This is a bit of an odd topic, but I think this tribe is about as good a place as I'm likely to find to discuss it. This is a rather large topic for me, and hopefully I can summarize it in a meaningful way.

My basic premise is that as long as humankind responds to violence with violence, we are doomed. Because of the "natural" tendency of violence to escalate (until one 'participant' submits, usually returning later with a higher degree of violence) that, to me, seems obvious and requires no spiritual beliefs to accept as a reasonable argument. (Whether or not we have a viable alternative, is a separate topic.)

The second part of my personal belief, has to do with "energy", mass unconscious, and fields of thought/emotion. This is where I may lose a lot of folks, but, oh well. I believe that thoughts have energy. "Mob psychology" (as an example) happens because a group of people combine emotion with like thoughts, and they feed and magnify each other. If you've ever found yourself in the midst of a mob, you know the energy is palpable. Any time two or more people agree on something, the confirmation/justification/validation builds the energy or conviction in each of them. Returning to my original statement, "as long as humankind responds to violence with violence, we are doomed" -- this now takes on a whole new level of meaning. The premise being that people coming together on any level in support of the use of violence are perpetuating violence itself, even if no action is taken.

Which brings me to my next and last point. Following this line of logic, the idea that we will "prepare for the worst and hope for the best" appears tragically flawed. The energy involved in preparation is geometrically greater than the energy we produce with "hope". If you spend your morning at the range shooting, your afternoon repairing your fences and checking your parameter, your evening on forums reassuring yourself that you are not alone, and then before going to bed at night you say a little prayer for peace, you've created a whole lot more energy in one field than the other.

One example of my personal experience with this concept revolves around carrying. I have a permit to carry (CHL in my state) and I have gone for long periods of time with and without a gun on my person 24/7. I have definitely noticed that there is a difference in my mental framework when my options for conflict resolution have changed that fundamentally. This includes interactions with people and even dogs. I am not by any stretch implying that all of a sudden I have some loose cannon "shoot 'em up" mentality -- its actually very subtle, but there is a shift. The essence of the shift is that when unarmed I realize that at the very outset of a possible confrontation with violent people (or animals) my best weapon to diffuse the situation is to flood it with love (this is not passive, but that's another topic). That may sound ridiculous, but its my experience - it works. When I'm armed, I'm more likely to simply stand my ground, not aggressively and not submissively... more like I'm too lazy to actually heal the situation. This description is overly simplified, but hopefully the essence is not lost.

The genius of Gandhi was that he forced the British to look at themselves; by not responding with violence they could not justify their actions and their violence (now isolated) was demonstrated as obscene in the face of pacifism. In a sense, at least for a short period of time, Gandhi "healed" the British of their violent tendencies... obviously it didn't stick. Today's problems are different and undoubtedly more complex, since the British at least on paper claimed to be part of the "civilized" world and possessed a moral code which contradicted their actions. It would appear that since "terrorists" apparently would rejoice if we stood idly by and allowed them to blow us up, this tactic would no longer work... but I can't be certain of that, I've never met or spoken with a terrorist. Also, a drug-crazed person or one in the throws of an addiction withdrawal are most likely not to be reasoned with. So I understand that on both one-on-one and international levels, pacifism may not be functional. Which is why I am amongst the "prepared", and I understand the inherent flaws in being human. But... in terms of evolution and the ultimate survival of our species, the question still remains...

My question is -- if there are any in this tribe whose concept of survivalist **love** is a spiritual one -- How do you deal with the discrepancy between the micro and the macro, between the spiritual and philosophical understanding of the nature of violence, and your personal willingness to participate in violence?