With Whom Does Global Peace Consciousness Begin?

The neophyte peacemaker’s journey comes full circle when they actualize authentic self being and the becoming of a transformative being in peace; peace-conflict-impasse-insight-compassion-contritition-forgiveness-reconciliation-consensus-peace (more succinctly, the cycle is from separation to reintegration).  This process of the introspective journey inspired by the externally experienced life, reveals to us an understanding of the cause of conflict, as well as presents us with a guide to effecting peace beyond ourselves in the world at large.  This guide requires us to return to our understanding of the Global Meta Power Structural Dynamic, from which originates the source of conflict in modern multicultural society.  While the Dynamic’s six ancillary power structural arrangements; Policing, Financial, Legislative, Juridical, Regulatory, and Communicative, are benign operational mechanisms of societal governance, the intrinsic fundamental nature of the Prestige Structural Arrangement embedded at the core of the Dynamic, is to foment the subdivision of humanity.  The nucleus of the Prestige Structural Arrangement is, more precisely, the origin of conflict.  This nucleus is described as xenophobia, the fear of otherness, which germinates from the tension and conflict arising from the unconscious attempt to separate the inextricable connection between authentic self being and humanity.  This unconscious attempt to separate expands through alliance proximity familiarity.  As it evolves through mass consciousness, it breeds increasingly more defined and rigid externalized social division constructs, such as; race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, tribe, clan, caste, class, and political identity.  These social division constructs give rise to the competitive-distributive paradigm, from which emerges the hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime, otherwise referred to as the Prestige Structural Arrangement.

The deconstruction of the established social order organized within the Prestige Structural Arrangement is not enough to complete the cycle from separation to reintegration.  Deconstruction in this regard in and of itself results in a power vacuum, in which the nucleus xenophobia, will inevitably foment a Darwinian-esque re-accumulation and distribution of power in hierarchical allotments among the distinct and cognizable populations comprising multicultural society, either reestablishing the preexisting social order or establishing a new hierarchical power regime.  This phenomenon may be easily observed in the emergence of new social orders arising out of post-colonial societies, such as has been observed in Rwanda, India, Nigeria, and Iraq.  Other examples are found in South Africa and Zimbabwe, where the internal transformation out of apartheid-based social orders resulted in the reverse realignment of preexisting hierarchical power regimes.  In each instance, the competitive-distributive paradigm fomented by a xenophobia nucleus endured and prevailed over the opportunity to establish a new cooperative-deliberative paradigm.  

Thus, the focal point of peacemaking is to effect a mass consciousness shift that restores the inextricable connection between authentic self being and humanity as a new consensus nucleus based on value commitments to peace.  In the same fashion that unconscious separation grows exponentially, the reverse is possible through seeding the natural consciousness of humanity, which is “oneness”, defined by shared origin and destiny.  Like any movement, this movement begins with a spark, an illumination carried by the few; agents of change who might be referred to as “flickerers”.  They are the seeds from which a new global peace consciousness will germinate.  Their cause is to find one another, to nourish one another, to grow in their illumination through sharing and affirming in each other’s journeys from separation to reintegration, each being the teacher and the taught, where and whenever they might gather.  Like seeds upon the wind, their cause is to adventure out into the world and to live within the struggle of humanity, to be; to be transformative beings in peace, in the midst of conflict.  Smaller flames will be drawn to greater flames, each the teacher and the taught in their meeting, each becoming greater in self-knowledge through shared reflection and mutual inspiration.  Each moment, each day, each year, each life lived in this pursuit, a step closer to the actualization of global peace consciousness, simply by following one’s calling to embrace and live within authentic self being.  This is the path of the third rabbi, the journey of the peacemaker, accessible to all who heed the calling.

Neutral Advocacy

I refer to Neutral Advocacy as the actualized transformative voice of peacemakers engaged in effecting peace in the midst of conflict.  The following story illustrates the transformative nature of Neutral Advocacy.  The story embodies the African philosophy “Ubuntu”, which means "I am because you are".  Ubuntu recognizes the shared essence within humanity and life.  

There were two farmers whose houses were situated directly across from one another with a dirt road running between them.  One farmer always dressed in red and raised flowers. The other farmer always dressed in blue and was a keeper of bees. While they had lived across from one another on their farms all of their lives, neither spoke a single word to the other. Each saw the other as a rival in the village market, despite the fact that one grew flowers, and the other tended bee hives and harvested honey. Each wished the other bad fortunate in their endeavors even though their own survival was dependent upon the survival of the other. The understanding of their interdependence was beyond them, distorted by their lack of capacity to speak to each other, and to see the other’s perspective. 

