"Ethnic cleansing" Misleads

Ethnic Slaughter Isn't Clean

What’s in a word? There are things I can’t say. Why? When I speak, I am embodying words. When I write, I am establishing the ongoing presence of “my words”. By using a word, I am enlivening it; I am validating the existence of that word in the world; emphasizing it, supporting it, feeding it, nourishing its presence. I am breathing words, and the mind-sets which spawned them, alive in the world. Like using money: Believing in it, agreeing with its meaning, and exchanging it, creates and continues its value. So works the world of words.

I don’t have much power and influence. I like to be careful with what I manage and am responsible for: My thoughts, my body, my words, my actions. I do not say “ethnic cleansing.” I don’t even like to write that here. After watching and discussing The Devil Came on Horseback with a friend, I realized the gist of it. In response to her questioning, I clarified: “Ethnic cleansing” validates and perpetuates the consciousness of the violators, the perpetrators, the mass murderers. Like Hitler, they actually think and believe they are cleansing (as in scum) off “their” lands. I refuse to think this way, it is abhorrent to me, and so I cannot speak this phrase without a sense of inner violation. I am not saying that I create my world with my mind, that if I do not see the ships in the harbor, they will not come and conquer me. I am saying I must describe the ships in the harbor to the best of my ability, and not confuse their contents with another idea entirely, like gods.

“Ethnic cleansing” says something that sounds like God. I grew up hearing “Cleanliness is next to Godliness”; it used to be ingrained in Western society, and still is, in many places. “Ethnic cleansing” skims across a mind without registering horror; the mass madness--raping and killing entire populations because they are in some way different--replaced by near-godliness. The phrase is very effective; a designer device diverting minds away from registering, visualizing, imagining, or feeling. It is a prophylactic phrase preventing a sense of the pain, terror, suffering, and grieving that descriptive words would arouse in our primeval mammalian architecture, would evoke in our mirroring minds. A conveyance that goes right around connecting communication, because its intent is not to bear meaning, but to confuse. Do you remember the 1989 Montreal Massacre killings? A young man separated college students by gender and shot the women, screaming, “I hate feminists!” Fourteen women were killed, eleven others injured. An expert on the psychology of mass murderers described how the gunman fit a mass murderer’s profile: hatred and revenge directed toward a specific group in society. Do we refer to this behavior as “gender cleansing”? Why not?


Lynn Oha Carey Fall 2007

Nazrah: A Muslim Woman's Perspective

Shortly after the 9-11 attacks, with hate crimes occurring against Muslims in Seattle, Farah Nousheen brought forth the need for cultural bridges in the form of movies. She was asked to locate good films about Muslim women. Searching broadly, she selected enough excellent films from various countries to create a very popular multi-day showing. But each of these movies was about Muslim women in one country; none covered the wide range of Muslim cultures.

Farah felt that gap strongly enough to put the word out in the Seattle region, inviting Muslim women to join in sharing their voices and perspectives. Each woman who answered the call co-created this movie, in fascinating cross-cultural conversations and debates, offering intimate insights into Muslim women’s variety of experiences, beliefs, and world views. The liveliness of their debates was inspiring and encouraging: their determination and willingness to accept responsibility for change in their Muslim cultures, or to come to terms with it as is; to develop their religious cultures, from personal jihads to community activism. Each woman walked her own edges of living true to her faith, her family, her community or culture, and her Self.

I had a chance to hear Film makers Farah Nousheen (director) and Rita Meher (production manager and wide-angle camerawoman) describe the making of the movie, its evolution, and its spread throughout the world. This grassroots movie was created by two women starting from scratch, with no previous experience in filmmaking. Cameras and labor were donated. In the years since, Farah and Rita have established Tasveer (http://www.tasveer.org), an independent film organization in Seattle, which gathers shorts, experimental films, documentaries, and narratives for monthly screenings and a yearly film festival: "South Asian Women Film Focus" (March 24-26). Farah is mostly screening films now, and working on shorts. Rita gained an education in film making and now works in television production. Farah mentioned that Nazrah, filmed in 2001, is almost historical now. In its first showings, it provoked shock and outrage in its inclusion of a lesbian Muslim woman. In the following years, debates centered around the wearing of head scarves, Hijaabs, and how conversations among Muslim women have changed, especially post Iraq invasion.

Lynn Oha Carey

Nazrah is available at the Evergreen State College library in video and DVD formats.

*SESAME, Students Educating Students About the Middle East, is a student group at Evergreen. SESAME can be reached at 867-6781 or sesame@riseup.net.

Fellowship of Reconciliation Training

Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), a group of folks from many faiths, and no particular faith, who cooperate in supporting nonviolence and justice in the world, held a training in personal and social transformative nonviolence in Olympia, Washington. Two trainers led our group of almost 30. One trainer, a West Point graduate with a military background, flew in from Phoenix; the other, a long time social activist who has worked with a number of Catholic organizations, came out from Philadelphia. Three generations and as many races were represented among the participants: most from the Centralia-Oakville-Olympia area, with some from Seattle or Everett.
Exercises and materials from a number of justice and peace organizations and leaders were integrated over the three days. Personal reflection and journaling balanced and deepened the practices and techniques, small group discussions, skits, and activities exploring and experimenting with group dynamics and community building.

We began by creating a shared history, each of us placing on a “timeline” on the floor, markers for the non-violent successes and leaders which had touched our lives, as we spoke of our mentors and heroes/heroines. In one exploration, “What is violent/non-violent?,” we physically positioned ourselves according to our opinions, our “stance” in relation to situations described. Listening to the reasons others chose their particular place on the spectrum of violent/non-violent sometimes caused participants to re-think their position, literally “moved” by the heartfelt thinking and speaking of another. This prepared us for learning nonviolence principles, as developed or adopted by FOR, Martin Luther King, Pace e Bene, and other groups.

Throughout the training, practices and generous rest periods reminded us to center ourselves and anchor in our true selves, releasing “old scripts” and communicating with respect and patience. These all can be challenging, and we worked with them from various angles. In one non-verbal practice, developed by Barbara Deming, one member of a dyad firmly resists a fist pressing towards them while reaching out with their other arm, palm up, in a gesture of reconciliation. These simultaneous actions provided a visceral experiencing of of protection and peace. After most practices, we paused to reflect on our feelings and thoughts and responses, sometimes sharing them. Frank discussions arose, with opportunities to tap into the accumulated wisdom and experience gathered in the room.

In another powerful exercise, similar to Joanna Macy’s work, six of us stood in each circle, role-playing an American soldier, a Congressman, a soldier’s parent, an Iraqi villager, an Iraqi government official, and a CNN reporter. We each spoke from our role, then moved around the circle to speak, as best we could, from each position, learning as much from other’s perspectives as from the process of changing our own positions.

We entertained ourselves while learning about Bill Moyer’s (of Movement for a New Society, not television, fame) Movement Action Plan (MAP) by breaking into groups to produce short skits illustrating the eight stages a social movement progresses through. We looked at what we would continue to do, or what we could do, to support nonviolence and justice in our own communities, and we recognized from others' efforts the kinds of steps that lead to success, in whatever time frame that success may require.

For some insights into how long that might be, and how to survive in the interim, see Margaret Wheatley's essay, "From Hope to Hopelessness" http://www.margaretwheatley.com/articles/fromhopetohopelessness.html