quarter I’ve learned that every single person has the opportunity every day to contribute in a positive way to issues facing our world. There really is, once you know how, a way for every single person to spur change and make a difference in the world.
The first thing to know is that change starts with the individual; change starts with you. It does not come from external forces or powerful weapons. Change comes from changing yourself and your life. Once you change yourself and your life, your family-life will change, from there your town will change, eventually your state will change, and then your nation, and at some point, the world. An unknown author says it best, “When I was a young man, I wanted to change the world. I found it was difficult to change the world, so I tried to change my nation. When I found I couldn’t change the nation, I began to focus on my town. I couldn’t change the town and as an older man, I tried to change my family. Now, as an old man, I realize the only thing I can change is myself, and suddenly I realize that if long ago I had changed myself, I could have made an impact on my family. My family and I could have made an impact on our town. Their impact could have changed the nation and I could indeed have changed the world.”
I also enjoy this quote by William Saroyan, which is found in his novel The Human Comedy, when a young boy at war during WWII writes home to his family, “I do not recognize any enemy which is human, for no human being can be my enemy. Whoever he is, he is my friend. My quarrel is not with him, but with that unfortunate part of him which I seek to destroy in myself first” (167). Change starts from altering and challenging our own experiences, which will eventually change the world.
“But how do you change your present situation?” you may ask. Well, it is by tackling the issues that the world is facing. The challenges that the world is facing may come in different forms than what may be presented to you, but they stem from the same train of thought. For instance, if I find myself feeling enslaved by the education system I am in, I am meeting a similar dilemma as when someone feels enslaved by his/her country’s government and political leaders. Although the people in these two scenarios are experiencing completely different situations, the fact remains that both are feeling a sense of enslavement from something that seems outside of their control.
Next comes the acknowledgment of the power of thought. Our thought is very powerful, and every time we overcome a challenge, we prove its validity not only for ourselves and our own lives, but for all of mankind. So if the things I experience throughout my life are similar to the challenges facing others around the world, as I see and find a solution to my problem I will involuntarily be affecting the world and how it deals with the given issue. “So how do we change the world?” you ask. You live it, and prove what is good and right and true, while also knowing that your thoughts are blessing both you and all of mankind. It is in our best interest to master the challenges that we face, because in doing so, we will find the solutions to the bigger issues facing the world.
- TAGS:
- campus
- COMMENTS:
- 11
by admin on May 18, 2011
by Hillary Austin
Seven Euphrates team members trekked to Newark, NJ, this past weekend to participate in the Newark Peace Education Summit: three days that brought together over 74 speakers, including Nobel Laureates Shirin Ebadi, Jody Williams, and His Holiness the Dalai Lama! With four of us even willing to drive there (18 hours one-way for world peace? Seems reasonable…) to attend, the Euphrates team really stepped up. We were initially attracted by how similar in principle the Newark Summit seemed to our own summit [“Our World Beyond 9/11,” coming this Fall], and were psyched to scope it out and experience their take on peace.
With the intention to “examine and discuss best practices for fostering peace and implementing those best practices, particularly in the field of education,” the Newark Summit promised a range of individuals organized into widening circles of peace: first, within; then, in the home; in education; in the community; in the world; and finally, with the planet. It didn’t disappoint…
—-
Getting There in the Right Frame of Mind
I, for one, traveled (by car!) from Illinois to Newark with three Principia students, drawn mainly by the promise of hearing HH the Dalai Lama speak and by the summit’s similarity to the Euphrates’ principles and approach. I was most grateful for the portions of the summit that reinforced the breaking of the myth that we must choose between local and global, between personal and interpersonal, and between inner and outer. It’s clear that the skills of dialogue, listening, inner strength and motivation, and having no ‘Other’ in consciousness are skills that apply no matter how wide or narrow your scope.
