There are few subjects more controversial than how we should respond to wrongdoing, and the family is the ideal setting to use as the base for a discussion on the complexities of discipline. Some of the thoughts and ideas expressed in chapter six of Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness may appear strange and ‘way out’ to some people and yet they have been around for thousands of years. They only seem strange because our main cultural response to wrongdoing is what Walter Wink referred to as ‘redemptive violence.’ But the nonviolence compass can lead us to many more effective methods to use.

In regard to parenting, the word ‘discipline’ means: To teach, assist and guide a child’s development towards self-control.

  Everyone has an opinion on how children should be disciplined, and can generally be divided into two main camps; those who believe parents should have the right to smack their children and those who are opposed to the use of physical punishment. I want to make my position on this very clear. I believe that parents who neglect to firmly discipline a child put the emotional and moral development of the child at risk, and make it more difficult for that child to form healthy relationships as an adult. Firm discipline is a necessary part of responsible parenting and the failure to meet that responsibility should be classed as a form of child abuse. However, I also want to make it very clear that although punishment remains an option, the negative effects of using it has led me to not only be against physical punishment, but against the use of punishment as a means of discipline.

  To many people that may seem an extraordinary contradiction. How can strict discipline be maintained without punishment? Does that mean children should be allowed to do anything and not be corrected at all? Obviously my strong belief in the need for strict discipline rules out such permissiveness and is backed up by the research indicating that each child should go through a stage in life when rules are obeyed simply because they are the rules, and authority figures be respected simply because they are in positions of authority. That doesn’t happen by letting kids do whatever they want to do.

  Some of the many tools available to help parents discipline children are:

• Grounded love.
• Manners.
• Example.
• Centring.
• Fairness and safety rule-making guidelines.
• Guidelines of creative conflict.
• Consensus.
• Truth-seeking debates rather than adversarial debates.
• Knowing the difference between punishment and consequences.
• The restorative action process.
• Voluntary punishment.
• Restorative consequences.
• Social contracts (cooperation\noncooperation.
• The Reality questions.

  The most effective way for people, including children, to become responsible, interdependent individuals is by the example of others and being held accountable for their actions. Anyone can use these tools to establish peace and harmony in the home and workplace. An additional tool for large groups of people is called Open Space Technology.

Composite of ideas from Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness by Bob Myers. 
 

Equality, nonviolence and love equals spirituality-without-religion when nonviolence expresses love that is  grounded in equality.

Oneness and equality is fundamental to religions such as Christianity, Buddhism, Islam and Ba-hai but when that fundamental is not reflected in the rituals, ceremonies and general culture of those religions, a distinction can be made between spirituality and religion. I identify spirituality as the individual awareness of the oneness and equality of all people and I view religion as a structure of beliefs, values, rituals, ceremonies and customs that the individual adheres to because of the accident of birth or by choice.

Separating the two gives us the freedom to commit to the fundamental of oneness and equality and the freedom of experimenting with new ways of expressing that commitment, guided by the principle of nonviolence. A commitment to basing our actions on the fundamental of oneness and equality leads naturally to nonviolence and therefore to both internal and external peace.

I believe this is what John Lennon meant in his song Imagine, when he referred to people living without religion. He wanted people to be free to express their belief in, and commitment to, the oneness and equality of all people in whatever way seems right to them in their relationships with others. Sadly, religious beliefs sometimes become a prison preventing people from expressing the connection they feel towards others; and this is especially sad when those others are members of a religion that shares the same fundamental.

Bob Myers.

I don’t know the meaning of life but I do know what gives life meaning.
Life has meaning when you have a reason for getting out of bed in the morning. Having a purpose or goal to achieve makes sense of what we do, even if it’s just going to the trouble of getting out of bed. It doesn’t matter what the purpose is; it might be to weed the garden or wash the car. It could be to do something to make someone happy.