Seeing their conflict and the ill will that each harbored for the other, God decided to pay them a visit. As each farmer attended to their perceived self-interest ignoring the other, God walked down the dirt road in the middle of their two farms.  Without breaking stride, God tipped a beautifully adorned hat toward each farmer, and continued walking down the dirt road.  The farmers looked up at the same time, and as they caught each other’s eyes affixed on God, they realized for the first time in their lives that they were sharing community with one another. They smiled at each other and began to share their perspectives of the experience, when the farmer in red said, “Did you see the beautiful red hat adorned with flowers that God was wearing?” To this, the farmer in blue rebuffed back, “What do you mean a red hat, it was clearly a blue hat adorned with a swarm of bees.” Focused in their perceived differences in perspective, each let out a gruff, and returned to ignoring the other and harboring ill will toward the other’s endeavors. 

Once again upon seeing their return to conflict and impasse, God turned around and walked back down the dirt road in the other direction, once again coming between the two farmers, and again tipping the beautifully adorned hat at each. This time each saw the other’s previously held perspective, upon which they immediately realized that the hat upon God’s head was red and adorned with flowers on one side, and blue and adorned with a swarm of bees on the other side. Upon this realization, each began to laugh uncontrollably brought on by their nervous acknowledgment of their wrong-doing to the other, and then embraced in friendship.  

From this point forward the two farmers learned to cooperate and in doing so they increased their gain.  Peace and prosperity became their shared destiny. Their differences became the source of their unity as opposed to being a source of division.

In this story, God advocates for neither side, but rather neutrally advocates through being the illuminated source of peace in the midst of the farmers’ conflict, so as to inspire the farmers’ realization of their shared interests beyond their perceived differences in perspective.  The resolution of their impasse and underlying conflict began with their mutual acts of contrition, represented by their humility displayed in their laughter, and their mutual acts of forgiveness represented in their embrace in friendship.  Conflict precedes impasse, as impasse precedes insight, as insight precedes compassion, as compassion precedes contrition, as contrition precedes forgiveness, as forgiveness precedes reconciliation, as reconciliation precedes consensus building, and as consensus building precedes sustainable peace.

There are a couple of points that I hope to illustrate in the telling of this story. First, the role of the peacemaker while passive, is nevertheless active through the uninhibited action of their natural way of being, and in being in peace, they are transformative in effecting peace beyond themselves.  The peacemaker, that is, is not an absentee God in the presence of conflict, but actively illuminates the prospects for reconciliation within those in conflict through the presence of their transformative being in peace.  The peacemaker does not feed fish to the hungry, but illuminates within the hungry an insight into their own ability to fish.  It is for the enlightened hungry to choose to fish. 

Ethical Foundation for Peacemaking

The neophyte peacemaker is careful to reflect on where they are in their journey.  There are perils for the neophyte who impatiently departs from their journey without taking all of the steps toward actualizing authentic self being.  These perils are illustrated in a story borrowed from the Judeo tradition in which three rabbis embark into the world after journeying toward an invitation to enlightenment. 

The first rabbi comes upon a ladder and climbs up to appear before the flame of enlightenment. The rabbi's eyes, mind and heart are closed, and thus the flame of enlightenment reveals nothing to the rabbi. The rabbi climbs back down and heads off into the world no better or worse off than prior to the ascent. A second rabbi comes upon the ladder and climbs up and faces the flame of enlightenment. This time the rabbi's eyes and mind are wide open, but the rabbi's heart is closed. The rabbi climbs down and sets off into the world with new found knowledge and seeks to proselytize this knowledge to the world as revealed by the flame of enlightenment. The rabbi wanders aimlessly, is ignored and ridiculed, and goes insane in the process. A third rabbi comes across the ladder and climbs up to face the flame of enlightenment. This time the rabbi's eyes, mind and heart are wide open. The rabbi climbs back down. Fully illuminated in the heart, the rabbi sees a pathway upon which the rabbi's name is inscribed. The rabbi follows the pathway and lives a beautiful life. Along the way the rabbi passes others in the darkness alongside the pathway.  Without direction from the rabbi, some are inspired by their wonder over the rabbi's source of illumination.  For some, this inspiration begins to awaken their consciousness and a calling within to journey toward their own invitation to enlightenment. 

