Skip to main content

Justice: the Bread of the People

Written by Juliet Bennett
Leave a Comment

“Justice is the bread of the people”, wrote the poet Bertolt Brecht. In the first week of November, I had more than my fair share of peace, justice and conflict…

A small team at the Sydney Peace Foundation comprising of myself, our media and events coordinator Melissa, my intern Bonnie, some volunteers, lead by our Chair Stuart Rees, pulled off the 2012 Sydney Peace Prize events: flying Senator Sekai Holland and her husband Jim from Zimbabwe to Sydney to face an onslaught of media including on ABC’s Q&A, followed by the City of Sydney Peace Prize Lecture to over 1000 people at Town Hall (recording from Sydney Ideas), and a glamourous Gala Dinner for 270 distinguished guests from the corporate world, media, government, and a great number of Sekai’s friends including members of the Wallabies who refused to play South Africa in 1971 in protest against Apartheid. It was challenging, inspiring and absolutely exhausting.

For six weeks I was sucked into a vacuum, taking not only my Friday study-days, evenings and weekends, but my conscious and unconscious mind, occupying my mind during the day and occupying my dreams at night.

Re-emerging from such a world is always a little tough – the mind, body and soul no longer needing adrenaline – I needed lots of sleep and to re-discover my “normal”. I think they call it “Post Project Depression”. Well, now, around 3-weeks post-peace prize, I feel I have adjusted, and I am able to reflect on the incredibly inspiring experience it was.

In Stuart’s closing remarks at the Gala Dinner he recapped a few sentences from Brecht’s  poem:

As daily bread is necessary
So is daily justice.
It is even necessary several times a day.

This stanza came to my mind as I started to write an abstract for an article I am proposing to write for a special edition of the Journal of Peace Education on “Greening Peace, Sustaining Justice.” I searched for the full poem, and I want to share it with you now:

THE BREAD OF THE PEOPLE

Justice is the bread of the people
Sometimes is plentiful, sometimes it is scarce
Sometimes it tastes good, sometimes it tastes bad.
When the bread is scarce, there is hunger.
When the bread is bad, there is discontent.

Throw away the bad justice
Baked without love, kneaded without knowledge!
Justice without flavour, with a grey crust
The stale justice which comes too late!

If the bread is good and plentiful
The rest of the meal can be excused.
One cannot have plenty of everything all at once.
Nourished by the bread of justice
The work can be achieved
From which plenty comes.

As daily bread is necessary
So is daily justice.
It is even necessary several times a day.

From morning till night, at work, enjoying oneself.
At work which is an enjoyment.
In hard times and in happy times
The people requires the plentiful, wholesome
Daily bread of justice.

Since the bread of justice, then, is so important
Who, friends, shall bake it?

Who bakes the other bread?

Like the other bread
The bread of justice must be baked
By the people.

Plentiful, wholesome, daily.
                                           Bertolt Brecht

For me the highlight of the 2012 Peace Prize events was the one that I wasn’t involved in organising: Cabramatta High’s Peace Day – a fusion of cultures expressing peace through costume, dance, music, words, and doves. Take away moment: “It’s time to stand up for what is right” sung by a girl from somewhere in Africa (I forget which country) in the most beautiful voice “it’s time for peace.”

There will never be peace without justice, and both peace and justice are like bread which, as Brecht reminds us, is baked by the people and consumed every day.

At a small gathering of the Sydney Peace Foundation Council with Senator Holland (in the middle) our special guest.

Peace

Life is a Conversation

Written by Juliet Bennett
Leave a Comment

Life is ‘“a conversation that has gone on for centuries,” that one comes in and one tries to hear others both dead and living, and eventually may add to the conversation. “But there comes a time to leave the conversation and the conversation will go on.”‘[1] Paul Ricoeur saw his life as a conversation, and his was a conversation I can only dream to join…

Ricoeur was a French philosopher (aren’t they all?) who wrote over 50 books and is one of the top five most important philosophers of the 21st century. He was famous for his contribution to hermeneutic phenomenology, the philosophy of action, and narrative identity. Ricoeur’s work is dense as it provides a comprehensive use of semantics, semiotics, hermeneutics and phenomenology support for his arguments via systematic ‘detours’ of a historical chain of philosophers from Plato and Aristotle, through Augustine to Kant, Heidegger and many more. Ricoeur is concerned with politics, ethics, and capabilities, led by a desire to understand the problems of human acting, suffering, and social justice. He states his “ethical intention” to be: ‘aiming at the “good life” with and for others, in just institutions.’[2] A major theme of Ricoeur’s work is a philosophical and anthropological enquiry into the idea of a “capable human being” — the “self” as an agent who is responsible for his or her actions, within the contextual constraints that come from the intrinsic connection between the self and other (including the people, culture and environment to which we are born). Ricoeur tends to see dichotomies as dialectics, and a pattern can be observed whereby his books end with a new aporia, a dead end.

