A seminary friend of mine is probably just getting up to visit a Palestinian refugee camp to experience their world for a day. She will also be visiting with Israelis. Her purpose: to understand the sources of hurt, anger, and violence, and to reflect on the strategies for peace. A tall order. Heads of state have failed. Yet I sense she is on to something.
The problem and the solution somehow are tied to that “up close and personal” experience of the reality in which you and I live. It is possible that the pronouns of opposition [them, us, we, they, I, you] can become secondary in the debate to a more inclusive “us.” We simply can’t find long term security in short term tactics of threats and violence.
The problem and the solution somehow are tied to that “up close and personal” experience of the reality in which you and I live. It is possible that the pronouns of opposition [them, us, we, they, I, you] can become secondary in the debate to a more inclusive “us.” We simply can’t find long term security in short term tactics of threats and violence.
As she awakens and begins her day, I will be concluding mine. Yet, I feel the closeness of connection. The world is capable of instant connection by technology, including live, real time video. We see the violence in the middle east as it is happening, not from paid journalists, but by the participants. The scene feels as close as LA, Chicago, or New York. It may be that we will work more cooperatively for solutions when we realize that we are not really separated at all except in our imaginations.
http://www.jobattorney.net “Fighting for the Little Guy”