All community members--youth and adults--who enroll in our programming begin by discussing what peacemaking means to them and to Wisdom Projects within a series of training sessions so that they have a strong commitment to being a Peacemaker.
American society is deeply violent. There are, on average, two mass shootings a week around the country; frequent school shootings; cultish celebrations of unfettered, unregulated gun ownership and use by even high ranking politicians and elected officials; a belief in the death penalty; hostile beliefs in cruel and unusual punishment and incarceration; high rates of child abuse and domestic/intimate partner violence; billions spent on wars, including those that kill hundreds of children a month; many police shootings and maiming of unarmed people; and entertainment that revels in brutality, aggression, and suffering.
Moreover, many Americans have knee-jerk understandings of when self-defense should occur, exhibiting low-to-no understanding of de-escalation. Furthermore, while the livelihood and healthcare of low-ranking people trained to commit violence in American militaries and police forces is sometimes neglected (especially in their veteran years), higher ranking people trained to commit violence are often highly paid and even rewarded with overtime (like many police, correctional, and military officers). Yet, there are very few parts of American society that directly compensate and reward peacemaking.
Within this malaise, it takes great time and effort to undo the violent mindsets valued in the United States of America.
That is why our initial peacemaking trainings are so critical.
In our holistic approach to violence prevention, we work with community members to foster five interrelated forms of peace:
These are the peacemaking practices valued in our peace education:
We also make referrals when our care and resources are limited (for substance abuse treatment, housing aid, food bank assistance, healthcare support, psychiatric rehabilitation, utility assistance, or legal aid).
At Wisdom Projects, we guide and/or encourage community members to understand major forms of violence so that they do not unwittingly commit these forms of harm. These definitions arose from our initial fieldwork in 2018 and 2019 within East Baltimore when we extensively discussed the kinds of violence endured in the community that we work.
Verbal violence: Written, spoken, or expressed harassment, bullying, put-downs, disparagement, teasing, taunting, threats, mockery, slurs, epithets, persistent silence when explanations should be given to make peace, and hate speech (or expressive bigotry).
Physical violence: Any physical attack or un-consensual touching; invasion of a person's personal space (within an arm's reach away); gestural threats that invade personal space or portend injury or death; damage to, or threats to damage or destroy, as well as the taking of property, real or imagined, including vandalism, theft, and arson.
Gun violence: Any form of violence involving guns, including "ghost guns," or unregistered and undocumented weapons that are assembled rather than acquired or purchased whole.
Emotional violence: Any targeted, toxic engagement that damages mental and/or emotional well-being, including, but not limited to gaslighting, blaming, shaming, threats, insults, constant monitoring or stalking, excessive jealousy, manipulation, persistent defiance, persistent belligerence, humiliation, intimidation, dismissiveness, teasing, taunting, mocking, and threatening or harassing nonverbal gestures. Emotional violence often overlaps with other forms of violence.
Institutional violence: Verbal, physical, emotional, or behavioral harm and violence from governmental officials, organizations, corporations, and systems or state actors.
Political violence: Mass violence or war, which may include verbal, physical, emotional, or behavioral harm and violence because of, against, towards, or by politicians, political systems, nation-states, territories, neighborhoods, or countries.
At Wisdom Projects, we believe that self-defense should only occur when we are in imminent danger, and, at that time, the self-defense should be limited--only enough to ensure that the aggressor is subdued so that nonviolent accountability measures can transpire. And yes: if the subduing is not possible, and an aggressor is relentless, then reasonable, limited aggressive steps to protect oneself are warranted.