Trust is closely related to love and, like love, we may receive trust without doing anything to earn it. And we may trust other people without them doing anything to earn our trust. However, there are few people, if any, we would trust absolutely, and there are few people, if any, who would trust us completely. Some people trust us with a little more, and we trust some others with a little more. That’s how society works.

Sometimes it’s easy to gain more trust and sometimes it’s extremely difficult, depending on the person’s previous experiences of trusting others. Some people will freely give more trust but not if they have ‘been there, done that’ and been betrayed many times. Generally speaking, a small level of trust is freely given as a test and if you want any more, you have to earn it. Some people's experience is such that they find it too threatening to trust anyone with any more than what is necessary to ‘be polite’. For that reason, patience is the first requirement for gaining the trust of anyone, because it may take a long time.

When we receive trust, we receive the power to do great harm to those who trust us and therefore we need to show we deserve their trust. The giving of trust and being worthy of the trust is the link to love; forming a spiritual bond between individuals.

So, patience is the first requirement for gaining trust. Take your time and remind yourself that trust is a gift; not a right.

Use that time to make the other person feel safe with you and from you.  Not just from physical harm but from emotional, psychological and spiritual harm. The easiest and most effective way of achieving that is by using manners. Manners help establish trust and a sense of security. Manners form the base for mutual respect, establishing a culture of equality and cooperation. Manners also lead to other useful tools such as the guidelines for resolving conflict, the guidelines for making rules people are likely to keep to, and the restorative action that does away with tools like manipulation, punishment, revenge and power struggles. All that can come from using basic manners.

Gaining trust means being worthy of trust. That means always being reliable – keep your word – be on time – be open and honest – make an effort to know the needs of people and be available to help – and be sincere in saying why you can’t help with some things. Always be willing to offer an apology when you are wrong and take responsibility for your actions.

To sum up, many people might just trust you, so there is no need to win their trust. You only have to be trustworthy and not let them down. However, if you are trying to win back trust, or win it for the first time, you first need to take it slow, especially if the person you want that trust from has been betrayed many times and finds it difficult to trust anybody.

If there is a problem to be worked out, be mindful of maintaining the dignity of other people, or maybe allow them to maintain dignity by ‘saving face’. Clearly identify what you are concerned about and why you need to share the problem with them. If there is a wrong to be righted, do it through restorative action, while being open and honest, especially about anything you did that contributed to causing the problem. 


Photo: Norlangie Park, N.T. Australia.

A builder told me he didn’t like the attitude of a third-year apprentice on his payroll. That statement didn’t give me any idea of what the issue was and, if that was said to the apprentice, I’m sure he wouldn’t know either. So I asked the builder what he meant. Apparently the apprentice often took the ‘near enough is good enough’ approach to his carpentry and dismissed the builder’s criticisms about quality as ‘being too fussy’. Part of the builder’s annoyance came from knowing the apprentice had the skills and knowledge to do better, if he just took a little more care.

An attitude doesn’t exist in isolation; it is an attitude towards 'something', which can be a particular object or person, or just life in general.  An attitude comes from beliefs, values and feelings and is expressed in actions. The attitude towards something in the immediate situation comes from beliefs, values and feelings about that particular thing, from whatever else is happening in the person’s life right now; and from the person’s deep-seated beliefs, values and feelings about life in general. Attitude is therefore complex. 

It seemed to me that the builder was referring to two attitudes. One was the attitude towards the quality of the work and the other was the attitude towards authority. In the early 1990s, the workplace adopted what was called Competency-based Training. To obtain a job, prospective workers needed a certificate that verified they were competent in that role. To get the certificate they had to be deemed to have the skills, knowledge and attitude to perform certain tasks in a range of circumstances.

Training organisations developed programs that detailed exactly what skills, knowledge and attitudes to pass on so the students got the certificate. It all looked great on paper but there was a major problem.  It’s relatively easy to teach someone of average intelligence the skills and knowledge needed to do a job, but it’s impossible to teach attitude. We can teach about attitude but a person’s attitude develops from within, and attitude determines the quality of what we do, whether the task is to join two pieces of wood or establish a relationship.

Part of the problem is that skills and knowledge are directly related to the task at hand but attitude is a combination of general beliefs, values and feelings. A person can have the skills and knowledge to produce quality results but has a toothache, or is running late for an appointment and can’t be bothered about quality.

Culture  is a major factor in regard to performing a task and may greatly affect the quality of the outcome. A person may have the skills, knowledge, and desire to do something well, but this may not be enough to overcome deeply held beliefs and values pulling them in a different direction. No matter what position a person holds and no matter how competent that person normally is, deeply held beliefs, values and feelings can suddenly surface and affect the quality of work or relationships.  