While each of the three rabbis found their way to the source of enlightenment, the story illustrates that actualization of authentic self being requires preparation and readiness through life experiences to be open to receiving insight on the direction to take in fulfilling one’s authentic self being, and therein become a transformative being in peace so as to effect peace into the world.  The first rabbi represents the neophyte who has yet to experience life in a manner so as to realize contrition and forgiveness, and thus, is not yet open to beginning the steps toward the actualization of authentic self being.  This is not to say that this form of neophyte might not return to the ladder of enlightenment, but that they have more life to encounter to prepare them for their return.  The second rabbi represents the neophyte who departs without consensus in heart to enable the actualization of authentic self being.  The second rabbi is still driven by ego projections influenced by unreconciled past and future conformity expectations, which are presented in the rabbi’s need to conform those they encounter to their understanding of peace.  The third rabbi presents as have having actualized authentic self being, and in doing so their ability to effect peace beyond themselves is not driven by the need to seek conformity in others to their ego projected expectations of peace, rather the rabbi respects the being of others by allowing them to fulfill their own journeys toward self authentic being as they might be prepared and ready to do so.

You might ask, “how can the third rabbi represent a peacemaker if they appear not to be actively engaged in aiding others to realize peace?”  The answer to this question might be understood through examining the Taoism understanding of Wu Wei, which is translated as non-action or non-doing, in which being a cause of peace is the natural way of behaving for one who is enlightened.  This approach to peacemaking might be described as the peacemaker effecting peace beyond themselves by being in a natural way of behaving, in which one’s being in peace in the midst of conflict is the source that illuminates the aspirations of those in conflict to seek their own path out of the darkness of conflict and into the light of peace.  This understanding, in reflection of the journeys of the second and third rabbi, brings to our attention the ethical boundaries of peacemakers, in which a clear contrast is drawn between approaches to peacemaking; seeking to fulfill ego driven outcome attachments versus fulfilling neutrality based value commitments.

Visioning Peace

A patch work quilt, in which different pieces of cloth, distinct by color, thickness, and texture, coexisting by defined separation, maintained by loosely stitched borders, presents a false and misleading image of harmony.  A patch work quilt is vulnerable to tearing at its loose seams.  In contrast, a tapestry, in which individual threads, distinct by color, thickness, and texture, are woven insepartably together, in which the individual thread and the community of threads can be observed simultaneously, presents an illustration of actualized integration of differences, in which true harmony is realized.  The being of a tapestry is not vulnerable to tearing. Study of the loom, composition theory, and weaving techniques, alone, is not sufficient to create a harmonious tapestry. The hands capable of weaving a harmonious tapestry must possess within them the harmony they seek to bring into being in the tapestry.  Thus is the basis of the contention, that peace within, precedes one’s ability to cause peace beyond one’s self.

The Calling to Peace

The ability to make peace can not be acquired through the knowledge of theory or the mastery of technique.  

The capacity to be a peacemaker arises from a calling and journey toward the actualization of authentic self being and the becoming of a transformative being in peace.  This being is realized from within not from without.

The calling to be a peacemaker may very well have led you to pursue a vocational path by which you aspire to answer your calling.  This pursuit may have resulted in the achievement of a degree and title, and perhaps has even led you to establishing your self in a professional career in peace studies or conflict resolution.   However, the mastery of theory and technique, as well as possession of a title, such as a peacemaker, does not in and of itself enable you to be a cause of and effect peace in the world.

These statements will perhaps challenge some of you who have acquired formal degrees and titles, as well as those of you who are actively engaged in seeking to end conflict and promote peace through professional work.  But if you pause and reflect on these statements, with respect to the peace you perceive as having witnessed through academic study, or through conflict you have worked toward resolving, you will enviably realize its unsettling truth, that you may not have witnessed or realized true peace in your life time.  At most, you have likely observed a secession of the manifestations of conflict, while the underlying origin of the conflict, the absence of peace, remains unattended to and ready to manifest, perhaps with a new face.

Peace is more than this.  It has been said that “there is no way to peace, peace is the way.”

