People tell us we should forgive and forget but forgiveness does not necessarily include ‘forgetting.’ To forgive is to remember an event without resentment or wanting revenge. We can forgive someone even while we are angry and hurt, or wanting our hurting to be recognized.

Some people believe that forgiving means  wrongdoers don’t have to face the consequences of their actions, or have to make amends, but neither of these has to be part of forgiveness. Forgiving is not about letting the wrongdoer off the hook, it’s about freeing yourself from the destructive torment of hate and resentment. Not forgiving can condemn yourself to a life of misery; of being battered in a stormy sea while the wrongdoer goes sailing on in calm waters, happily unaware of the hate that threatens to drag you down.  

It can be quite foolish for a woman in a domestic vioence situation to ‘forget’ this man is likely to react violently in certain circumstances.  It can be foolish because the same thing is likely to happen next time he is faced with the same circumstances. It can be irresponsible because it fails to protect other people from being affected by his actions. It also fails to help the perpetrator, and that can sometimes be the most serious failing because helping the perpetrator face up and make amends helps all those he will have dealings with in the future. 

Forgive and forget’ can contribute to continued violence, to the extent that forgiveness  becomes just another part of the ‘cycle of violence.’ When that happens, forgiveness is still necessary for your own sake, but there should be conditions attached to any reconciliation. This is important in domestic violence. Many people find it difficult to understand why a woman remains in a violent  relationship being beaten by her partner, especially if she has opportunities to leave. However, the emotional and psychological forces involved can make it very difficult for her to leave, especially if the man is well aware of those forces and uses them to trap her in a power game he may actually believe is love. He is partly right in that belief but it is his love of power, rather than love for his partner. 

Women in domestic violence situations can mistake feelings of dependency as love, which can be made more complex by cultural or religious beliefs about a woman’s role in regard to sex and love. When she does muster the courage to leave, her partner may be devastated and crumble into a broken, sobbing mess pleading for forgiveness and making all sorts of promises to be good. This part of the game is an attempt to hook the woman’s compassion and her need to be wanted, which often works. So she forgives him and after a blissful few weeks he slowly returns to his old habits, and the cycle of violence continues.

Reconciliation does not have to be part of forgiveness. Before reconciliation can be successful, the cycle of violence needs to be broken by the abuser successfully completing an attitude-changing course on establishing and maintaining a relationship based on equality. Ideally, the woman should also successfully complete such a course before considering reconciliation. Forgiveness, forgetting and reconciliation are three distinct and independent concepts that may or may not be tied together.

Bob Myers.

We usually think of peace in terms of 'being calm and peaceful.' We may picture something tranquil. However, if that is the true meaning of peace, no human relationship can be peaceful, because conflict is inevitable in human relationships. World peace would also be impossible to achieve. As well as being unachievable, perpetual tranquility could become incredibly boring. Just imagine what life would be like without novelty; or without the unexpected and the bloopers that make The Funniest Home Videos Show so popular. A great deal of humour is based on mistakes, accidents and out of the ordinary events. Disputes between close friends can be hilarious to audiences and, with hindsight, even to the friends involved. Even constant disputes can be positive. Many wonderful friendships, and marriages, have existed between people who argue about almost everything while enjoying a strong spiritual bond.

The word dynamic means lively, vigorous, vibrant or changing. Therefore vibrant peace can include the differences, disputes and conflicts that seem to strengthen some relationships rather than cause harm. Dynamic peace allows a relationship to grow through, or because of, the existence of conflict. The difference is in how the people involved respond to the conflict and what they are centred on as they express their views. People can be very assertive in ‘robust discussions’ and still keep within the guidelines of conflict resolution. They strike a balance, without being aware of it, between their need to belong and their need to assert themselves as individuals.

In 1996 this concept inspired me to register the business name Harmony in Dispute. To me, that captures the fundamental of dynamic peace in human relationships at every level, from the interpersonal to the international. And the guidelines for establishing dynamic peace are the same at all levels too. No matter what age or position we hold in life, we are still struggling to resolve the childhood inner conflict between the need to belong and the need to assert ourselves as individuals. All adults are just grownup children who mainly learned how to resolve conflicts in their family setting and, if that early experience was negative, they may continue to resolve conflict in a negative way. However, it’s never too late to learn to transform conflict into the creative conflict that is part of dynamic peace. 