Broadly speaking, quality outcomes are either motivated by the desire to gain external rewards or internal rewards. The first could be called a strategy for a purpose, and the second could be called a spiritual necessity: material gain versus a sense of satisfaction and pride from a job well done, and this increases self-esteem.

Most people act from either of those motivations, depending on the situation. However, the emphasis in the work situation seems to favour attitude as a strategy for achieving a goal. Being polite and helpful in discussing differences then reflects beliefs and values about money or keeping a job, rather than caring about people or relationships. Being polite and helpful may quickly cease and the people involved can become embroiled in a bitter conflict over a relatively small matter. However, if the politeness and helpfulness was reflecting deeply held beliefs and values about human relationships, there would be little chance of disputes getting out of hand. Winning a point  is then less important than having a good relationship with other workers. 


Photo: Replica submarine in South Australia.

People come in many shapes, sizes, ages, and colours but they are all human. People gather in a variety of situations with all kinds of people, but each remains human. And whenever two or more humans gather - at home, at play or at work - there are always problems and conflicts requiring a response from each. Each person’s response is affected by different levels of power, duty, knowledge and skills, as well as the different beliefs, values and culture of each person. But, no matter what form the response takes, it is a human response.

My book, Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness, looks at the sameness of being human and sets out the fundamental tools we need for dealing with problems and conflicts in life. The family is the setting for describing the use of each tool because everyone has some knowledge of family life and an opinion about how the various members of a family should act and be treated. For other settings, such as work or play, the challenge for all of us is to recognise the humanness of the people involved and consciously use the same fundamental tools, albeit in different ways.  The fundamental tools are:  

GROUNDED LOVE.
Grounded love is the first and most important tool. It is love grounded in equality that guides the use of all the tools described in the book. ‘Love’ includes virtues such as respect, assertiveness, care, protection, compassion and cooperation.

 In the home and personal life it can be emotional love. In a group or work situation, it is generally referred to as our duty of care, which may have a minimum level enshrined in law.

A culture of equality can exist even though people have different duties, responsibilities, skills and knowledge, and they need the authority to perform those duties and meet their responsibilities.

MANNERS.
Manners are used to establish trust and a sense of security. Manners form the base for mutual respect, establishing a culture of equality and cooperation. Manners lead to other useful tools such as the guidelines for resolving conflict, the guidelines for making rules people are likely to keep to, and the restorative action that does away with tools like manipulation, punishment, revenge and power struggles.

EXAMPLE.
Regardless of the setting, example is the most effective way to teach and convey expectations of what to do and how to do it.  Example is sometimes described as: walking the talk; practicing what you preach; showing how it can be done; and being the change you want to see happen.

CENTRING.

Centring is focusing on something that helps you achieve the outcome you want. Sometimes it means focusing on the outcome itself and sometimes it means focusing on something seemingly unrelated to the outcome. Centring is a state of mind in which a person, the action and the outcome seem to become one.

The overall aim of Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness is for Grounded Love, Manners, Example, Centring and all other tools and skills they lead to, will cease being regarded as tools, and become the normal way of relating to other people, regardless of their shape, size, age or colour.





Photo: Kakadu National Park N.T. 

Conflict is inevitable, even in ‘love relationships’. Resolving conflict can be difficult, even for people centred on improving the quality of a relationship. It’s difficult because the urge to win or to get even for past wrongs is so much a part of our culture. We need to acknowledge that we are under the influence of these urges whenever we are faced with conflict but also be aware we can counteract that influence. 

It’s much easier to resolve a conflict or solve a relationship problem when we start from the cosmic viewpoint that all humans are equal and think about how that should affect what we say and do. When a relationship is grounded in equality, the people involved will centre on the problem, or conflict, at hand, including the emotional effects and any material loss or damage that needs to be put right. In a relationship of equals, there is no competition; no desire to dominate or thought of retribution. However, as soon as one views the other as ‘the enemy’ and begins focusing on winning or seeking revenge, the chances of peacefully resolving the problem takes a nose dive.

Conflicts are more likely to be resolved peacefully when those involved share the same worldview and have common goals. Religious people should have the advantage in this, since they aspire to share the same worldview, but even religions are notoriously competitive on all levels of interaction. This applies from the level of ‘which is the one true religion’ upwards. And resentment over past injustices has lingered between religions for centuries. Even though organised religion has failed to lead the way in conflict resolution, it is possible for anyone to start the ball rolling in their own life.

