I explained the larger context of the quote King talks about how military leaders including Charlemagne, Adolf Hitler, and Lyndon B. Johnson all talk about peace as the end goal of warfare. “The idea is that if there is a battle going on, the solution that many people try, including America is to join the fight with the goal of achieving peace.” At this point that every student was confused.
One of them asked:
Why would people think that the best way to keep people from fight a war would be to start fighting in that war? Wouldn’t that just cause more fighting? Shouldn’t they just help people to talk to each other?Other students nodded in agreement. A couple others rephrased her question sharing similar thoughts. As my mind raced to figure out a way to explain geopolitics to the 3rd graders, I instead went another route.
Yes, that makes sense. If two of your friends are fighting, joining their fight wouldn’t get them to stop. This is why when you are all being very loud, I make my voice quiet when I talk to you. You can’t fight fire with fire, you put out fires with water. So why have so many people throughout history decided that the way to stop wars and achieve peace was through violence? I don’t know. Your solution makes a lot more sense to me. Look I’m a lot older than you, I’m in my thirties, and a lot of things in the world still don’t make sense to me and that’s okay. Part of growing up is learning that the world doesn’t make sense, but here’s the thing. All of you have the right idea. That in order to have peace you have to use peace. You will have to spend a lot of time understanding why other people don’t get that, but what’s more important is that you do.The confusion in the students’ faces eased. Maybe it was because I validated their thoughts or acknowledge that I shared in their confusion. And as I sensed their minds settle, I moved on with the class.
The 3rd graders pointed out a lack of logic, a baffling contradiction in the way we attempt to achieve peace, even now, as a human race. They got something about what we should do and can do to solve conflict that many adults don’t seem to understand.
Violence in our schools? In a school in Indiana many thought that an active shooter drill in which teachers are shot at with plastic pellets would help prepare the teachers. Gun crimes? Arm “responsible” gun owners so they can participate in vigilantly-like actions. Wars in other countries? Bomb them.
None of this makes any sense. Creating more opportunities for violence is not going to prevent violence and responding to violence with aggression isn’t going to solve anything. My 3rd graders, a group of 8 and 9 years-old’s get it.
Why don't we?
No comments:
Post a Comment