Peace Radical for a Radical Peace

Without offering room for debate, I make the naked assertion peace is not an ideal. You cannot arrive at peace through mere study and logic. You cannot make peace some disembodied ideal you pursue through Peace Studies or such. You can promote peace only by being peaceful yourself. Peace is by nature a living entity, and it must live in you, or you cannot comprehend any part of it.

Sure, we see the symptoms of peace as deescalation of tensions. That’s if we understand tensions are natural to the human condition. We all want something we don’t yet have, and we cannot help perceive someone is getting in the way. Regardless how we handle it, tension is a fact of life. The problem, then, is not the tension, but how it is handled.

Or so it seems. I agree with Dr. Kolkey in one aspect of his thesis: Every war in history appears to be the result of nothing more than the personal ambitions of one or another ruler. It has never, ever been in the national interest, or any approximation of that, but always the personal desires of some big shot who is all too willing to lie about his motives. Perhaps he lies even to himself, but every war has been nothing more than a personal gripe of some ruler or group of rulers.

And I agree with what lies behind the answer Dr. Kolkey offers. While he asserts we must make sure every leader lives in fear of his subjects, I would say that is just another way of describing decentralization of power. Leaders who have all the power fear nothing. Leaders in a world where such concentration of power is not possible won’t make war with the lives of those they lead. They can’t.

But the mechanics of implementation are the real question here. How do you and I go about changing how folks live so that power remains decentralized? Obviously, it requires raising a consciousness. So far, various peace movements have never gotten too far. That is in part because the peace movements themselves were too often centralized. But worse, they viewed peace through the logic of achievements, of goals, something so vital it could eventually move people to compromise principles, the old end-justifies-means question. You can’t avoid that if you pursue peace down the wrong trail. You’ll end up chasing ghosts, because you don’t understand where peace flourishes. It’s like hunting waterfowl in the desert.

Peace is a very personal force. You get there by commitment, by loving it enough to sacrifice just about anything for it. All that blather by experts around the world means nothing without such a commitment. No, I don’t mean making peace your god; rather understand peace as one character trait of any god worthy of worship. Yes, I’m a Christ follower, but I realize where peace lives, so does He. You can think of it any way you like, but peaceful people smell like the robes of Christ, the smells of long hikes across rocky mountainous terrain, sleeping under the stars, the smell of sheep and unwashed humans crowding around in desperation, of perfumed hair and feet, of blood and beams of wood.

Let’s serve peace. Just presenting the peaceful ways to all you encounter is the one best way to promote the idea there is a better way than fighting. We don’t need a movement. We can recognize each other easily if we choose to keep our eyes open. Do your own peace, and make friends with those who are making peace in other ways.