<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2">Thomas: is anyone dealing with the question "If war and violence are so horrible and are what we </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><I>don't want</I></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2">, why are we not </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><I>already</I></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"> peaceful?" Who wants violence? Who wants war? Why do we have war when few people want it?<BR>
<BR>
Joelle and I have been noodling that question around for a while. We think it comes down to an inability to agree on whose 'story' is going to be told and lived and our inability to allow someone else to live their story their way and for them to allow us the same freedom. We seem to have to have forced agreements, codified into laws, which further entangle us (great article recently in NY Times about how laws are strangling education in the US) in disputes. Lawyers abound. Lawsuits follow.<BR>
<BR>
Ex: North Ireland. Whose story will be the dominant paradigm. Protestant or Catholic? To which country do those counties owe allegiance? Why is that a question? What laws and rules will be put in place that reflect the different world views? What is the fighting </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"><I>about</I></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2">?<BR>
<BR>
Ex: Palestine. We could ask many questions of the same order. In fact, wherever there is conflict, we can ask the question: whose story is striving to be told, agreed on, and lived? Who is resisting the story and why?<BR>
<BR>
The issue might become: what does it take for a group of human beings to allow and create enough space for freedom of choice (that doesn't compromise someone else's freedom of choice) in how they live their lives? What is the mental, emotional, spiritual construct necessary? Is it even possible?<BR>
<BR>
Ex: the dispute between religious fundamentalists and others on what will be taught about evolution in the United States. Is Darwin's theory a fantasy or do we have scientific proof? (I think we do). What to do then about the slippery argument of "Intelligent design" and what will be taught in our schools?<BR>
<BR>
That brings me back to the issue of consciousness, (the role of the ego, shadow, etc.), the concepts of selfhood and a mass of other considerations which roil our human relationships. <BR>
<BR>
Which leads me to the despairing question: Is peace even possible?? Are we wasting our time talking about it or even trying to practice it? If so, what should we be practicing instead? Maybe tolerance with majority power, the rule of law, legal structures, prisons for lawbreakers, etc., is the best we can do in our current state of conscious evolution and we'd best be focusing on raising our own individual consciousness, tolerance level and inner beingness and forget about peace as a target. Peace will emerge when we emerge into a different state of being. Radical thought.<BR>
<BR>
These would be my reflections if I were there.<BR>
<BR>
Paul Everett</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2"></FONT></HTML>
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist@listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist