It appears that there is an increasing sentiment among some government officials along with the men who feel the antidote to men under siege is to evoke the ethos of the warrior. The problem is which aspect of the warrior archetype are they endorsing? As I have previously shared, The Warrior – takes action, confronts, commands, motivates and can be expressed in the Light (I do)– change agent, protector, disciplined, assertive, leader or in the Shadow (I take) – violent, bully, uses aggression as primary strategy, impulsive.
The question is, “How do we shift from the warrior in the shadow to the warrior in the light?” Historically, there are numerous examples of how strategic nonviolence has been successful in remediating injustice and accomplishing win-win outcomes. There is research that -shows that nonviolent campaigns are twice as likely to succeed as violent ones (53% vs. 26%) because they attract broader participation and cause defections within the government or military.
Specifically, looking at what Ghandi accomplished underscores the power of strategic nonviolence in the form of civil disobedience. His great salt march and his hunger strikes were actions that led to the end of colonial rule in India. Civil Disobedience as explained in Thoreau’s essay “Civil Disobedience”, an argument in favor of citizen disobedience against an unjust state has become the blueprint for action against injustice and authoritarianism. The civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr. and many others demonstrated the power of warriors acting in the light. When the media showed non-violent protestors being attacked by police wielding batons and “sicing” their dogs for attempting to sit in segregated lunch counters the political establishment took note and brought an end to Jim Crow restrictions.
There are historically many other examples of how civil disobedience achieved change without resorting to violence. Social change occurs when a moral imperative can be demonstrated and when violence was not used as the instrument of change. We need to honor the warriors who act in the light and are willing to put themselves in harm’s way as a means to remedy injustice.
I am not attempting to cast the warrior in the light as a pacifist. There certainly are circumstances, especially when acting as a protector, that the warrior must appropriately resort to violence. However, the violent response should be proportional and not as a justification for vengeance. Let us not invoke the image of the warrior as an excuse for aggression being the primary approach to problem solving. A warrior behaving in the light is much more than an instrument of violence and domination.