There is effective love, but chatting about love on the internet without doing anything kinda makes you look naive - and indeed, you likely are.
But if you have real love that can survive and contribute, then do it. Get involved. Learn Arabic, spend time in Palestine, spend time in Israel. Get to know people, and work on healing the underlying emotional scars that boil to the surface like this.
Until then, I may appreciate your love as ‘nice’, but it’s not meaningful like you think it is unless you also back it up with will and power.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and criticize, which at the very least flirts with being avoidant rather than loving. But if you love, and this is your calling, go do it.
That’s self righteous and unproductive. So, you can only love and show empathy in the places where it’s needed, when it’s needed? How magnanimous. Love anywhere spreads love everywhere.
Do as you wish. I think your take is ineffectual. But you’re, of course, welcome to it. You’ll just need to convince the people who are directly involved of the validity of your viewpoint. You will succeed, or live with what they do. But i think it’s the latter, as people tend to ignore those who have strong opinions but aren’t really willing to get involved.
I disagree. People like me protest. We are the ones who have pressured a pause, and still demand a ceasefire. And eventually an end to the apartheid. We will win in the end. Because love creates, and hate destroys.
It’s not the duality you think it is. It’s not love and hate, it’s love and will. …although hate may be involved for some, generally it’s just survival and effective courses of action. Some situations have no effective courses of action, and there aren’t enough loving people directly involved in the wielding of power to create new, mutually-beneficial courses of action using the insight that love can provide. So it continues in the best way people can see - which isn’t always a clearly loving way.
You’re welcome to protest. But when a person/group acting from love requests that a person/group acting from will do the job differently, but that person who loves isn’t willing to apply their own will, it just rings hollow.
Hearts that appeal to power are just as culpable as powers that ignore their hearts. Period.
real Love - capital-L love - is capable of love and power, but isn’t limited to either one. It gets hate, and yet knows the ineffectual nature of it. It seeks the best ways it can find, and implements them. It knows the tiredness of doing your best and finding no answer, and having to choose a course that’s painful for yourself or others. It knows the joy of success when situations work out. It knows the sorrow of facing situations with no clear answer.
…and ultimately, it takes the criticism of those who don’t understand the situation, and the emotional impact of the ‘righteous’ anger of those people who criticise, and uses it to learn and grow.
…and then continues on, because that’s just another thing it can be, but isn’t limited to being.
Gandhi’s peace was not non-confrontational. He conducted mass protests, refusal of payment to authorities, and mass exodus from British commerce.
Throwing reference to his name as simply a “love of peace” is ignoring the circumstances and actions that lead to peace. Everyone loves peace. The question is what kind of confrontation you accept to achieve it.
Love and empathy. You should try it. Best high you’ll ever get.
deleted by creator
Then you don’t really have empathy.
Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi found the answer. It is peace through love. I still highly suggest you write it down.
There is effective love, but chatting about love on the internet without doing anything kinda makes you look naive - and indeed, you likely are.
But if you have real love that can survive and contribute, then do it. Get involved. Learn Arabic, spend time in Palestine, spend time in Israel. Get to know people, and work on healing the underlying emotional scars that boil to the surface like this.
Until then, I may appreciate your love as ‘nice’, but it’s not meaningful like you think it is unless you also back it up with will and power.
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and criticize, which at the very least flirts with being avoidant rather than loving. But if you love, and this is your calling, go do it.
That’s self righteous and unproductive. So, you can only love and show empathy in the places where it’s needed, when it’s needed? How magnanimous. Love anywhere spreads love everywhere.
Do as you wish. I think your take is ineffectual. But you’re, of course, welcome to it. You’ll just need to convince the people who are directly involved of the validity of your viewpoint. You will succeed, or live with what they do. But i think it’s the latter, as people tend to ignore those who have strong opinions but aren’t really willing to get involved.
Good luck.
I disagree. People like me protest. We are the ones who have pressured a pause, and still demand a ceasefire. And eventually an end to the apartheid. We will win in the end. Because love creates, and hate destroys.
It’s not the duality you think it is. It’s not love and hate, it’s love and will. …although hate may be involved for some, generally it’s just survival and effective courses of action. Some situations have no effective courses of action, and there aren’t enough loving people directly involved in the wielding of power to create new, mutually-beneficial courses of action using the insight that love can provide. So it continues in the best way people can see - which isn’t always a clearly loving way.
You’re welcome to protest. But when a person/group acting from love requests that a person/group acting from will do the job differently, but that person who loves isn’t willing to apply their own will, it just rings hollow.
Hearts that appeal to power are just as culpable as powers that ignore their hearts. Period.
real Love - capital-L love - is capable of love and power, but isn’t limited to either one. It gets hate, and yet knows the ineffectual nature of it. It seeks the best ways it can find, and implements them. It knows the tiredness of doing your best and finding no answer, and having to choose a course that’s painful for yourself or others. It knows the joy of success when situations work out. It knows the sorrow of facing situations with no clear answer.
…and ultimately, it takes the criticism of those who don’t understand the situation, and the emotional impact of the ‘righteous’ anger of those people who criticise, and uses it to learn and grow.
…and then continues on, because that’s just another thing it can be, but isn’t limited to being.
I like where you’re headed, though I ascribe more to materialism than existentialism. You might find this interesting.
Gandhi’s peace was not non-confrontational. He conducted mass protests, refusal of payment to authorities, and mass exodus from British commerce.
Throwing reference to his name as simply a “love of peace” is ignoring the circumstances and actions that lead to peace. Everyone loves peace. The question is what kind of confrontation you accept to achieve it.
As was King, and Jesus even. Love, through the will of the people , can conquer all. Confrontation with compassion.
deleted by creator
That’s reductionist but funny. That would make you, what? A conservative? Let me guess. A moderate centrist liberal? Know thyself.