Reconnecting the dots between Activism and Peace.

 

Re-framing, re-branding activism as the true process of peace using strategies usually used by the corporate world may sound like such an unconventional, absurd idea. If so, good, because none of the strategies of the past 50 years have done much to prevent armed, social, economic or environmental catastrophes.

Repeace is not about arbitrary attempts at repeating, regurgitating a well established movement and huge inspirational ideal of a past era and add a new design and catchy slogans. Repeace is about reorganizing our thoughts, because they are flawed. Reorganizing is designing. New identification methods are simply necessary to materialize any form of change, Occupy, Wikileaks, or Podemos. Who cares what strategy works to empower the 99%, as long as it finally does!

The Repeace strategy of defining Peace as "Absence of fear," is simply better conceptual thinking, that has consequences. As argued (here) we're not the only ones who regard social or environmental conflicts as "wars," as sources of fears, not just wars or nuclear weapons. "War & Peace" has become a dogma, one that just doesn't work for peace, and it doesnt work well for non-violence initiatives either. It's obviously not only a misguided strategy. This all sounds so harsh, but who can argue with the facts that activism, directly or indirectly, via the UN, governments or any organizations, has effectively promoted peace?

Either we come to a point where we change our strategy because we see that it's not working or because we understand why is not working. We believe that the approach of peace through the lenses of wars and nuclear weapons is not working because it prevents all human beings wanting to participate in the social discourse to be part of a unified will, a cohesive movement. Peace may have created a cohesive team among pacifists and veterans for peeace, but its narrow focus on wars has excluded all other activists from seeing their shared emotion, fear and identify with their shared purpose... peace, exactly.

Fear has been so skillfully exploited by the 1% to achieve their own objectives, at dividing us so well. Why can't we look at fear for actually being a plain emotion, one we actually share because "we worry about stuff" and use it for what it's naturally supposed to do, connect us! We wish to get all the attention of activists, socially engaged humans, anarchists, etc, by appealing to our shared fears. That's how we wish to get your attention first.

All activists realize peace because they fight "conflicts." They fight to relieve "fears." Peace is the absence of fear. It makes sense. These are the rationales that haven't been tried to unite and deliver new forms of consent and direct democracy. We wish to try these rationales because they are there to empower you.

Do we really have to wait for when it's too late?