In this regard, I introduce you to the understanding that you can not effect peace in the world until you effect peace within yourself.  Securing peace in oneself is a journey beyond theory and technique.  This journey is unique to each individual.  While the path of each individual’s journey may differ, the beginning and end of each journey is universal.  The beginning might be described as separation from authentic self being, or separation from peace within oneself, and the end to the journey might be described as acceptance of one’s authentic self being, or being in peace.  One can not fully respect another’s authentic self being without first respecting and accepting their own authentic self being.  The fear of living into one’s authentic self being extends by projection through the rejection of another’s authentic self being.   This origin of fear is the underlying source of rivalry, which leads to conflict within one’s self and in humanity.  It may manifest itself along lines of divisions within humanity defined by by social constructs such as; tribe, clan, race, gender, color, age, religion, class, language, nationality, sexual orientation, and, or political identities.  These social constructs shape identity through conformity expectation and alliance with familiarity.  Authentic self being transcends conformity identity, as peace transforms fear of otherness experienced within self and humanity; it does so through the grace of insight and understanding of the inextricable bonds within and between humanity and self, and their shared destiny.  This realization marks the integration of differences.

The Global Meta Power Structural Dynamic Model: An Analytical Lens for Conflict Analysis in Multicultural Society.

I contend that interdependent power structural arrangements influence and shape socio-economic relationships in multicultural society through their distribution of power manifesting in a socio-economic spectrum ranging from privileged elitism to marginalization, in which distinct and cognizable populations within multicultural society observed to be in conflict over public policy relate to one another in a prescribed order and spatial power dynamic.   This spatial power dynamic may be generally described as a hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime, characterized by socio-economic divisions defined by multicultural category constructs, manifesting along historical identities such as bloodlines, ethnicity, race, nationality, regionalism, religion, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender, language, and class.      

I proposed that reoccurring patterns of meta power structural arrangements may be observed at the local, national, and international levels of multicultural society. Thus, they are global in nature, reliably rendering themselves as a universal evaluative model for peacemakers and public policy mediators to analyze the spatial power dynamics at each level of multicultural society in which conflicts over public policy among distinct and cognizable populations comprising a given level of multicultural society might be observed. 

Envision multicultural society at any level, local, national, or international, in which the level of society being examined is perceived as existing within a spherical dynamic shaped and influenced by power structural arrangements emitting from a primary power structural axis, in which the poles are capped by a financial power structural arrangement and a policing power structural arrangement.  Further imagine that this primary structural axis is reinforced along the sphere's belt by secondary power structural arrangements, communicative, regulatory, legislative, and juridical, all of which are interdependent and reinforcing of the other to maintain a systemic governance apparatus over multicultural society.

The core of the "Global Meta Power Structural Dynamic Model" is what might be referred to as the "prestige structural arrangement", or more specifically the existence of a "hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime", which governs the levels of inclusion and participatory democracy among the socio-economically distinct and cognizable populations comprising the multicultural society; specifically, influencing their respective voice and agency capacities to access and mediate conflicts within each of the power structural arrangements that comprise the broader global meta power structural dynamic.

The model suggests that disparities among distinct and cognizable populations comprising multicultural society, with respect to inclusion and participatory democracy, correlate to the level of socio-economic tensions within the level of multicultural society being examined, and that this correlation can be measured on a critical mass trajectory by analyzing Human Development Index and other socioeconomic available data as proxies to represent and evaluate disparities in voice and agency capacities, as well as represent and evaluate the nexus between human development and unrest temperaments among distinct and cognizable populations comprising multicultural society.   In this regard, the elasticity of the spherical dynamic of a given multicultural society can be assessed with respect to predicating its inevitable tipping point and resulting socio-economic destabilization.  I contend that this critical mass trajectory analysis enables peacemakers and public policy mediators to more effectively devise and implement public consensus based conflict resolution strategies in the prevailing political context of the examined multicultural society toward the goal of resolving the underlying structural origins of conflict.  Specifically, I contend that with this understanding, peacemakers and public policy mediators can more effectively transform collective consciousness through neutral advocacy to move populations in conflict beyond prescribed spatial dynamic conflict voices that perpetuate impasse, inhibit mediation, and undermine public consensus building.