Even if the other person in a dispute is intent on winning and therefore not interested in equality, any person who is grounded in equality, and centred on the principles of nonviolence, is in a strong position to gain a fair outcome, and turn an ‘enemy’ into a friend. Therefore, when faced with a conflict, the first thing to do is remember that equality is the true ground for human relationships, and then centre on obtaining an outcome consistent with that base.

Once you are grounded and centred, there are four guidelines to peaceful conflict resolution. It’s ironic that if these guidelines were used to guide communication between people in everyday life, there would be few negative conflicts to resolve. The guidelines for conflict resolution (or for avoiding negative conflicts) are:

·         Respect the other person.

·         Listen until the other person’s views are understood.

·         Be open and honest in sharing your own views.

·         Make agreements for the common good. (Seek win/win solutions)


Bob Myers, author of Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness.

We fight because our culture taught us to fight.  We had no say in what we were taught as children so it’s not our fault that we fight.  However, each of us can do something about the way we handle disagreements now, simply because we have a choice.

Human behaviour is always complicated so let’s simplify it a little by comparing two couples born and raised in the same culture who are faced with the same conflicts in their relationships. Both couples live in a culture that measures success by wealth and power. Both couples are high achievers who want to do well in a society that idolises winners.

Competition and Domination are known as couple number one. These two are lovers who usually walk hand in hand and are seldom apart. Even when they are apart, they continue to flirt with each other. This flirtation can be a lot of fun but sometimes turns nasty, especially when Domination tries to control Competition by imposing revenge or punishment.

Couple number two is comprised of Cooperation and Equality. These two are also lovers who usually walk hand in hand but sometimes they enjoy spending a little time apart or walking separately, confident in the enduring strength and quality of the relationship.

Both of these couples face the same conflicts in their relationships and both are well aware of the guidelines for resolving conflict. The main difference is in the way each couple interprets those guidelines.  People living in a culture that glorifies winning are encouraged to centre on their own needs as they follow the guidelines and use them to gain an advantage over their opponent. Therefore, Competition and Domination have no problem keeping to the guidelines, even though they know their interpretation of the guidelines will result in one of them losing in some way. The four guidelines for conflict resolution are very simple:

1. Respect your opponent.
2. Listen until you understand your opponent’s point of view.
3. Openly and honestly express your point of view.
4. Seek solutions you and your opponent can live with.

 
Cooperation and Equality, on the other hand, try to centre on the relationship itself as they struggle to ignore the competitive influence of the culture they live in. Their aim is to find a solution to the conflict that will improve the quality of their relationship and strengthen it. They sometimes find it difficult to centre on the relationship itself but know they must guard against the training they received in early childhood to be competitive. They know that if they start fighting as they negotiate a solution, it’s because some kind of competition or domination has crept in and caused them to centre as individuals rather than remaining centred on the relationship itself.

People in competitive mode argue to determine who is right and who is wrong. There has to be a winner and a loser, so the aim is to win. Parliament works that way and so does the legal system. People in countless meetings across the country try to convince other members to vote for their ideas as they debate topics and sometimes an argument can become nasty. Over a lifetime, we witness countless movies and hear countless stories about people settling disagreements with the power of words and sometimes with weapons. It is all around us every day of our life so it’s no wonder we fall so easily into the adversarial way of settling a dispute. And it’s no wonder winning has, so far, been so important to us.

Instead of seeing conflict as a competition, we could change what we centre on so we see it as an opportunity to find a cooperative outcome that strengthens the relationship. 

The dynamics of this apply to conflict in any situation and at any level. That is why I use family situations in my book, Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness, to promote cooperation and equality.  


Bob Myers.

The White Ribbon campaign to reduce or stamp out violence against women is a great initiative. However, I look forward to the time when men don’t treat women as equal to men but instead recognise that women and men are equal, and act accordingly. There are many things we can do, right now, to move towards such a reality; the first of which is to recognise the shortcomings of our present society.

The emphasis on family violence should be viewed as just a starting point leading to cultural, systemic and structural changes in society to remove things that currently feed problems such as domestic violence, road rage and street violence.

Physical violence makes headlines because of the damage it causes. However, some forms of violence cause lifelong suffering by destroying the spirit, self esteem and confidence of people. These forms of violence can be compounded if labelled as weaknesses that people should just ‘get over.’ Anger, depression and resentment from this often lies dormant until alcohol, or some perceived injustice, brings it bursting to the surface, sometimes surprising the actor. Others may see it as unprovoked violence because it is not directly caused by people but by the way our society operates.

Family violence can be a symptom of a wider problem caused by injustices known as systemic violence, structural violence and cultural violence that appears ‘normal’. Study after study links this violence to a vague sense of frustration and ‘not being good enough’ that nags at some people and affects every part of life. These injustices form the breeding ground for headline surface violence. And this may be increased by inadequate or inappropriate education.