His obituary on the right (that I took last year when visiting the University of Chicago), reads:

“He saw the butchery of the Second World War and asked: Out of a culture that has high ideals and high morals, how do you explain this problem of evil? Schewiker said. The search for an answer led Dr. Ricoeur to examine the symbolism of evil, in society and in literature, and the role that it plays in distorting one’s will to do good, Schewiker said. From there, Dr. Ricoeur examined the nature of symbols, delving into how narrative, dialogue and the use of metaphors combined to create new meaning. That method of interpreting texts, called hermeneutics, was but one of several disciplines, including biblical interpretation, structuralism, deconstruction and psychoanalysis, mastered by Dr. Ricoeur, Browning said. Dr. Ricoeur is most widely known for his work in phenomenology, the study of how a person’s reality is shapedby his or her perception of world events.” Antonio Olivo, Obituary: Paul Ricoeur 92.

“We lose today more than a philosopher,” French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin said in a statement. “The entire European humanist tradition is mourning one of its most talented spokesmen.” French President Jacques Chirac told the BBC that Ricoeur was a man who “never stopped proclaiming with determination the need for dialogue and the respect of others.”[1]

“Justice and love summarize, in my mind, the man Ricoeur.” said Andre Lacocque.[1] That’s some conversation. To Justice and Love!


[1] The University of Chicago News Office 23 May 2005:  University of Chicago philosopher Paul Ricoeur, 1913-2005

[2] Ricoeur, Paul (1992). Oneself as Another. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, Ltd. p. 172.

 

 

Academic, Peace

Dictators, Monarchs and Anarchy: on Earth and in Heaven

Written by Juliet Bennett
1 Comment

Have you ever noticed that the interior design of churches bears a striking resemblance to courts? From the pews to the preacher, and even their outfits!

There is a curious similarity between our politics and our religion, and an even more curious similarity between our systems of power within human societies and the way we imagine power structures within our universe.

“God” is still imagined by many people to be a king. This metaphor originated in the time when this image came to bear people were living in a monarchy. The king was the most powerful person in the kingdom, so God was imagined to be a king.

It is interesting that as our political models have changed, this image hasn’t.

I suppose in some circles it has, and “God” is imagined to be a little more democratic. But in some circles God is still imagined to be a bit like a king, or what could even be considered a fascist dictator (who punishes with eternal suffering if one doesn’t do what he says).

Alan Watts says on The Worlds Most Dangerous Book:

When one considers the architecture and ritual of churches, whether Catholic or Protestant, it is obvious until most recent times that they are based on royal or judicial courts. A monarch who rules by force sits in the central court of his donjon with his back to the wall, flanked by guards, and those who come to petition him for justice or to offer tribute must kneel or prostrate themselves simply because these are difficult positions from which to start a fight. Such monarchs are, of course, frightened of their subjects and constantly on the anxious alert for rebellion. Is this an appropriate image for the inconceivable energy that underlies the universe? True, the altar-throne in Catholic churches is occupied by the image of God in the form of one crucified as a common thief, but he hangs there as our leader in subjection to the Almighty Father, King of the universe, propitiating Him for those who have broken His not always reasonable laws. And what of the curious resemblances between Protestant churches and courts of law? The minister and the judge wear the same black robe and “throw the book” at those assembled in pews and various kinds of boxes, and both ministers and judges have chairs of estate that are still, in effect, thrones.

The crucial question, then, is that if you picture the universe as a monarchy, how can you believe that a republic is the best form of government, and so be a loyal citizen of the United States? It is thus that fundamentalists veer to the extreme right wing in politics, being of the personality type that demands strong external and paternalistic authority. Their “rugged individualism” and their racism are founded on the conviction that they are the elect of God the Father, and their forebears took possession of America as the armies of Joshua took possession of Canaan, treating the Indians as Joshua and Gideon treated the Bedouin of Palestine. In the same spirit the Protestant British, Dutch and Germans took possession of Africa, India and Indonesia, and the rigid Catholics of Spain and Portugal colonized Latin America. Such territorial expansion may or may not be practical politics, but to do it in the name of Jesus of Nazareth is an outrage.