Bob Myers

It’s true that we are born with the need to be an individual and the conflicting need to belong, not only to belong to other people but to nature and the cosmos (or God). We are also born with incredible potential to satisfy these conflicting needs and enjoy peace and happiness. Each of us arrives in this world with the potential of the full range of human characteristics, traits, virtues or whatever else you want to call them. We have the potential to be whatever it is possible for a human person to be and to maybe surpass the achievements, positive or negative, of any person who has lived before us.  

Which of our characteristics or traits are encouraged or restricted is determined by the culture we are born into, and by the beliefs and values of the people around us, especially our carers and teachers, who experienced the same process.  And although they loved and cared for us, and wanted us to feel we belong in a spiritual way, the social structures of our culture strongly encourage the opposite. Our economic system is competitive and so is the majority of our recreational activity. Our parliamentary and legal systems are adversarial and emphasise the fear of punishment for maintaining social order; these systems only succeed in perpetuating the desire to dominate rather than belong.

To a large extent, our culture encourages the characteristics or traits that cause us to judge our self esteem and self confidence by comparing ourselves against the wealth, possessions, power, knowledge and skills of other people. Winning, status and image is portrayed as giving us importance and happiness. This is false because the balance between the need to belong and the need to be an individual is upset when one person’s gain in self esteem is another person’s loss. All the violence in the world stems from our failure to set up social systems with values and beliefs that maintain a balance between the need to belong and the need for individuality.

There is no happiness without peace; no peace without justice; and no justice without equality. Difference doesn’t disappear with equality. It’s possible to have importance and equality. It’s possible to have authority and equality. By changing what we base our sense of importance on, we can also change our sense of belonging and bring the two into balance.
Bob Myers.

People spend millions of dollars on what often turns out to be a fruitless search for some form of peace and happiness. The sad news is that most just waste their money because they can’t recognise peace and happiness when they find it. So they just pass it by. Part of the reason is because we think of peace as being something calm and tranquil. We don’t think of finding peace in the midst of a heated argument. Nor do we think of finding happiness in a catastrophe if we think of happiness as being a constant state of euphoria. Constant tranquillity and constant euphoria might sound like a promise of heaven but it certainly isn’t life.

The best we seem to be able to manage in life is to experience short periods of tranquillity or feelings of euphoria that pass too quickly. Most are just fleeting moments that become wonderful memories we carry with us for the rest of our lives. However, we can do better. We can have both peace of mind and a sense of harmony as normal parts of daily life, even in the midst of turmoil and sadness, if we are realistic and aim for dynamic peace and happiness.

The word dynamic means vibrant, lively, energetic and surprising. Dynamic peace immediately becomes more appealing and exciting than constant tranquillity over the long term. Therefore, peace and happiness can vary without being lost, because it is really based on something deeper than the fluctuations and disturbances appearing on the surface. Large fluctuations can occur without destroying the overall sense of stability within human relationships when the people involved follow the guidelines that transform conflict into creative conflict. They can learn from nature and experience harmony in disputes.   

Four themes run through the material on the Harmony in Dispute website and I will explore these in future blogs. Using these four themes as the framework was inspired by the work of Brendan McKeague, lead trainer with Pace e Bene Australia.   

1.    Exploring our relationship to other people; to the environment and to the cosmos
         (or God, by whatever name). 
                    Included under this heading are things like identity, self esteem, self confidence and
                     morals, as well as beliefs and values regarding authority (ours and theirs).
2.    The ways in which our culture affects how we relate to each other. 
                    Included under this heading are things like love, sexism, racism, social status,
                    structural and systemic inequality and discrimination.
3.    Where and how to regain spiritual and emotional strength when life gets tough. 
                    Included under this heading are the myriad of ‘self esteem service stations’ people
                    use to lift their spirits, ranging from religious practices to secular activities such as
                    shopping and sport.
4.    Exploring new and better ways to enhance problem solving and conflict resolution skills. 
                    Included under this heading are various sets of conflict resolution methods and
                    guidelines, as well as the teachings of Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Dorothy Day,
                    and various religious figures.  

Bob Myers.

  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. 
 

The popular perception is that street violence is on the rise and media reports reflect the public’s rejection of random acts of violence.  To me, the wording of some reports  add to the confusion young people must experience at a stage of life so crucial to them in their search for identity and their efforts to make sense of society.  The fact is that some violence is not only acceptable but is encouraged by society. Violence is a major factor in our entertainment and many of our heroes gained their hero status through violence. Sometimes it seems that the good guys only win because they are more violent than the bad guys, so the message is that violence is Ok as long as we approve the target.