Prescribed spatial dynamic conflict voices observed in multicultural societies governed by a hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime, might generally be characterized as falling into one of three levels of maturation: Protest Voice, Empowerment Voice, and Transformative Voice.  The most primitive of the conflict voices is “Protest Voice”, in which the population exhibiting this voice may be observed as lacking the capacity to command the institutional forms (agency) and languages (voice) of the power structural arrangements in which the conflict arises; thus, limiting the population’s access to the power structural arrangements by which to meaningfully mediate on the reform of the underlying structural origins of conflict.  A population engaged in Protest Voice is generally limited in its agency and voice capacities to identify and articulate sustainable resolution in pragmatic terms, which tends to push the opposing population in the conflict away from sustainable resolution.  In some instances, the opposing population may exercise flexibility over policing and other power structural arrangements as socio-economic controls in responding to Protest Voice, by conceding to temporary distributive concessions intended to appease threats of a sustained, intense protest posture.  When such concessions are made, they are often utilized as a means to preserving the existing power structural arrangements, which the opposing population is likely to perceive as ultimately benefitting its power position in the hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime. This faux resolution outcome tends to be cyclical in managing impasse, marked by patterns of distributive concessions and retrenchment.  In sum, it does not reconstruct the power structural arrangements that give rise to the underlying conflict as a systemic phenomenon. 

“Empowerment Voice”, is exhibited in a population possessing, at various degrees of agency and voice capacities depending on the population’s power position within the spatial power dynamic, an ability to command the institutional form (agency) and language (voice) of the power structural arrangements in which the conflict arises, sufficient to effect long term distributive concessions, sometimes permanent.  However, like Protest Voice, populations engaged in Empowerment Voice are unlikely to achieve reconstruction of the power structural arrangements, instead they are more likely to engage in an effort to preserve the existing power structural arrangement to maintain perceived socio-economic advantage, or to be unable to identify how the power structural arrangements might be reconstructed in a way that does not perpetuate the underlying source of conflict; namely the imbalances of inclusion and equity resulting from the hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime. Their disposition in this regard is based on their relative power position within the existing spatial power dynamic.  With respect to reconciling the respective socio-economic interests of the populations in conflict, mutual Empowerment Voice confrontations perpetuate a competitive-distributive paradigm as opposed to facilitating a cooperative-deliberative paradigm, as such, they are not likely to produce a sustainable conflict resolution outcome.

Transformative Voice, when employed by peacemakers and public policy mediators through the exercise of Neutral Advocacy (an enlightened strategic engagement of Transformation Mediation), seeks to transform the collective consciousness among distinct and cognizable populations in conflict to bring about an interest convergence realization of their complex interdependence and inextricably shared goal of sustainable multicultural society; which when realized, establishes capacity within the populations to embrace Transformative Voice as their own conflict voice.  It is through their maturation to Transformative Voice that distinct and cognizable populations in conflict may cultivate a revitalized spatial capacity for inclusion and equity in the existing power structural arrangements.  This maturation in conflict voice enables populations in conflict to mutually reach compassion, contrition, and forgiveness, by which capacity populations are enabled to pursue reconciliation and ultimately the consensus goal of transforming the existing hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime to achieve revitalized and sustainable fully democratized power structural arrangements embodying institutionalized inclusive and equitable mediation processes.

The achievement of the reconstruction of the existing hyper-segregated hierarchical power regime, and therein the transformation of the existing power structural arrangements, ensures that future conflicts over public policy among distinct and cognizable populations within multicultural society, do not reach impasse or rise to a critical mass level that threatens the socio-economic stability of the broader multicultural society in which the conflicts arise.  However, in order for reconstruction of the existing hyper-segregated hierarchical regime to realized the potential for promoting sustainable peace, the reconstruction most be accompanying by a mass consciousness transformative shift away from a distributive-competitive value-based paradigm to a deliberative-cooperative value-based paradigm.

The attempt to conceptualize the several national identity constructs of Europe's nation states under the European Union, based on the realization of complex interdependence and an inextricable shared destiny, provides a limited example for the theoretical basis for how mass consciousness shifting might be structurally undertaken to promote sustainable multicultural society.  Similarly, at least in theory, the conceptualization of the American Experiment as pursuing an inclusive and equitable participatory democracy comprised of a diverse array of humanity, suggests the possibility for how a complex multicultural society through a more committed and enlightened conflict resolution strategy might achieve greater transformation away from a competitive-distributive paradigm to a cooperative-deliberative paradigm.  However, both of these examples reveal continued resistance to embracing the levels of inclusion and equity among their evolving diverse populations, which contradicts the realization of mass consciousness transformation required for sustainable multicultural society.