In The Nature of Consciousness, Watts notes with a twinkle in his eye (I imagine through his voice) that: 

“the man who rules you all is the biggest crook in the bunch. Because he’s the one who succeeded in crime. The other people are pushed aside because they–the criminals, the people we lock up in jail–are simply the people who didn’t make it. So naturally, the real boss sits with his back to the wall and his henchmen on either side of him.”

When you really think about our conceptions of God and Satan, and where they have come from and how they have changed throughout history, I can’t help wonder:

What if power-hungry men switched around the human conceptions of Satan and God, in order that they might rule earth?

In other words what if we are mixed up: what if Satan is good and God is bad? Is it more likely that “God” is a dictator wanting worship, or a social libertarian wanting individuals to enjoy their lives while contributing freely and positively to society?

In The Dictator (undoubtedly a ridiculous and distasteful movie, which I enjoyed), General Aladeen asks: “Why are you guys so anti-dictators? Imagine if America was a dictatorship. You could let 1% of the people have all the nation’s wealth. You could help your rich friends get richer by cutting their taxes. And bailing them out when they gamble and lose. You could ignore the needs of the poor for health care and education. Your media would appear free, but would secretly be controlled by one person and his family. You could wiretap phones. You could torture foreign prisoners. You could have rigged elections. You could lie about why you go to war. You could fill your prisons with one particular racial group, and no one would complain. You could use the media to scare the people into supporting policies that are against their interests.”

Would it be better to have a peaceful dictatorship or a violent democracy? Neither.

How about a democracy based on freedom and non-violent conflict?

I wonder if that could become the basis of our power structures on earth, and maybe in (metaphorically speaking) heaven too?

General Aladeen goes on to admit, for all its faults, a love for Democracy (in the movie represented by a Greeny who doesn’t shave her armpits). This is a sentiment shared by many including myself. Democracy is good until the point where it joins forces with capital and media and turns into a somewhat fascist state.

None of this is black and white, but it’s interesting to contemplate the extremes and the endless in-betweens…

 

 

 

Truth

Living authentically, and its anxieties

Written by Juliet Bennett
1 Comment

I am far too aware of my being-towards-death. While Heidegger calls this “authenticity”, I call it “frick’n annoying” and a “tad bit depressing”. But it’s too late now.

My ignorance is gone and like when you see a huge zit on someone’s face, it’s hard to then go back to ignoring it.

For all it’s frustrations there may be something to it: an awareness of death leads to more conscious decisions in the way you live life.

Awareness of death makes you reflect on what you care about, and encourages you to ensure your actions reflect that care.

This is the “authentic” experience of  not only being-toward-death but living-toward-death.

Heidegger predicts a certain anxiety that comes with this authenticity. The anxiety of understanding your limited time in your body, that every day brings you a day closer. But he thinks that with this anxiety, life becomes a bit thicker – more meaningful, more purposeful – because one lives with an awareness of his or her finitude.

Consequentially I spend a lot of time asking and re-asking myself: What do I want out of life?

In a less self-centric form that question is: What do I want to give back to life? That is, how do I want to influence the world beyond my own bodily existence?

And from that question: Am I getting that and giving that in my life right now? Am I on a path that will continue to bring more of this into my future?

 

The pic: I took this photo of a boy sending a rocket into space earlier this year in Nicaragua while on an adventure with a friend who is doing amazing work over there, an example of truly authentic living. Jason set up the La Isla Foundation to address the epidemic of Chronic Kidney Disease among sugar cane workers in Central America. Check it out: http://laislafoundation.org


Adventure, Truth

The Taboo Against Knowing Who You Really Are

Written by Juliet Bennett
1 Comment

No one “gets it” like Alan Watts gets it. He summarises “it” in a 160 page book called “THE BOOK: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are” (1966).  This TAG proves the pattern: no matter what I learn in the other fields and areas of scholarship, I can’t help but return to the metaphoric and comedic language of Alan Watts.

These two paragraphs in the Preface to THE BOOK, (almost) captures the thesis I’m spending hours upon hours trying to write:

“THIS BOOK explores an unrecognized but mighty taboo—our tacit conspiracy to ignore who, or what, we really are. Briefly, the thesis is that the prevalent sensation of oneself as a separate ego enclosed in a bag of skin is a hallucination which accords neither with Western science nor with the experimental philosophy-religions of the East—in particular the central and germinal Vedanta philosophy of Hinduism. This hallucination underlies the misuse of technology for the violent subjugation of man’s natural environment and, consequently, its eventual destruction.

