Para La Paz

1> SOLIDARITY
remember my working definition? well, i'm about to add to it :)

I went to the Ignatian Family Teach-In for Justice in Fort Benning Georgia the weekend before Thanksgiving, and one of the speakers talked about solidarity. it is compleltey escaping who said this at the moment, but anyway they identified "solidarity" as a buzz word, thrown around all the time but not necessarily defined. So in the talk, they defined it, saying:

solidarity is about conversion. It is about letting your life be touched by someone else, and allowing that contact, that human connection, to change you past just that moment. It is a daily (or even moment by moment) decision, commitment, investment.



2> PEACE
I was sharing at guided examen last week my experience with the word PEACE. It is a powerful word, one that has been very present with my lately. Johan Galtung has this amazing approach to understanding peace through identifying two type of peace. The first, I think is how the term is typically used: referring to an absence of direct or physical violence. he calls this "negative peace" because it is defined by what it is not rather than through an affirmative statement.

This negative peace is important, yet if this is the extent of our understanding of peace, if this is the goal, then we're taking the easy way out, we're missing something hugely important.

In addition to this "negative peace," Galtung also talks about this idea of "positive peace." Positive peace is the affirmative peace, peace that speaks to what it is, rather than just (the essential) statement of what it is not. As they say in Rent, "the opposite of war isn't peace, its CREATION." Positive peace are these acts of creation which works to address oppressive social structures (aka "structural violence" and recognize the common humanity and human dignity of all while working for a world where that basic human dignity is upheld.

Both are important. Negative peace, the stopping of bombs being dropped on a national level, the ability to be in another's presence without lashing out at them on an individual level, these are important things. However, particularly on an individual level, there comes a time when commitment to negative peace is unhealthy. If I am hurt or upset by something or someone and keep my mouth closed, in order to preserve the appearance of peace, I am actually committing an act of violence towards myself and whoever else is involved. My keeping my mouth shut when I need to speak up, when the boat needs to be rocked, I am denying my humanity and my own self worth, as well as disrepecting any other parties involved. By keeping my mouth shut, I am in a sense taking total responsibility for whatever it was that went wrong, I am not acknowledging the agency of the other, nor am I allowing them to care for (or about) me and the fact that I am hurt. It is violent and ultimately destructive to sacrifice for something defined by what it is not.

As was said, negative peace is the first step. Peace is a risky business and so a trust in at the very least one's physical safety is an important starting point. saying words that need to be said, risking those tough words or actions, calling things as they are, living and thinking and speaking in a way which recognizes and promotes the human dignity of all (including myself!) is scary and hard. Ella curia said the most amazing thing that I think is so true, speaking of the University of Central America (UCA) during the civil war: "If our university had not suffered we would not have performed our duty. In a world where injustice reigns, a university that fights for justice must necessarily be persecuted.” This, I think, is just as applicable to the individual as to the university.

So, solidarity, then, this act of conversion, this knowledge that we are all in this together, is essential for peace. Solidarity is based upon the understanding of the universality of humanity and our interconnectedness, which I think is fundamental for peace. Just as important, is that to live this active positive peace, to bring about these acts of creation, well, it is impossible (and discouraging and disheartening) to do it alone, alone it cannot be done.

So this risk of peace happens through and with and in solidarity, in hope of humanity, in faith in God. Yet this risk can't be taken just for the sake of taking risks. I think I mentioned before getting a tattoo and that can be a powerful symbol, but the only if in context. We are, each and every one of us, created by God (on purpose) in God's image--I think it is this that binds each person, throughout time and space, together. As we take the risk for peace in solidarity, it is important to ask: what am I risking? to be able to name it, to place it in context. And to follow that question with: and what am I risking it for? Peace cannot happen by accident.