For example, Marianne Williamson, spiritual teacher, reminded us that the “happier we are, the more brain power we have to devote to helping others” and Goldie Hawn corroborated, explaining that her organization, MindsUP, knows that children can’t be in a state of learning until they’re come to calm and peace within. In the frenzy of chaotic lives, of violence of all sorts – verbal, physical, structural, systematic* – it’s important to understand that finding that sense of stillness, or at least that sense of “this is who I am and this is my purpose in this moment” has to come first. Beginning each day with the question “What good might I do today?” is Ms. Williamson’s suggestion as to how we best serve humanity.
That said, the outlets for finding peace, and the qualities that help engender it, can take many forms. Fiery Nobel Laureate Jody Williams walked the floor barefoot, in jeans and a T-shirt, and shouted into the microphone: “talk is not a strategy for change! It’s time to get up off our collective ass and do something about it!” Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi, on the other hand, spoke to us in calm and measured Farsi, and her translator’s even voice shared practical, systemic-level suggestions to achieve political and social change. She knows more about American foreign policy and even American civics than, I would guess, does the average American.
Ebadi brought down the house with some of her more hard-hitting advice, which included a simple fact-sharing of the reasons, she feels, why 9/11 occurred. As she walked us through two examples of hypocritical U.S. foreign policy; first arming the Taliban to bring down communism, now fighting them, and propping up Sadaam Hussein in the ‘80s only to take him down in 2003, there were smatterings of applause. Ebadi’s standing ovation came, though, when she outlined three ways to move towards world peace: “1) vote for groups who have not committed these mistakes in the past, 2) that the world will get better when American foreign policy gets better, and 3) that American foreign policy will improve when Americans understand ‘what we’ve done’ in the past.” She finished with a resounding, “Go Vote!”
The ecstatic response reminded me that these summits typically draw like-minded (for the most part) people together, and I wondered how those comments would have struck a different audience. Recently, Euphrates has adopted the idea that in the beginning of a movement, it’s really all about talking to the small percentage of the population that wants to get on board in order to create that critical mass of early adopters. The idea is that this will then effect change on a much wider scale. So, perhaps preaching to the choir in this instance really does make it sing louder, and the ripples of change will slowly spread from Newark. Plus, “in the absence of personal transformation, there is no social transformation,” says Dr. Deepak Chopra.
Wisdom From His Holiness Himself
Amazingly, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, took two full days of his time to give us the gift of his thoughts. His definition of peace, that it is the choice to be non-violent when you have the option of force, is profound. He stated continually that we, as people, are all the same and that this sense of humanity is necessary in getting past war and conflict. For example, he said, “the us / them mentality essentially legitimizes war!” New ideas of interdependence, however, mean that if we destroy “them,” we destroy “us,” as well, and that we had all better be aiming at “the big we” to rise above and beyond the separatist mentality. We were gently chided to remember that while we can condemn actions of others, we may never condemn the actor, but only cherish him as we would cherish ourselves. He explained how the reasons to go to war are literally outdated, and that in this 21st century we must demilitarize, distribute equally, and talk with each other.
Character Education and the Value of Values, but Don’t Say “God,” Whatever You Do
William Rideau, a former death-row inmate turned award-winning journalist, stressed the need for character education. “People need to feel that they are heard, understood, and most of all, that they belong” are the words that wrapped up his portion. This admonition to educators: “do not make learned monsters – help your students become more human”** was quoted by Pedro Noguera, Professor of Education at NYU, as a way to fold in the practice of teaching values to children in addition to facts. As the conversation on moral ethics ensued, it became clear that the panelists wished to separate these values from religiously motivated ones. The Dalai Lama even made sure to talk about secular ethical values, just like Marianne Williamson made sure to tell us she wasn’t talking about “religion” as she spoke of conflict resolution from a spiritual grounding.
I certainly understand the need for inclusivity, and the buzzword nature of “God” and especially, “religion,” but I also hesitate to attack religion in this context. Another idea with which I take issue is to withhold forgiveness until the situation has changed and justice has been served. Shirin Ebadi feels that “if we forgive before justice has been done, we are condoning the perpetrators.” I simply don’t agree. Forgiveness at a personal level helps us to move forward and begin reconstructive work in our hearts. And, how will these magical conditions of justice be brought about without first, a shift in thought? I argue forgiveness not to be an approval of violence or injustice, not to be a fluffy ignorance of the problem, but to be the hardest and most important bridge to cross in the path leading us out of a violent cycle.
And So …
Throughout all of these peace conversations, practical steps did emerge. My favorite was from Joe Green, who is in cahoots with founders of Facebook and other such online social networks, told us about his Causes.org effort to combine the psychology of Facebook (the need for social validation) and the economics of conspicuous consumption (that we’ve gotta show others our disposable income) in order to encourage charitable giving.
To be honest, though, the practicality of the summit was expected to begin at the exits doors. We heard many examples of great NGOs working in their respective communities, saw proofs that there are roomfuls of people who care about this kind of thing, and heard ad-nauseam that we have the power to do something about that which makes us upset. Really, though, the action and the chance to reflect, digest, and decide what to do is occurring right now, in these days after the gathering.
Leaving in the Right Frame of Mind
Overwhelming? Potentially so. Possibly even encouragement to retreat to our issues, the topics within our domain, and not venture out into the vast chasm of challenges facing the world. Amidst the many admonitions to “act” and not to let these ideas stay in the abstract, Daryl Presgraves, there representing the LGBT community, countered with this simple fact: “you don’t have to do everything, just do something.” Equally encouraging was the over-the-top-personality of the Newark “Street Doctor” whose passion was unmistakable as he paced the stage and announced that “when spider webs unite they can tie up a lion!” as a reminder that small actions and little steps do form a greater network with larger impact.
Zaina Salbi’s contribution to the world peace panel brought a hush over the crowd, and, in a quiet way, summed up the vision of these three days in the words of Rumi:
Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,
there is a field. I will meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass,
the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas, language, even the phrase each other
doesn’t make any sense.
Our job, Salbi said, is to make this field as wide as possible.
*Williams brought out the need to expand our sense of the concept of violence in order to find peace. She included structural violence, “the creation of ‘the Other,’ racial injustice, economic injustice, the violence of people, the violence of environment, the violence of a healthcare system people feel ignores them, the violence of a school system unable to challenge or discipline children. The feeling of chaos or of victimhood at the hands of bureaucracy are all myriad expressions of violence.
**The quote in full reads: “Dear Teacher, I am a survivor of a concentration camp. My eyes saw what no man should witness. Gas chambers built by learned engineers, children poisoned by educated physicians; infants killed by trained nurses, women and babies shot and burned by high school and college graduates. / So I am suspicious of education. My request is: help your students become human. Your efforts must never produce learned monsters, skilled psychopaths, educated Eichmann’s. / Reading, writing and arithmetic are important only if they serve to make our children more humane.” – cited by Haim Ginott in his writings.
- COMMENTS:
- 0
by admin on May 10, 2011
By Amber Dahlin
Osama bin Laden’s death has brought about an onslaught of news, from celebrations and suspicion to its implications for the Middle East, the U.S., and the war against al Qaeda. I hope to synthesize some ideas for moving forward and bring to light some of the less mainstream reactions and perspectives.
All over the internet are poignant photos of Americans celebrating after Obama’s announcement last Sunday. They appall and sadden me immensely. The president said in his speech that night that “[bin Laden’s] demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.” Welcoming this event is one thing; but I see no dignity in the uproarious parties that ensued.
When I look at those pictures, I see huge smiles, jumps of joy–what seems to be genuine happiness. Obviously, that happiness goes at least a little beyond the moment of bin Laden’s death (I hope). But therein lies the problem. Perhaps to those celebrating, his death represents reparations made and justice done: finally, the thousands of deaths in New York on 9/11 and around the world since then have been requited! But so much more than that is at hand. Osama bin Laden may not be around anymore, but the fear that his mission incited certainly is. Hatred of the West is not dead, and hatred toward the Middle East and toward Muslims which comes out of the West continues to dump boulders in the road to peace and understanding, continues to fog our view of the world and its global community.