We are therefore in urgent need of a sense of our own existence which is in accord with the physical facts and which overcomes our feeling of alienation from the universe. For this purpose I have drawn on the insights of Vedanta, stating them, however, in a completely modern and Western style—so that this volume makes no attempt to be a textbook on or introduction to Vedanta in the ordinary sense. It is rather a cross-fertilization of Western science with an Eastern intuition.”

It’s contents includes:

1 Inside Information 11
2 The Game of Black-and-White 29
3 How To Be a Genuine Fake 53
4 The World Is Your Body 82
5 So What? 100
6 IT 125

Reading these paragraphs make me question why I am writing a thesis that seems to take the above two paragraphs and make them a whole lot more complicated?

I guess that’s the process of growth: take things apart, make them more complex, then put them back together, and see if there’s something useful you can add in returning it to the simplicity. Even Watts wrote and spoke at length about “Nothingness”…

I doubt I can add much to the messages Alan Watts conveys so effectively, but given the feeling of alienation of humans from their universe continues, as does the exploitation of our fellow humans and our planet, both which appear connected to understandings of self and world that don’t align with a holistic look at what western science tells us (including evolution, emergence and quantum physics). Maybe my contribution will be exploring how the idea captured in THE BOOK may be put to use in new ways…

THE BOOK is definitely worth a read (or Google the title and PDF and you’ll surely find a free copy) and The Nature of Consciousness (an audio lecture series) is well worth listening to, at least ten times:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhRWYFJ2pyI[/youtube]

Hopefully when my ability to express these ideas improves I will be able to share this in ways that doesn’t simply direct people away from my blog. When one is working over 4-days a week, and trying to write up a long academic thesis by the end of the year, there’s only so much you can do…. I guess it’ll all happen in good time.

 

Truth,

Words of Wisdom, Lessons for Life

Written by Juliet Bennett
1 Comment

There’s always more to learn and a good place to start is to listen to the words of those older than ourselves: people who have lived through more years, had more experiences, made more mistakes – people who have reflected on life’s meaning and on how to best deal with life’s challenges and adversities.

Last week was a significant birthday for my Dad…

This photo captures some of the celebrations shared by three generations of Bennetts 🙂

Events like this inspire reflection on life (as if I don’t do that enough), and looking through old writings I came across the following 45 lessons for life – saved from one of those random emails forwarded from inbox to inbox around five years ago.

Googling it now I found their author – Regina Brett – posted as she approached her 50th birthday. There’s many-a words of wisdom in there so I thought I’d share (some of my favs are in bold):

1. Life isn’t fair, but it’s still good.

2. When in doubt, just take the next small step.

3. Life is too short to waste time hating anyone.

4. Your job won’t take care of you when you are sick. Your friends and parents will. Stay in touch.

5. Pay off your credit cards every month.

6. You don’t have to win every argument. Agree to disagree.

7. Cry with someone. It’s more healing than crying alone.

8. It’s OK to get angry with God. He can take it.

9. Save for retirement starting with your first paycheck.

10. When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.

11. Make peace with your past so it won’t screw up the present.

12. It’s OK to let your children see you cry.

13. Don’t compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about.

14. If a relationship has to be a secret, you shouldn’t be in it.

15. Everything can change in the blink of an eye. But don’t worry; God never blinks.

16. Take a deep breath. It calms the mind.

17. Get rid of anything that isn’t useful, beautiful or joyful.

18. Whatever doesn’t kill you really does make you stronger.

19. It’s never too late to have a happy childhood. But the second one is up to you and no one else.

20. When it comes to going after what you love in life, don’t take no for an answer.

21. Burn the candles, use the nice sheets, wear the fancy lingerie. Don’t save it for a special occasion. Today is special.

22. Over prepare, then go with the flow.

23. Be eccentric now. Don’t wait for old age to wear purple.

24. The most important sex organ is the brain.

25. No one is in charge of your happiness but you.

26. Frame every so-called disaster with these words ‘In five years, will this matter?’

27. Always choose life.

28. Forgive everyone everything.

29. What other people think of you is none of your business.

30. Time heals almost everything. Give time time.

31. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.

32. Don’t take yourself so seriously. No one else does.

33. Believe in miracles.

34. God loves you because of who God is, not because of anything you did or didn’t do.

35. Don’t audit life. Show up and make the most of it now.

36. Growing old beats the alternative — dying young.

37. Your children get only one childhood.

38. All that truly matters in the end is that you loved.

39. Get outside every day. Miracles are waiting everywhere.

40. If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else’s, we’d grab ours back.

41. Envy is a waste of time. You already have all you need.

42. The best is yet to come.

43. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.

