|
Subject:
Creation Versus Destruction; An Argument For Nonviolence
Issue: Nonviolence
Date: March 9, 2003
Author: Ken Larsen
************************************
Creation Versus Destruction; An Argument For Nonviolence (3-9-03)
Throughout the evolution of our species and our culture, two opposing forces
have been working together. The first has been the random creation of new
genetic code or new cultural ideas, hereafter referred to as "memes." The
second, and equally important, player has been the selective destruction of
less successful code and memes.
If you think on the individual level, you fear the Destroyer because it may
select you for destruction -- even if you deserve to survive, but the
survival rate is not 100%. Thus, to you, the Destroyer is evil; it is your
Demon. You struggle to propagate your code and memes in spite of the
Selector. On the other hand, you exist because you were created by the
random Creator, your God.
If you think on the group level, you are grateful for the services of the
Selector, who keeps your code/memes clean and efficient. On the other hand,
you fear the random Creator who may come up with something superior that
will result in your selective destruction. So, the roles of God and Demon
are reversed.
If you think on a world level, you realize the equal importance of Creator
and Destroyer to the development and progress of the best possible total
system. Thus, Creator/Destroyer, God/Demon, male/female, Yin/Yang, etc.,
become ONE as separate cogs in a single creative machine.
Until as recently as a few thousand years ago, we developed instincts and
traditions to support both the individual and the group. In many cases,
these instincts/traditions are contradictory. Whether you think at the
individual or the group level, your view of these "natural" tendencies as
evil or noble may be reversed. We accepted both sets of instincts/traditions
because we were not thinking at either the individual or the group level. We
were not thinking. It was natural to work for individual comforts while at
the same time taking personal risks to nurture the group and defend "us"
against "them". We were like the honeybee protecting itself individually,
and then committing suicide (stinging) to defend the hive.
Suddenly, we developed consciousness and began thinking about ourselves. We
were conscious at the individual level. We asked why we should follow our
urges to reproduce and form tribes. Why should I stay and defend the tribe
with my life when I can run and live? Before that question destroyed our
social progress, we learned to believe in God. The older and wiser
individuals in society used God to justify our social instincts. God
explained why we should "multiply and replenish the earth." God explained
how life was not without meaning or end. God explained how we would get our
payoff later in another world. God helped us, individually, to follow our
"irrational" instincts to nurture/defend our family and tribe. This thesis
is totally independent of God's reality or non-reality. I am merely
observing some effects of God's role in our development.
Thus, Consciousness and God have served us well as we have learned to master
our environment and multiply it's carrying capacity for our kind. It has
maintained the essential balance between random Creator and selective
Destroyer. Individual inventiveness is the mechanism for the random creation
of better ideas and better mousetraps. These ideas and inventions have been
selected for adoption or disposal by the free market. Our mechanisms for
cultural and personal selective destruction have been less benign. Three
Destroyers have been selecting us. They are: famine, disease, and violence.
They have kept our populations within the environment's carrying capacity
while providing a mechanism for the survival of the fittest.
Now, we are faced with a second dilemma. It is a greater threat to our
survival than the development of individual consciousness without a belief
in God. Our amazing technology has given to each of our societies the power
to destroy us all. I doubt anyone has the power to destroy life on earth, or
even eliminate humankind. But, we do have the power to destroy our
civilization, and we all have access to it. Communication technology has
made a joke of such notions as nuclear nonproliferation. We are all within
each other's fortress (911). Our weapons are no longer secure. Everyone has
access to Armageddon. Escalated violence is no longer survivable, as a
civilization or as a culture.
I. The Species Level.
Our survival demands that we take the next step. We must learn to shift
beyond thinking as individuals and think on the species level. We must
forever end the notion that countries can consider violence -- even as a
last resort or final option -- even as a response to violence. Until now, we
have wanted to destroy each other because we all carried the survival meme
for destroying "them." It is time to exercise social consciousness and ask
new questions. We must shift our consciousness to the species level and
rethink the rules. I suggest that the necessary meme now for species success
is that we expand the notion of "us" to include everyone. You would never
punish your brother with a bazooka. You must now consider everyone your
brother. The alternative is suicide.
Christ proposed nonviolence as an individual strategy. Gandhi demonstrated
the power of nonviolence as a national strategy. Soon, perhaps now, we will
face two options: either we develop an effective nonviolent strategy, or we
join the extinct civilizations in our history. They all put their trust in
violence. Now, wild animals wander over the dust of the ancient
civilizations of Egypt, Babylon, China, Greece, Rome, Mexico, Peru, etc. It
is not a short list. If we continue to put our trust in violence, we are
doomed to join their dust. Our money says we trust in God. For most of us,
that God is a god of nonviolence. We must now learn to practice nonviolence
as a society. I don't have the final answers. I suspect nonviolence includes
refusing to fight, to run, to deceive or to surrender. It is not the
coward's way. On the contrary, it requires more courage and commitment than
violence. It means standing and saying to an enemy, I refuse to stop
tolerating you. I will not harm you. I will not run. I will not surrender.
