Toward the end of last month, Stephanie Van Hook and Michael Nagler participated in The Shift Network‘s Politics of Love & Justice Summit, which was a free online event integrating spirituality and activism.
Over the course of a few days, 25 of the world’s most visionary spiritual leaders convened online and shared their wisdom, offering guideposts for building a sustainable, caring world. Presenters included such prominent voices as Marianne Williamson, David Korten, and Rabbi Michael Lerner. Stephanie and Michael spoke about nonviolence as an act of love.
Hear what Stephanie and Michael brought to the discussion in this recording of their session. Please note that while we are offering the recording here, it is ultimately a copyright of The Shift Network.
Please feel free to share the link to this web page with anyone who may appreciate the discussion.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Topic: Questions on Gandhian economics, constructive program and peace and conflict studies course wrap-up.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
I am in search of a K-8 non-violence/diversity education curriculum that can be incorporated into my school district. Can you recommend anything, or do you know of any organizations that offer grants to schools that want to incorporate this kind of curriculum? Any information you have would be appreciated.
You may be interested in the website Teaching Tolerance, which is run by the Southern Poverty Law Center, as well as the resources on the Educators for Nonviolence section of Metta’s site and our older EFNV site, which is no longer being updated but has a lot of information.
I would recommend “The Friendly Classroom for a Small Planet.” New Society Press, !998. The book is also handled by Children’s Creative Response to Conflict, http://www.planet-rockland.org/conflict/Publications.html
I believe a more modern edition has been prepared.
— Ian Harris
Dear Metta, I thought to share a news paper article with you about the *Palestine Papers*, that I think you won’t read in the US. I’m not sure if the suggestion that it’s the PA who leaked the documents is likely or true, but I do agree that: “the Palestine Papers prove that this “peace process” just allows Israel to build more settlements and grab more Palestinian land. And the papers also prove that *Israel is unlikely to make the sacrifices that Palestinians are willing to make*.”
As a peace activist in the Catholic Church I’ve been having an ongoing talk with a number of my nonviolent colleagues and we’ve begun to be somewhat critical of the stance of religious institutions towards gays and lesbians. Since I usually only look at nonviolent literature from a Christian perspective, I was wondering what other nonviolent activists think about this? It seems to me that the acceptance of a nonviolent lifestyle would automatically support those who are undergoing persecution. Any thoughts? Also… do you know of any literature on this subject?
I hope that you’ll allow me a serious question about non-violence. A friend of mine is committed to your perspective. Here is my question: “Do you advocate local, state, or national police personnel carrying and using weapons? If not, why not? If so, when & how? Does weapon use contradict maintaining a perspective of nonviolence?”
Every month I meet as a member of a gathering of two Catholic communities, one progressive and one conservative, who come together on a Sunday to discuss important social issues. We call this “Justice Sunday.” The issues discussed in the past include the Death Penalty, the Palestine-Israel conflict, Immigration, and aspects of US foreign policy. In a future meeting we would like to explore the topic of nonviolent communication. We sense the benefit this could provide us. What suggestions can you provide?
I teach high school history and want to present the downfall of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) regime in 1989 as the result of nonviolent action (Professor Nagler talked about this in one of the Berkeley podcasts). My question: Do you know if the people who started the peaceful demonstrations in Leipzig were consciously using nonviolence because they were familiar with and dedicated to principled nonviolence, or was their choice the result of just not being very well armed (and therefore, a feeling that nonviolence was their only choice)? I’d appreciate any insight or information on the matter.