44. Yield.

45. Life isn’t tied with a bow, but it’s still a gift.

 

http://www.reginabrett.com/life_lessons.php

Random Life Stuff

A new calendar and a 70th birthday…

Written by Juliet Bennett
1 Comment

“For my 70th birthday I would like to invite you to join me for a nude beach party,” my friend announced, dressed in a hijab and in her early 30s.

“Sure!” I laughed, imagining my group of friends from university, of every colour, shape, gender and culture, imagining us in our 60s and 70s, running bare and free at a nude beach.

“I might have lost my sight by then,” one of the boys sighed.

“You need to give me more notice,” another one joked.

It got me thinking, what would a 100-year calendar look like? How would it affect my life if I started mapping out the next 60-70 years? Career, family, travel, birthday parties, and even my own death…

Of course there’s no way to know when you are going to die, nor any way to know in what ways the world is going to change next year or in 60 years time. The state of technology, of war, population, poverty, peace, of values, culture, and life styles… all are constantly change.

However there are some things that can be mapped out:

1982

1992

2002

2012

2022

2032

2042

2052

2062

2072

–>

0

Teens

20s

30s

40s

50s

60s

70s

80s

90s

Birth

What is this world I’m in?

Study, try jobs, have fun!

Career: publish, work, specialise

Family

Back to career. Pay off mortgage.

Have I lived a good life?

Grand kids. The nude beach party.

Leave a mark on the world

Any final remarks?

Legacy & genes live on

In 2072 will I have experienced 59 more NYE’s, 59 more Christmas Days, and 59 more birthdays. If I live to 90-years old (as I plan), 2072 will be the year I pass away. If I live to 2082 I will have been on the planet for an entire century. Maybe I’ll make it, maybe I won’t. Maybe I’ll live on through babies I make, books I create, policies, businesses, and teaching, or maybe I won’t.

Then I catch myself: Is it morbid to be thinking about this?

When something is unknown I get anxious. When I have certainty, anxiety disappears. If there is one thing certain in life, it is death. So what is behind our resistance to articulate, discuss and come to terms with it?

Facing up to death need not be a source of anxiety. In fact it may make you less anxious than acting as if it will “never happen to you”.

Owning your death, truly accepting it, and living your life in the certainty of it, can be source of empowerment.

Thinking about death helps me appreciate every moment I’m in. It helps motivate me to plan my future, knowing that these plans are always changing. And most of all it helps point out the humour that comes from the fickleness of it all. One day there will be nothing once more.

Life is like a game: you play it. It’s not an endpoint to arrive at but is a process to be enjoyed. You can struggle with it, and narrate a story of suffering. Or you can dance your way through it, narrate a story of laughter and care. At my end, when my body starts to croak, I hope I can look back and say—“wasn’t it good.” And I hope that others can remember me, and the legacy I leave behind, and say the same.

 

 

 

Random Life Stuff

The Factory Hooter has Gone!

Written by Juliet Bennett
Leave a Comment

One of the best things about working with Stuart Rees is the little one-liners I am introduced to. At 5pm, or if the sun is shining, he will knock on my office door and say: “The factory hooter has gone!”

The first few times he said it my response was “Huh? The what?”

“The factory hooter,” he smiled, going on to explain that the “factory hooter” was the noise that sounded in Industrialising England when it was time for all the factory workers to go home.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCnRV3SQkKk[/youtube]

I may Fridays working from home on my thesis (and getting distracted by the internet), but for all you peeps out there finishing the standard working week I share your joy when I say:

“The factory hooter has sounded. It’s time to go!”

 

 

Random Life Stuff

I want

Written by Juliet Bennett
Leave a Comment

When someone goes straight to the point and says “I want…”, it can appear a little confronting, but there certainly is power in it. You know what you want and you have the confidence to ask for it. Respect.

Conversing on this topic my friend observed that people often ask for things (especially in Australia) starting with “Sorry, but can I…”

Are you sorry? If you were actually sorry, would you still be asking the question? In such a scenario, is “sorry” a useless and inauthentic forerunner to expressing what you want? If you want something, or do not want something, why not just say it???

This conversation inspired me to reflect on my own language and hesitations in asking for what I want.

My Spring resolution: say “I want” and don’t apologise for it.

Hm… but what is it that I want? Right now, I want to go to bed. Good night 🙂

Random Life Stuff