How to maintain right speech when doing social justice work?

elenagreene

Hello. I have been absent from the site for a while due to family and life issues but now an issue has come up on which I could use advice. I apologize ahead of time for being more of a taker than a giver in this community. I hope times will become easier and I can give back more of what I'm learning.

Anyway, to my question. It looks like I may have to become involved in an issue of social justice, one which is divisive by its very nature. My Buddhist books say we are supposed to avoid speech which is divisive, but in this case remaining silent would allow an unsafe and hurtful situation to continue.

Are there techniques for communicating peacefully and skillfully when dealing with injustice and intolerance? The books I have encourage peaceful communication but are short on examples and methods of how to do that. Does anyone have recommendations?

karasti

Make your point based on love, compassion and fairness. You can do that without always pointing out the downfalls and problems of the other side. It can still be very disheartening to deal with people on the other side who may be hateful and negative and hurtful, but you don't have to "sink to their level" to make your point.

fivebells

Regarding taking vs giving, don't sweat it. There are people here who are happy to help regardless.

Regarding divisive speech, it's a question of intent. Is your intent to set people against one another? If not, it's not divisive speech, at least for the purposes of the 8-fold path, even if one of the effects will be division. Of course, questions of intent can get very murky, even when examining one's own intent, so the safer route is to avoid speech with that effect when at all possible.

vinlyn

@fivebells, you said, "Regarding divisive speech, it's a question of intent. Is your intent to set people against one another? If not, it's not divisive speech, at least for the purposes of the 8-fold path, even if one of the effects will be division."

I've got to play devil's advocate here. I can use this thinking for justifying being a meat-eater. My intent is to enjoy a hamburger, not to cause suffering to animals.

Ejou

I am a relatively new Buddhist, and unskilled... but, I often will take part in internet discussions about homosexuality and civil rights for gay people. My stance is divisive for some, and rational for others... but is it best to stay out of the discussion and leave things the way that they are, or is it better to voice your opinion and help make change in the world.

As long as you are coming from a place of compassion, and you can put yourself in the shoes of those you are arguing with (meaning not degrading them or getting emotional) then you are in a good place.

elenagreene

In this case the intent is good: to make the community safe for the minority involved, which should ultimately would make it safer for everyone. But the message isn't popular with those who think they have a right to continue tormenting the minority.

vinlyn

@Elenagreene, I think it's difficult. There's a lot of judgement that comes to play here. For example, prior to the Civil War, those in favor of slavery thought they were "right".

I watched an interesting movie the other night -- an old Western based during the Civil War era. It was done interestingly, because neither the Yanks nor the Confederates were portrayed as being "bad" or "wrong", but for both groups, some of their actions within the story were portrayed as being "bad" or "wrong".

I'm gay and I support civil unions and eventually gay marriage. But I also understand issues that are being brought up by the other side.

fivebells

@vinlyn: Right action does not necessarily preclude eating meat. There is some controversy over this, but it really isn't a useful debate. The key question is, is your diet getting in the way of the study and taming of your own mind. For many people, eating meat does indeed get in the way. For many, it doesn't.

elenagreene

Ejou, this is exactly the dilemma. In this case I feel it would be wrong to remain silent. Those of us who are working to resolve this issue are trying not to get outraged and say anything that would make matters worse. This is difficult because the "other side" has been flinging some ugly, inflammatory stuff our way.

vinlyn

@fivebells, forget about eating meat...that was just an example of how I could use the principle you seemed to stating.

karasti

@elenagreene It is the same type of thing I am dealing with. I try to only deal with the people and not their poor behaviors. Especially online because the same people who feel free to use disgusting words online would never do it in person. Instead of being disgusting back, I just point out that their words are hurtful and that they can make their argument without being hurtful. And if they can't, that problem is theirs, and not mine. It's hard when people are voting to change lives, and making those votes based on hate and disturbing beliefs, but all you can do it talk about the positive side of your views. I'm very active in our community's debate over gay marriage (my state is voting on it) and I live in a very small town, so everything is very personal. It's much harder to ignore hurtful words when the person saying them is someone you know and have to see on a regular basis. But it is a good study in patience, and when you can speak/discuss using terms they understand, they are more likely to listen. Some people will just never listen, and there is nothing you can do but not behave like they do and point out how their behavior is hurting people they claim to care about. But some people do listen, and your choice of words makes a big difference. They CAN change minds. But they can also make the person dig in their heels and think "I knew that's how these people were." You just have to choose the right words. If you don't know what they are, they it's usually best to say nothing at the time.

fivebells

@elenagreene, if you are struggling with outrage, try metta meditation.