Many millions of people, all over the world, struggle to make sense of life and only find the strength to face each day’s problems through their faith in God. For many people, the goal is to earn a place in heaven through good deeds done each day. However, close relationships with other people probably give most people a purpose in life and generates many short term goals to make each day interesting.
It’s also true that without a purpose or goal to achieve, nothing makes sense. We have nothing to guide our actions and no motivation to do anything. We need four things to be motivated to do anything:

• We need the opportunity to do it.
• We need the knowledge and skills to do it.
• We need to believe we can do it (encouragement);
• But most of all, we must want to do it, for whatever reason.

In his book The Six Stages of Faith, James Fowler referred to the important part bumper stickers play in giving life meaning. Bumper stickers are  a public display of the beliefs and values that guide our behaviour and help us to make sense of the world. ‘Jesus loves me’ is a reassuring bumper sticker giving strength and a sense of security to many lonely people. ‘Ban the bomb’ can symbolize a dedication to peacemaking and a focus for activists. The ‘Walk the talk’ bumper sticker is a constant, challenging reminder to act the way we expect other people to act and to do what we say we are going to do. It’s also a reminder that as adults we are role models for every child who witnesses what we do. So having that sort of bumper sticker can provide an important purpose for life in general.

But simply following a belief and having a purpose doesn’t guarantee we will have a long, trouble-free life, or that we will not be a problem for other people. A negative purpose can give life the same level of meaning as a positive purpose. Terrorists and suicide bombers have a purpose that gives life meaning and they can be very happy as they fulfill their mission to destroy the lives of other people.
When I was about 19 my boss at the time gave me two bits of advice. One was to always have a goal you really want to achieve and you will be amazed how many opportunities life presents for moving closer to it. And you will even create opportunities when there appears to be none. His second bit of advice was that ‘you can only freewheel downhill.’ By that he meant that people who want to achieve something have to be prepared to put a lot of effort into it.

I am fortunate in having many bumper stickers and positive relationships to give my life meaning but my fundamental, encompassing belief is that equality is the true nature of relationships. That challenges me every day to counter the effects of the culture of inequality that prevails in our society by aiming to walk in the spirit of equality and practice nonviolence. Every day becomes a learning experience and if I were to design a bumper sticker it would be something like, ‘Dissolve violence by aiming for equality.’

Bob Myers. 

Many people argue that violence is a natural reaction to threats. This means we are born with that protective reaction and therefore we are naturally violent. Since I partly agree with this, I am willing to concede that point but add that we are also born illiterate.
Professor Colman McCarthy of Maryland USA asked his students to write a paper along those lines and he described the response from one student as “a masterpiece of brevity and breadth.” It consisted of just 13 words:

“Why are we violent but not illiterate? Because we are taught to read.”

Does this mean our society is becoming more violent because we teach our kids to be violent? No. The student was pointing out that just as each child is born with the potential to learn to read and write, and gain all the benefits of literacy, each child is born with the potential to learn the ways of nonviolence, and gain all the benefits attached. Violent behaviour comes from not teaching our kids to be nonviolent. That may seem to be a double negative but it isn’t. Most people teach kids to be ‘not violent,’ which is very different to teaching kids to be nonviolent. Teaching kids to be ‘not violent’ may achieve some level of ‘peace’ but it actually perpetuates violence.

The main way most of us teach children to be ‘not violent’ is through the use of punishment or the threat of punishment , which means the natural violent reaction is suppressed by the fear of punishment. Take the fear of punishment away by lowering the chance of being caught or raising the potential reward to be gained and a child is more likely to use violence.

Nonviolence is difficult to define because it is not just the absence of violence. It is the opposite of violence; the antidote of violence. It is an attitude towards other people and to ‘rules of behaviour.’ Nonviolence defies violence and deprives it of any victory. Nonviolence disarms an aggressor without using violence. Nonviolent discipline can be aggressively confrontational, and even take a zero tolerance stand in holding people accountable for their violent behaviour, without resorting to any kind of punishment. Imposing a punishment often sets up a cycle of revenge that prevents any worthwhile lesson being learned. The real consequence of behaviour is the most effective way people learn what acceptable and responsible behaviour is.  

