Lesson Basics

To create a nonviolent world, we need to build institutions and social structures that embody the new story and do away with old systems and structures that are built on the culture of violence. In this lesson we look at how the new story is unfolding with some examples of promising initiatives. Nonviolence is already happening all around us — we just have to look out and pay attention.

Gandhi called this aspect of nonviolence constructive program. Constructive program is essentially building the world we want. While nonviolence is often associated with civil disobedience and resistance, that is only part of the picture. It is perhaps even more important for us to build the alternatives we need to replace the old-paradigm structures and systems, which are based on the idea that humans are separate, aggressive, individualistic, and competitive. At Metta Center, we like to say, “be constructive where possible, obstructive where necessary.”

Let’s start big and jump right into the war system. If you are opposed to war, what are you for? To answer this question, we need to consider what purpose the war system is (in theory) meant to serve, security and defense, and ask ourselves whether wars really make us secure. People choose war because they think they don’t have any alternative. What other options exist that might allow us to achieve this need for human security?

Luckily, a whole field has been developing over the past few decades to answer this question, and it’s called unarmed civilian peacekeeping (UCP) or civilian-based defense. Organizations like Nonviolent Peaceforce and Peace Brigades International have been active in this field since the 1980s, providing nonviolent third-party intervention in regions experiencing violent conflict. As the concept implies, third-party intervention requires nonpartisanship — a third-party who is neutral and not involved in the conflict.

Imagine a world where we channeled our very large military budget ($1,776 billion for 2014, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) into nonviolent peacekeeping instead of armed defense. In fact, we wouldn’t have to channel it all into that, as nonviolent peacekeeping is much less costly than military power. UCP would leave us many resources for other constructive program initiatives like health care and education. As scholar and historian Theodore Roszak said, “People try non-violence for a week, and when it 'does not work' they go back to violence which hasn't worked for centuries.” The war system isn’t working for us, and unarmed civilian peacekeeping provides us with an alternative that just makes sense.

Another very promising area of constructive program is the field of restorative justice. Rather than punishing the “perpetrator,” restorative justice seeks to heal and repair relationships and restore the health of the community as a whole. Restorative justice has recently been making headway in the US school system, with organizations like Restorative Justice for Oakland Youth trailblazing as an alternative to juvenile incarceration. Research has shown that restorative justice is much more effective in almost every possible way than the conventional forms of justice, and it’s much less costly. New Zealand adopted a nationwide restorative justice system for juveniles in 1989, which has had very impressive results.

Unarmed civilian peacekeeping and restorative justice are just two examples of the types of institutions we can create for a peaceful, sustainable future that works for all of us. What other possibilities can you imagine?