What could cause kids to use violence so easily? To many adolescents, their peer group is the ‘we’ approving of the target, and that makes certain violent acts not just acceptable but necessary if it forms part of their identity. Members of the group may say things like, ‘This is what we do.’  Any statement about ‘who we are’ makes it an identity thing. But that isn’t unusual because violence plays a major part in our identity too. It is often said that Australia forged its identity through the violence at Gallipoli but the difference there is the bravery involved.  

I believe the main cause of random violence is that living in an adversarial society means that a big part of our identity, or sense of who we are comes from comparing our attributes and achievements  against those of other people, in two ways.  One  is by competing with others to gain knowledge, power, expertise or wealth, so we feel somehow superior to, or more important than, others. But that often requires  incredibly hard work and dedication. Some people find it much easier to gain that sense of superiority or status through domination, which usually involves the use of some form of force or violence to ‘put others down.’

People judging themselves by using either competition or domination find that they are better than some and not as good as others. So, even those who are the best at one thing may sometimes be tempted to use the ‘put down’ method.  All in all, the adversarial base for an identity divides people and is a breeding ground for violence.

Fortunately, there is an alternative to the adversarial base. We also gain part of our identity by how we use our individual differences to help each other achieve and progress, rather similar to what happens in nature. Instead of comparing ourselves against each other, we share our knowledge, skills and wealth. People with this outlook gain their sense of importance to each other rather than against each other. This cooperative base  tends to unite people and, therefore, reduces the level of violence.

We may never be free of our adversarial ways but, if we are really serious about reducing violence, we need to put more effort into changing the messages we pass on to our children in our entertainment and the heroes we create for them. As individuals, we could start by deciding to adopt the attitude that, ‘there is no one in the world more important than me and no one in the world less important than me.’ We are then free from the competition-domination, status-seeking  game and  a whole new way of relating to other people opens before us.

Bob Myers.

Many studies have shown that a strong link exists between inequality and all kinds of social diseases. My latest book, Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness, contains information from some of those studies, including the following:

Based on thirty years of research by leading organisations, various universities and independent social scientists, (The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always do Better) argues that inequality is the root cause of many of society’s ills.

 The authors claim that if an affluent society suffers from one social disease – for example high levels of stress – we can be reasonably sure it will also have high rates of obesity, drug use, mental illness, imprisonment, violent crime, distrust, depression, and illiteracy. And the more unequal the society is, the higher will be the rate of those diseases. Although most of the evidence is centred on income inequality, they make a strong link between perceived social inequality (judging ourselves in relation to other people) and all the stress-related social diseases.

They emphasise that inequality doesn’t just affect the poor of society; the affluent are also adversely affected. To put that in a more positive way, reducing inequality also benefits the affluent members of the society.

Most people think of equality in terms of income but reality makes it very unlikely that there will ever be a society in which everyone has the same income. At the beginning of board games like Monopoly every player has an equal amount of money but it isn’t long before that equality is upset. Some social analysts use equal opportunity to rate a society’s level of equality, which is certainly more practical than rating it by income.

 The studies mentioned above indicate that money is very important for health and happiness only up to a point, but past that point it makes little difference to health or happiness. What then becomes important is the perceived social equality, which is so delicate and at the mercy of a society obsessed with domination and competition in almost every area of daily life. The obsession with domination is seen in our parliamentary system and legal system, both of which set and reflect the adversarial nature of our culture in regard to conflict resolution and differences of opinions.

The obsession with competition is seen in sport, which has become unhealthy because of the high emphasis placed on winning. Instead, the emphasis should be on participation, or on the comradeship of team sport, or on the social side of individual sport. The harm caused by the attitude of ‘winning is everything’ comes out when elite athletes reveal their battles with depression or their thoughts of suicide to escape the pressure to be constantly winning.

Violence begets violence and what these studies are revealing is that socioeconomic inequality is a form of violence built into our normal social systems producing the violence that we call ‘social diseases.’ None of us are to blame for the system we were born into but each of us can do something to change the system. Our politicians are well aware of the studies linking inequality to all the social ills and that the social ills are increasing because the gap is increasing. They are also the ones who can have the most influence on changing the system, simply by adopting policies and making laws that reduce the gap between the advantaged and the disadvantaged.  However, we are the ones who could put pressure on our politicians to base their bid for power on their ability to come up with policies centred on reducing the present socioeconomic gap. And the good news is that it appears we would all benefit from reversing the trend of the past twenty years (according to the Salvation Army reports).

An added bonus is that it would provide the means by which we can hold our politicians accountable. If the gap between the haves and have nots is decreasing under whatever party is in power, we would know their policies are working. If the gap is increasing, we would know their policies are not working and we probably should give the opposition a chance.

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).