| home |
PART
III
Not only are there the legitimate "beefs" we might have with other coalition
members - the vegans might take umbrage at a hostile carnivore at the
podium. But between "mis-hearing",
"misconstruing" or even totally hearing what we want to hear.
These and more mistakes will occur, all the standard range of miscuing -
that we do every day - becomes so much more significant as diverse groups
work and plan together and speak to the world as a coalition.
Miscommunication is more common than we might hope, and as the "temperature"
of the discussions rise in socially significant dialogues the possibilities
of misunderstanding only increase. Monologists need not be concerned because
they are only interested in territory rather than communication.
Communication requires a dialogue.
Whether incendiary language or images are used, interpreted, or mis-interpreted
the activist community must summon the most generous interpretations of
actions and motives. Acting to embrace and include our great diversity.
Ironic isn't it.
I also wanted to suggest that heard accurately or not, we must seek to
embrace with more sincerity than the last republican platform attendees, our
diversity it is our unique strength. Every person or organization that we
shun, or disparage reduces our power.
I hope that these essays raise issues and reach out to the activist
community.
Please bring your biggest heart to our meetings. These factors
must be anticipated and tactics must be in place, to enhance unity and reduce
factional friction.
If the anti-war coalitions are to grow beyond the narrowest of opinion,
these must be considered. Since the power of a coalition is its ideological
diversity - those among us, who hope to contribute must keep our barriers
down, and be as tolerant as we can humanly manage. Each voice adds to the
choir
"If we do not hang together, we shall mist assuredly hang separately"
Ben Franklin
|
