A Practical Peace

It’s been a little over a year since Boulder landed the 4^th spot in the “best city for hippies” ranking by the magazine Estately. And while Boulderites will have a divided opinion about that, few would disagree that hippies are intimately linked with the word “peace.”  Boulder has its own history of peace activism, especially with the protests against the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant. Some of those activists may have considered themselves hippies; some may not have… but the article did not mention this history of peace activism, focusing instead on Boulder’s love of marijuana. So what does it even mean to be a hippie? What does it even mean to really desire peace?

It’s this word “peace” that has become almost a laughingstock – a tie-dyed peace symbol you’ve stared at so long it’s lost its meaning, or something shouted by barefoot, drugged out people that will never ever happen.

If we’re keeping peace only in the houses of hippies and within the ambit of a 1960s counter-culture, we’re doing it a major disservice.  This is the message that’s been coming out of an organization here in Broomfield, One Earth Future, which has been producing research and interviews of thought leaders on the subjects of peace and conflict. What is needed to make us stop thinking of peace as an unattainable utopia, and apply this concept to a practical agenda?

For one thing, we can’t be kidding ourselves that the mission is to evaporate all forms of conflict. “We need conflict,” says William Ury, co-founder of the Harvard Negotiation Project. “Wherever there’s injustice, you need to engage it.” But injustice can be engaged through nonviolent forms of conflict that are more effective in the advancement of humankind.

For another, there are some seriously underutilized resources and attention out there that can be harnessed for the cause of peace. As Sanam Anderlini, the co-founder of International Civil Society Action Network points out, a silent majority actually does want peace, and it’s not the hand-holding, altered-mind state, but the practical existence of nonviolent action. We just need to elevate and learn from these voices – especially women. Women in particular can be powerful negotiators, says Swanee Hunt, and bring a different perspective and knowledge base to the peace process.

And let’s remind ourselves that peace is not represented only on your uncle’s John Lennon poster. Like psychologist Steven Pinker says, our mindsets towards peace should change so that it becomes a practical, solvable problem, not about whether or not you sing the right folk songs.  We no longer consider dueling, slavery, or human sacrifice fashionable practices, and norms about war may be going the same way.

Voices like Ambassador Charles Stith caution us about the scope of the challenges, especially existing levels of discontent. Lack of fairness makes for violent people, as he says, and we have only to look to Ferguson, MO for proof that underlying grievances are far from vanishing. But we can also look to some inspiring examples – like the Civil Rights movement – for confronting anger and conflict in nonviolent ways.

There is a little referenced distinction between inequality as represented by World Bank stat sheets, and a person’s own sense that they are being treated unfairly What if we were to get better attaking the sense of a people’s inequality into account along with the other statistics? What if, like Ury suggests, we treat war and violent uprisings more like common health ailments – predictable and preventable? What if we stop giving in to a narrative of spiraling unrest and danger and start paying more attention to some of the astonishing positive global trends that have taken place?

Whether or not Boulder is a haven for hippies is beside the point. Hippies and non-hippies alike, we have a lot of practical problem-solving ahead of us.