People decide to set up these systems and structures, and the injustice they build into them is unnecessary simply because it is a decision. People should be held accountable for the effects of the choices they make regardless of whether those choices are made in a relationship or in setting up social systems. A person’s background can make their choices understandable and may remove blame from them for making those choices but it doesn’t remove the need for accountability for the effects of those actions. People learn how to act in future by being accountable now.

The ever-widening gap between rich and poor is evidence of the injustices in society’s systems and structures. Our politicians know, or should know, of the many studies linking inequality to the frustrations that lead to the anger, depression and resentment so common in our society. People find it so difficult to cope and this is compounded by a culture of alcohol abuse. Politicians will only act to address these problems if people demand such action.

The claim that all people are equal before the law becomes another level of injustice when that principle is applied regardless of a person’s ability to pay. E.g. a fine of $300 imposed on the wealthy and on a pensioner for the same offense is a gross injustice. Being equal before the law is unjust when the social system it operates in is unjust.

It’s important to provide people with the knowledge and skills to reduce the frustration that precedes the anger, depression and resentment that so often leads to violence. However, more can be achieved by also removing the cultural, systemic and structural causes of the frustration.

My book, Travelling the Road of Peace and Happiness explores ways we can counter the effects of living in an unjust society.

 Bob Myers.

  

      When the Prime Minister said "Sorry", were all black and white people in Australia reconciled? Not likely. Real reconciliation will not happen until black and white are no longer different, and because blacks and whites are fundamentally different, this will never happen. Or are they? Some don’t act that way. 
      For people who think in black or white terms, it must be confronting when some black people are white, or should I say when some white people are black.
      When Kyle Van Derkuyp, the product of an Aboriginal mother and an Irish father, said he wanted to carry the Aboriginal flag at the Sydney Olympics, my first reaction was, "Will he carry an Irish flag in the other hand? After all, he’s no more Aboriginal than Irish.” 
      Many non-indigenous Australians express annoyance, or even disgust, at white-skinned people claiming to be black. Their various opinions are summed up by the question, ‘Why don't they go with their three parts white rather than their one part black?’
      Although some are annoyed by it, the fact that white can be black is an indication that real reconciliation is possible because it moves us away from physical differences being the focus of racism. If physical difference is not the problem, spiritual difference must be. 
      The previous paragraph may seem contradictory because the spiritual is as fundamental as you can get and surely the more fundamental the difference, the harder it is for reconciliation to occur.
      Popular white perception of the spiritual connection indigenous people have with the earth seems to be based on indigenous spirituality being somehow different to non-indigenous spirituality. This perception is the actual root of racism, since 'different' quickly leads to judgements of better/worse, superior/inferior.
      There is a perception of difference at the most basic (spiritual) level without there being any actual difference. All people are made of the same ‘stuff’, which means, at the most fundamental level, indigenous and non-indigenous people are equal. The actual difference is in the awareness of our spirituality, and in the way of expressing that awareness; not in the spirituality itself.
      In countries where there is a separation of Church and State, ‘religion’ refers to how a group of people traditionally express their awareness of human spirituality within a culture, but where there is no such division the culture itself is the expression of spirituality. Old Testament Israel and pre-1788 aboriginal Australia would be examples of the latter. 
      As a culture, indigenous people have enjoyed their spiritual connection with Australia much longer than non-indigenous people but it would be quite wrong to now attribute that spiritual connection only to indigenous people. And, in every day life, it is difficult to assess the relative strength of that connection in individual Australians, indigenous or non-indigenous.
      Conflicts in relationships, in the home, between religions, cultures or nations are difficult to resolve when people act from positions of perceived difference. Those same conflicts become much easier to resolve when the people involved are aware of starting from common ground: equality.
      There is no difference between Aboriginal spirituality or Buddhist, Christian, Islamic, Taoist, or Atheist spirituality. Those terms indicate how members of each group satisfy the need to express human spirituality, as they gather to meet the need to belong.   
      Acceptance of the oneness of human spirituality would make efforts at reconciliation real rather than cosmetic and unite Australians of all backgrounds in the struggle to gain respect for each other's way of expressing spiritual awareness.
      Applying the concept of ‘a fair go’ to spiritual expression demands that each person has the opportunity to develop their own identity. Many studies have found that having a strong sense of spirituality or ‘being religious’ is a protective factor against depression and suicide. 
      The way spirituality is expressed is part of a person’s identity and is evident in how they relate to other people. Kyle Van Derkuyp was not denying his Irish heritage, which had been expressed for many years, he just wanted to also express himself through his aboriginality, and that’s cool.