You can insult me. You can injure me. You can destroy me. But, you cannot
stop me from tolerating you. It means we decide that no individual and no
culture can be so evil that we would not choose its survival over total
extinction of us all. It means we cannot use our violent means of species
extinction, even to destroy those who would destroy us. At the national and
cultural levels, we follow the honeybee example. We accept national
destruction, rather than unsheathe the sword of human extinction our
technology has provided.
It seems to me that any nation adopting such a strategy would eliminate
virtually every motive another nation might have for aggression. How could
anyone like Osama recruit terrorists against us if they knew we would never
use our power against them or their culture? Why would Saddam pose any
threat if he really believed nonviolence was our policy? Once any powerful
country, like America, has demonstrated the effectiveness of the nonviolent
strategy, how long would it be before the peoples of the world would demand
that their governments follow our inspired example? Perhaps the best way to
police the world is to stop policing the world. Bring all the troops home.
Let all the refugees in. Give them no more reason to hate or attack us.
The Jews, Muslims and Christians have tried for centuries to control and
destroy each other. Why? Each fears the others. They want to control and
destroy each other because they want to control and destroy each other. The
solution is simple: We must all learn to stop using the violence of
government against each other. And, yes, a new idea is enough. This idea can
be more powerful than all the governments and armies in the world. The pen
is mightier than the sword, and the Internet is mightier than nuclear bombs.
Why is the United Nations useless in this effort? Because it is an
organization of governments, not people. Every government holds a national
monopoly on violence. Have you ever seen an officer of any government use
nonviolence as a strategy? We should not expect an organization of
governments to produce peace. We must develop the nonviolent solution
without governments or government organizations. The Internet might be the
vehicle for our salvation as a civilization. It is certainly time for the
people of the world to unite -- independently of government -- and take
control of our destiny.
II. The World Level
As we think on the world level, we must replace the old violent Destroyers
with a new and effective nonviolent Selective Destroyer. May I propose such
a Destroyer? It is a new system of welfare. First, we eliminate government
welfare because government is violence and this must be a nonviolent
strategy. If we are to consider everyone as brothers (created equal), we
certainly cannot force a brother to support something of which he
disapproves. We cannot force atheists to subsidize the preaching of
religion. We cannot force Christians to sponsor abortions. We cannot force
monogamists to subsidize the children of polygamists. We cannot force anyone
to help anyone else.
Next, we need to establish a worldwide network of private (volunteer)
welfare organizations to replace forced government programs. As we do, I
suggest that no one be given any assistance for more than a year while they
are fertile. Yes, you heard me. Those with inferior genes/memes will be
helped individually while we prevent their future offspring. Thus, we
selectively destroy inferior genes/memes without violence. This will provide
the balance we need to improve our genes/memes through random creations and
selective destruction, while staying within the carrying capacity of our
environment. I know it is brutal. I can only defend it with the argument
that it is less brutal. It is less brutal than waiting until we are overrun
and destroyed by famine or disease. It is less brutal than the plague of
violence now consuming our planet.
The individual consciousness within each of us should accept this plan
because no existing individual has to suffer. The group consciousness should
accept it because it provides an effective mechanism for sorting among
divergent genes/memes. No one has any reason to fear my proposal because an
essential component is that no one will be forced. You will still be free to
help fertile people. You will still be free, as a charitable organization,
to consider each case and make that judgment. You will still be free to seek
help without sterilization, or to live in poverty.
The good news is that as we divert our resources from military development
to economic development, the resulting prosperity might postpone the need
for selective destruction for a hundred years. The better news is that as
enough of us adopt the meme for responsible reproduction, we might eliminate
the need for any destroyer, violent or nonviolent, for a thousand years, or
more. The magic of a symphony is not the clarinets or the violins. It is the
harmony. Perhaps our divergent memes and genes can learn to celebrate our
diversity and live in harmony, peace and prosperity through the worldwide
memes of tolerance and trust.
In February 2002, as a citizen of Salt Lake City, Utah, I welcomed the world
to my city. Now I invite the world into my heart and beg everyone else to do
the same. 911 was a wake-up call. Now that we're awake, let's smell the
coffee and do this right. We might survive a war with Iraq. Maybe so, maybe
not. It is eventually certain, however, that the forces described above will
destroy our civilization if we do not choose wisely. We have a distinct
advantage over all the dead civilizations that went before. We have their
history and we have the Internet. I, for one, prefer not to take the risk
that we, as a species, will not get a second chance at this for another
thousand years. We are intelligent enough to work out the strategy. The
Internet is our tool for peace. Thank God for the Internet.
Now, spread this meme before Bush drops the other shoe.
Ken Larsen
|