One of the great advantages of nonviolent discipline in the home, school or workplace is the distinction it makes between punishment and consequences, allowing ‘restorative action’ to be taken instead of imposing punishment. This is not just spin because ‘taking restorative action’ and ‘imposing a punishment’ are mutually exclusive opposites. All of us are capable of thinking in both ways, and we do sometimes take restorative action depending on the circumstances of a situation, but we cannot think in both ways at the same time. 

The above could explain why school discipline programs based on restorative practices, such as the Responsible Thinking Classes, are not as effective as they could be. Maybe some of those running the programs are caught up by our cultural addiction to punishment. That could also be the reason why restorative programs in the criminal justice system don’t always produce excellent results. A punishment-minded person cannot effectively operate a program designed to be run by a restorative-minded person.

Parents can introduce kids to the ways of nonviolence in the very first year of a child’s life. School children can be taught the art of nonviolence from day one. And it's never too late to start. It won’t always work in every situation because few parents or teachers have the nonviolence training to recognise how their own attitudes are effected by the institutional, structural and social violence built into the culture we live in. Once we become aware of our own attitude we can help children to live nonviolently in a violent world, and change it.

Bob Myers.

The importance of peace of mind became obvious to me during the years I spent working with dysfunctional families, involving all sorts of conflict and violence against people and property. The unhappiness and angst in these relationships motivated me to find a starting point that anyone could use to help people gain peace of mind; one that would fit in with any religion. Studying people in conflict made me aware that peace of mind doesn’t mean being free of problems and conflicts because these are just part of life’s journey. So at first it didn’t seem like rocket science; all anyone needs is the knowledge and the skills to handle whatever happens. However, life is never that simple. Knowledge and skills are reasonably easy to pick up but everyone is different so the problem is ‘what knowledge and what skills will be right for every person?’

All journeys have a starting point and a destination, with a road between the two. All adults already have a great deal of experience in dealing with problems and conflict and the ability to learn more along the way. That is for the starting point for the rest of our journey. Happiness is the goal that we all seek, although some people may refer to it as ‘peace of mind’ or ‘having a sense of security.’ To complete the plan we need to choose a path to the destination and pack a compass to keep us on track when we can’t see our way forward.

Fortunately, nature has installed a belief deep within all of us that will take us to that destination but since we have freedom of choice, it’s up to us whether we go that way. The compass that comes with that choice will show us the way through, over, or around problems and conflicts, and help us to avoid creating new obstacles. However, it only works if we practice using the many tools that come with it. ‘The equality of all people’ is the name of the road to peace of mind, and ‘nonviolence’ is the name of the compass that keeps us on the road, or shows us the way back to the road if we wander off it.

I began consciously using the tools of nonviolence as an honorary probation officer, and managing a youth centre, where many opportunities arose to help angry youths and adults resolve disputes. But the big test came as the supervisor of a non-government residential facility for teenagers who, for various reasons, were labelled ‘homeless’ and/or ‘uncontrollable.’ The young people in our care constantly tested and questioned society’s values, beliefs and rules, and for what seemed like a long, stressful time I went along with the general community’s expectation that the staff of the facility should control these young people. The reality was that it was often a ‘them and us’ power struggle that no one really won, partly because we represented the social system that had failed to meet the needs of the residents, and then put the blame on them.

Anyone who looks back can probably see a pattern in their life but I believe the experience of working with the residents, the parents of residents, and the staff of the facility strengthened a subconscious belief I already held that ‘the equality of all people’ is the base for resolving relationship problems. The equality of people is what I now try to ground my thinking in, because I can see how it has strengthened and guided me through some stressful times. I can also see how much strife I got into, and how much strife I caused, when I failed to act in accordance with that belief.

Most people intuitively know we are all equal, and this is why being made feel inferior is so stressful.  The intuitive sense of equality persists in spite of the huge differences in wealth, power, abilities, knowledge and health between people in the social systems we created, and that we may well pass on to our children.