@vinlyn: Can you give me another example where the reasoning seems to break down?

vinlyn

@fivebells: Hmmmm. I murder my boss because he's being severely abusive to employees, and I can see no other way to definitely stop him. I live in a state that is strongly "pro-wrok", and its record on job cases is very poor. My intent -- stopping the abuse, which is a good thing.

fivebells

Ill will and intent to kill. Very unskillful. Definitely not Right action.

vinlyn

@I agree. But remember, my intent was to stop an abusive boss. Just as my intent was to enjoy eating a hamburger. Just as a person's intent was not to be divisive.

What I am trying to say is -- we need to do very complex thinking in these things. Our intent may have predictable consequences, even though we may not see them.

fivebells

There was other intent, the intent to kill your boss. I agree it can be complex (and Elena's case may be, hence my warnings), but your example is pretty simple, actually.

Dakini

The Buddha said that to remain silent when others are being harmed is "wrong speech". As long as you are advocating FOR justice, FOR compassion for those who have been denied it, and see your mission as one of fostering more compassion and loving-kindness in the world, imo you can't go wrong. I've worked in human rights and social justice, and I view it as a Buddhist calling. Stay focussed on the positive things you're trying to achieve when you do your work. If you write an article or a speech, again, stay focussed on the compassionate awareness you're trying to raise, and imbue your writing with that. Work on inspiring people to do the right thing, rather than criticizing. This is definitely do-able. :thumbsup:

taiyaki

Watch your intention.

vinlyn

@fivebells: Simple yes. But there is a difference between intent and byproduct, and I think one has to consider both. In my example, the byproduct is clear, so you think it is simple. Think of some more complex situation and there will likely still be byproducts of action that were not intended.

As a school principal, when we would be contemplating some new policy or action or program, a major part of the job was to search for all the potential downsides of what was being proposed. And one of the most likely statements made in such discussions was, "Well, I never thought of that." Just because we don't think of byproduct, doesn't release us from responsibility.

elenagreene

@fivebells Thanks for the suggestion of metta meditation. I have done that at times and it may be helpful preparation. I can sort of handle the anger in general, when I have time to meditate and calm myself. The difficult situation for me is in the moment. I don't tend to be good on my feet anyway; I'm better at mulling things over. But when being attacked, or seeing someone being attacked, it's hard for me to keep my cool and figure out how to react. I might say something I regret but other times I clam up, just because I can't figure out a skillful response.

@vinlyn Your points about intent are helpful. My overall intent seems good to me, but I'm realizing that in the moment of being attacked, there's a tendency to forget the overall intent and a new intent arises: to hurt the attacker. Part of my task here is to learn how to remain mindful of the overall intent even under pressure.

@karasti and @dakini, your words are all very helpful. It helps to know you understand the balance I'm trying to achieve here. I'm going to try writing down some of my points and see if I can frame them positively. That could be useful preparation for the moments when I'm in the spot, which as I said, is not my forte.

lobster

Learn reframing in NLP

buddhajunkie

Have compassion for your enemies. Understand that their harmful actions are likely a result of their own suffering. Bear in mind that you have suffered, and have caused others to suffer, just as they have suffered and caused suffering. Give loving kindness to yourself and to them, since you both want to be free from suffering. Do this every day.

Songhill

elenagreene:

My Buddhist books say we are supposed to avoid speech which is divisive, but in this case remaining silent would allow an unsafe and hurtful situation to continue.

"Divisive" needs to be replaced with "harmful" or "cruel" (the opposite of compassion/karuna). This does not mean that you should be a wimp or be obsequious. You can speak non-harmfully and still admonish someone or show them their errors.

elenagreene

@lobster, I hadn't heard of NLP reframing before so I googled it. There are a lot of references out there and some of them seem to imply I should find good in what this oppressive group is doing. Maybe I'm not understanding... Do you have a specific website or book you would suggest?

@buddhajunkie, thanks for the encouragement. That is what I am trying to do.

@Songhill, I think I do understand the point of not saying things that are divisive, especially if that's the only reason for saying them. I've learned that some people who make hurtful, ignorant statements are just looking for validation or an argument. In some cases, I don't dignify those statements with a reply. I have found that this is embarrassing for the other person, hopefully in a good way, because their own underlying doubts can surface. They may think about what they've said, just for a moment. If I argue with them, they just bolster up their position with the same old arguments.

However silence doesn't feel right for the case in the situation I'm in now. Not speaking up would allow those who are being hurtful to continue. They would interpret silence as indifference or support for what they're doing.