I recognize the increased security of having Osama bin Laden off of the playing field, even if his ever-so-secret asylum in Pakistan put him more in the dugout. In an organization like al-Qaeda, even an absconder seems to have easy access to the controls. But the movement’s loss of its leader doesn’t mean the loss of the movement. In other words, bin Laden’s assassination doesn’t end the problems; it doesn’t end the terror and it doesn’t end the so-called war on terror. Bin Laden’s political execution shouldn’t signify progress. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., often quoted for his honorable discernment, said, “Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth.” Progress comes not from endings but from beginnings and from the actual moving onward.
In an opinion piece for the Christian Science Monitor, NYU’s professor Jonathan Zimmerman called the celebrations anti-American. The U.S. has been in a position of huge global power for much of its history. Remember Spiderman? With great power comes great responsibility. Zimmerman writes that by celebrating we put our guard down. This week’s celebrations have been paralleled to the provocative footage of Palestinians celebrating after 9/11. Granted, Americans are celebrating the death of a militant extremist, not of thousands of civilians, and not to mention that footage of Palestinians from 2001 may in fact have been borrowed from an entirely unrelated event. But imagine how those pictures look to the international community. Is that the message we want to be broadcasting? Or shouldn’t we be showing that dignity by taking the opportunity to acknowledge the deaths that have occurred throughout the past decade…?
In an interview on Democracy Now, author Jeremy Scahill said of the operation, “it shows that President Obama has really continued and doubled down on the Bush administration policy of targeted assassination leading the way in terms of America’s response to al Qaeda and to people it designates as so-called terrorists.” I say instead that peace-building should be leading the way.
Euphrates Institute founder Janessa Gans Wilder reminds us that the majority on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is made up of moderates, which places extremists in the margins. So too in the wars that the U.S. is waging in the Middle East: the more we work off of the middle ground, the further extremism is marginalized. Eliminating those involved in suicide bombings may lessen future violence, but can it ever completely defeat it? Just as killing bin Laden didn’t kill his ideology, killing other so-called terrorists won’t end the violence. Instead, we should build up that middle ground to replace the extremist quest, encouraging a world of tolerance and dialogue instead of global misunderstanding and violence.
What I’ve been reading:
“Bin Laden is Dead, Obama Says” on nytimes.com
“Reactions: Bin Laden’s Death? on english.aljazeera.com
“What’s Next for Al Qaeda?” on cnn.com
John Nichol’s blog “Obama’s Political Coup” on thenation.com
“Osama’s Death a Good Career Move,” “The Death of Osama and the Return to Reality,” and “After Osama: Stop Feeding the Beast” on english.aljazeera.com
Robert Fisk’s May 3 article independent.co.uk
“After Bin Laden” and Jonathan Zimmerman’s opinion piece on csmonitor.com
“Is it Wrong to Celebrate Bin Laden’s Death? on npr.org
And “Obama and Bush: Two Very Different Wars on theatlantic.com
What I’ve been watching:
“10 Years too Long” and “Jeremy Scahill on Killing of Bin Laden” on Democracynow.org
Mona Eltahawy and Hebah Ahmed on the release of bin Laden’s death photos on youtube.com
- TAGS:
- campus
- COMMENTS:
- 1
by admin on May 10, 2011
By Eric Pagett
As the uprisings in the Middle East continue to spread across the Arab countries, I find myself pondering the cause of the “democracy-seekers’” sudden momentum. Protesters in recent months have been reported to claim that the economic status and social dynamics of their country have driven them to challenging the governments that control their lives. While each country is unique and each day holds different promises for each government, as well as for protesters and common civilians, there is one unifying factor across the board. This factor? The desire of the protesters, anti-government regimes, rebels (whatever label you wish to put on them), is to raise the standard of living for the common-man by adopting the qualities and elements of democracy.
Why is democracy so attractive? Is it because it works for the West? That can’t be a good enough reason. As we’ve seen, in ample examples, the Middle East will not be able to sustainably adopt Western methods. The Middle East needs a democracy of its own.