We don’t usually think of people as being part of nature, probably because we inherited age-old beliefs and traditions that portray us as constantly fighting against nature. In recent years our awareness of climate change, and the threat it poses for life on earth, makes it obvious that we need to cooperate with nature if we and the planet are to survive. As part of nature, humans are subject to the natural law but, over time, we came to believe we are superior to all creation and set up social systems to control and exploit the earth to meet our needs. However, to nature we are still all of equal value. The rain falls on everyone and the sun shines on everyone. A tsunami sweeps rich and poor from the beach, and an earthquake takes no notice of a person’s social status. Nature doesn’t make one person more important than another, people developed social systems, so it was people who decided:

• who is important and who isn’t;
• what is important and what isn’t;
• who has power over others;
• and how people should behave.

Accepting that people are part of nature leads to the thought that, If I were in harmony with nature, I would not only be in harmony with the environment and other people, I would be in harmony with me, and to be in harmony with oneself is to have peace of mind. Fortunately for us, peace of mind doesn’t only come when our relationships are equal. If it did, we would probably never have peace of mind, or peace would be a fleeting experience, because of all the inequalities, disputes and conflicts in daily life. We can have peace of mind amongst all of that by actively responding to inequalities, disputes and conflicts in a nonviolent way. And as we persist in experimenting with creative ways to use the tools of nonviolence, we are already in harmony with nature. The magic of our compass is that equality, nonviolence and peace of mind are names attached to the many faces of the same thing.  

Although we live in a violent world, most of us believe we are nonviolent and seldom experience violence. When asked to give examples of violence, most people refer to the physical harm caused by bashings, guns, knives and bottles but the great majority of violence between people in everyday life is emotional violence, delivered personally or increasingly via cyberspace: hurtful rumours, putdowns, insults, and the like. The effects of emotional violence can be devastating and has resulted in suicide.

One definition of violence is: ‘any verbal, nonverbal, emotional or physical behaviour that dominates, divides, diminishes or destroys ourselves, or others’ (From Violence to Wholeness). All these behaviours harm or weaken relationships, so a shorter definition of violence is ‘any behaviour that harms or weakens relationships.’

Violence can also be just part of a system, such as family, community or nation, if the rules favour one person or group of people at the expense of others. An example of systemic violence in a wealthy economy such as ours would be when the laws ensure that certain groups of people will remain in poverty.

  Competition, domination and inequality.

Most problem relationships, even in families, are affected by one of two things, either competition or domination. A conflict does not become harmful until either competition or domination creeps into it. Both of these cause inequality by putting distance between people. Our culture puts great pressure on us to follow scripts involving competition and domination every day of our life. The urge comes from within us but is made ‘normal’ by:

·         the fear of losing face or being judged as ‘not good enough;’

·         clever advertisers getting us to judge ourselves by our possessions; and

·         the level of competition and violence in our entertainment and socialising.

The pressure from the influence of competition affects how we respond to differences with our loved ones as well as with those we don’t like. Competition is present when we feel a need to win, or to at least save face, and makes it difficult to sort out differences without getting into a harmful conflict or giving in.

 It’s natural to want to achieve. However, what we try to achieve and how we measure success can cause problems. Unfortunately, ‘the need to achieve what I am capable of achieving,’ has become ‘the need to win’ which means to be better than other people. Competition is now so much a part of our culture that it is regarded as part of human nature. Winning has become the main goal in so many things, boosted by the wide-spread belief in the myth that competition is necessary for advancement, development or progress. For people who shun competition and simply give in, life can be very difficult.

Competition is one way but there are other ways that non-competitive people can learn about. Cooperative achievement is one alternative to competition, consensus and a method inspired by Gandhi called truth-seeking are also available. Open Space Technology is yet another alternative. Alternatives like these have been around for a long time and work very well but are not widely taught. However, if we are to solve the problems and conflicts unique to this century, the alternatives to our adversarial ways need to become part of the culture our children and grandchildren live by.

That’s why parenting is an important part of discussions about conflict resolution. It’s said that the only certainties in life are taxes and death, but there are two more.

• Family life is where we mainly learn how to resolve conflict because healthy conflict occurs in all families.
• Healthy conflict can become destructive when we follow the urge to win, or the urge to dominate (control or punish).