You ever been in a situation where people are having fun, and there's somebody not enjoying themselves (or who has the perception they're not enjoying themselves) -> Then some of the people who are having fun become emotionally agitated by their presence, turning on them or even insulting them?
"Why's he/she so serious"
"They're ruining my vibe"
"They won't change my opinion"
They'll bombard that person with a barrage of negative attention but never directly engage with them or ask them what's wrong.
I believe that shared consciousness is real, and that malicious intent and selfish intent within that shared pool holds less potency than morally upright and altruistic thinking. The latter serves as a constant interrupter, bringing forth emotions and accountability that one may not want to deal with at the moment. It thrusts it to the front of the individual mind like "you're going to deal with me!!" Some people get offended by that and react in a number of ways: aggression, mockery, etc. This shared consciousness process becomes like a tug of war, where the side of selfishness is often loud and brash, and vindictive against their opponents, wanting the opposition to not just lose, but suffer. Sometimes the side of altruism picks up this vindictiveness, becoming like an oppressive authoritarian in the mindset. But every now and then somebody shows up on the side of morals just as loud and brash, but without the vindictiveness, and they really become a problem to the opposition, throwing them off their game. Martin Luther King Jr is the best modern example of this.
I'm just as much a student of Malcolm X as I am MLK. I am a fan of the original Black Panther Party. I'm also a card carrying member of the Hip Hop generation, which has branches extending from the militant arm of the Black Power movement.
I believe nonviolent doesn't refer to being unprepared and defenseless. I draw inspiration from the sense of urgency, duty, and creative expressions of anger from the more militant Black movements, however the militancy isn't the primary guiding factor in my philosophy. I believe that the idea of violent revolution, in its reasoning, steers the mind to the final destination of committing violence against one another. It subtly incentivizes hurting others, keeping that action as an unspoken goal that looms over everything, taking precedence over the actual goal of the revolution itself. This hijacking of the mind can easily lead one to dehumanize whom they seek to commit violence against, and create or obsess over "Us Vs Them" scenarios, even when they don't exist.
I was watching a speech by MLK towards the end of his life and was very inspired by his resolve. This particular speech happened when his popularity dropped significantly, as he became more unpopular with White people for his anti-War position and unpopular with many Black people who began to toss aside his peaceful philosophy of revolution in favor of more militant solutions. In a speech he stated very passionately, "If every negro in the US turns against nonviolence, I'm going to stand up as a lone voice and say this is the wrong way!" He was heckled, and insulted by many who were working towards the same goal of civil rights and Black self-sustainability, but he didn’t back down.
To stand firm in his convictions in the face of that much opposition is courage on a level I cannot possibly understand, but I will try to make sense of his rationale. I think MLK was a prophet that though far beyond his time.
Consider this:
War is a terrible facet of humanity where violence is the primary method of resolution. Veterans who return from wars often have PTSD. War can corrupt and damage your thinking process, it can cause trauma that accumulates and becomes self-destructive if not healed. Even the most clear-headed military leader is showing a level of mental acuity that's only measured in response to a situation of extreme duress. Trauma takes a toll.
How does one build in this paradigm?
How does one fellowship in this paradigm?
How does one innovate in this paradigm?
How does one have the clarity to see opportunities as they arrive in this paradigm?
How does one trust in this paradigm?
In this paradigm, the mind is stuck in fight or flight mode, made even worse in situations where its not called for. This mindset becomes an obstacle to build community, an obstacle to open-mindedness, an obstacle to creativity, free thought is stifled. Lucid, logical thinking can easily become prone to paranoia, obsession, rumors and fallacies. It leaves the mind vulnerable, not at its full capacity, not at its full strength. Its too easy to create conflict and discord where there is none.
In todays America, violent "Us Vs Them" mindsets have created an epidemic of paranoid people convinced that someone is out to get them, convinced to the point they will commit horrific, despicable actions against others with the rationale that there's a war going on, despite any evidence to the contrary.
Yet there are also factual instances of conspiracies and unwarranted aggression against people with no just cause, instances if left unchecked can threaten us all. So how does one deal with this? That's a hard question to answer.
I don't know. I know this, I believe in preparation, planning, de-escalation, protection over escalation and becoming the aggressor.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr lived by the Biblical decree of "Love thy enemy". I believe this decree doesn't have to be some feel-good quote in which brings up imagery of flowers, hugs and romantic relationships. You can love someone and never have to see them again. You can love someone and angrily let them know how frustrated you are with them, and how you refuse to accept or respect their behavior. You can also love someone and aggressively incapacitate them if the situation calls for it. I think the term "love" has become triggered, because its so overused in our society. There's also respect. IMO, respect is a subordinate to love. You cannot respect what you don't love in some way, even if it isn't love with a capital "L". I think a clear and universally agreed antithesis of love however is dehumanization. Some of the worst violations of the preservation of the sanctity and safety of life, some of the worst atrocities committed come from people who dehumanize others. The path to dehumanization begins with "Us vs them", and that is further extended with the thought of committing violence against one another.
I could attempt to explain the logic behind the statement "violence begets violence", how violence is mostly akin to putting out a fire with grease, and how violence on a large scale in todays era of super-power weaponry could lead to assured mutual destruction, but I'll leave that for another post. I will say this, I believe MLK was a prophet who saw the modern day storm coming, and was well ahead of his time. Some might say his methods are outdated, but I feel they are as relevant as ever. Through his historical example, today, in 2022 and beyond, I choose nonviolence over violent revolution.
"I feel that organized nonviolence resistance is the most powerful weapon that oppressed people can use in breaking loose from the bondage of oppression. Non-cooperation with evil is as much of a moral obligation as cooperation with good" - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