What does this mean? Well, it means much more than elections. As we saw in Iraq in 2005, governmental elections are not the “democracy pill”. Democracy is much more then elections, it’s a culture. Although democratic process at the governmental level is vital to the success of democracy, there also exists a responsibility on the every-day civilians to embrace democratic principles. These principles include rule of law, equal and balanced justice, freedom of expression for all, and most importantly: equal rights. In addition, democracy is dependant upon a unity of the population, one that isn’t present in Middle Eastern countries like Libya.
So, can democracy be adopted in the Middle East, or is this an unachievable ideal? Can country-wide democracy be implemented by the government when the civilians of that country don’t live a democratic life within the confines of their home? A society cannot be truly democratic when a man has the right to beat his wife, women are not allowed to drive a car or be seen in public without their husband, or when it is a transgression against your government to reveal your face or your hair in public as a woman. These practices are not universal across the Arab world, however they are common enough to make note of.
So where does that leave us? Well we certainly can’t allow dictatorships to continue to rule and suppress the citizens of the Middle East. A new democracy must emerge, one that embraces social norms, yet challenges the idea of division and inequality. Each country must find their own methods and practices, but most importantly it must come from the people.
To be clear, I am a citizen of a democratic country, and so I understand that my opinion of democracy and the promise it holds in the Middle East may vary from others views. Although I have traveled to the Middle East, understanding the social dynamics and local context of a country and a religion is a complex task that takes far longer than I’ve been studying this region of the world.
- TAGS:
- campus
- COMMENTS:
- 0
by admin on May 10, 2011
By Vincent Herr
The United States has long been lacking of positive public expression of joy in relations to the Middle East. This last Sunday, however, thousands of people expressed their joy, happiness, and excitement about an event that took place in a country far away from the United States. To me it seems weird and awkward that it takes the killing of a man to bring Americans on the streets to celebrate an event in the Middle Eastern region. Certainly, the joy seems justified given the fact that Osama bin Laden was responsible for the worst terrorist attacks this country has ever experienced. And even more than that: Celebrating Bin Laden’s death is more than just appeasement of a revenge impulse; it is the presumed end of fear.
Looking from a European perspective, I cannot help but notice two things:
- The celebration in the street now show very clearly the fear and feeling of humiliation this man had brought to the American people. In my more or less short lifetime I have never seen so many Americans excited about the passing of an enemy. Bin Laden was more than the evil enemy at the gates, bin Laden was America’s worst fear. The fear of being weak, defenseless, and incapable of striking back. In that sense seeing people cheer about his death tells me more about the deep fear of the American soul than reading history books and studying Sociology. It also helps me to empathize with a people who want to live in freedom and peace. And that are great ideals!
- I also notice disappointment. In some regards Europeans consider America as their big brother, who is always able to help, to protect, and to guide. For decades the Americans have been the moral compass of the Western world, leading our cultures through troubled times, and spreading ideals and icons of freedom, hope, and happiness throughout the world. This last Sunday though the moral compass rejoiced over the death of a man. Certainly, he was a terrorist and the world might even be a better place without his activities, but we are still talking about an individual being killed. The last place I would have expected people to behave so unchristian was the United States. Seriously, you can do better!
What counts now, is how we go on after his event; how you go on after this event! Osama bin Laden’s death might be a step towards a safer world, but it is not a step towards a more peaceful world. True peace is more than just the end of violence. Peace studies researcher Johan Galtung defined a so called positive peace, which is more than the absence of conflict. In my understanding positive peace is a form of living in which cooperation and dialogue dominate relationships and behavior, and not deterrence, specialized military units, and war. At least to me that sounds like a very good idea!
Bin Laden’s death also gives all of us the possibility to rethink the way we perceive the Middle East, Islam, and foreigners in general. The tendency now is, to forget all the other important events around the globe that need our attention, and focus on the possible release of a morbid picture. We should focus on a more substantial topic like the uprisings in the Middle East. For those who have not noticed yet: These are historic times. And many seem to have difficulty understanding what is going on: Muslims are fighting for democracy. That does not sound like our picture of the threatening Middle East.
Let us stop dancing over a man’s death, and start supporting the real events that will make this world a better place!
- TAGS:
- campus
- COMMENTS:
- 0