by Scott Cressman

We are lucky that Remembrance Day is when we reflect on war. If they don’t want to, no Canadian needs to think about the fear, violence, and turmoil that war carries. But one man, a man who had more to remember than most people, did not enjoy Remembrance Day. War is a waste, he said, and Nov. 11 is “just show business.”

That man, Harry Patch, died in July at the age of 111. He was the last British veteran of the trenches from the first World War, which Woodrow Wilson called the “war to end all wars.”

Mr Patch was 18 years old when he was conscripted into the infantry. The next year, 1917, he manned a machine gun in France, where the war had slowed to a crawl in the muddy trenches. He fought at Passchendaele, a three-month battle that gained only five miles but cost both sides hundreds of thousands of lives.

He soon felt the routine tragedy of war, as an exploding shell killed three members of his gun crew. Mr Patch spent a year in hospital, and the war was over when he emerged. Back home, he kept quiet about his war experiences for 80 years. Finally, in 1997, this veteran decided to use his war hero status and make peace his legacy. He was interviewed on television, in magazines, and wrote a book about his experiences and observations. The war was a tragic waste, he said

On the 90th anniversary of Passchendaele, the old soldier returned to France to lay wreaths for both Allied and German soldiers. He never forgot the humanity in the men he had fought in his youth. He never praised victory or glorified war.

Harry Patch was a regular man, a soldier, a plumber, and a man of peace.

You can find Mr. Patch’s life story in his book “The Last Fighting Tommy.”

Information gathered from the New York Times and BBC .

More news from the revolution to change the world…

Which country is doing the most to help poor nations develop? Sweden is tops, according to measurements from the Center for Global Development.  The Center has an index that judges how well the 22 richest countries support prosperity and security for others. While northern European countries are doing the most, Canada is unremarkably average. 

Soon after iamrevolting’s latest environmental post, the CBC’s D. Simon Jackson also explained how Canada has been slow to join the world in developing environmental strategies. A major climate summit will be start in Copenhagen Dec. 7. You can read more about Canada’s relationship with climate change in that article.

But let’s not be preoccupied with nations’ roles as peace-makers. We might never see a political leader step forward with bold choices. Better for individuals to take the responsiblity themselves and create a movement for peace and justice. A practical, personal relationship is more real and impactful for those involved than any national policy.

by Scott Cressman
This blog post is part of Blog Action Day on climate change

Canadians love our home’s reputation as a pristine nature sanctuary, the Great White North. We also like to call ourselves a progressive country, a global do-gooder. After all, we’re safe, peaceful, and clean, right?

But maybe Canadians should take a harder look at our identity. According to Green Peace, Canada’s not so squeeky-clean. In a recent report called “Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent,” (you can find a copy of the report here) environmental writer Andrew Nikiforuk blasts Canada and its Alberta oilsands project. The oilsands are an immense endeavor, owner of the biggest carbon footprint of any commercial oil producer. The oilsands already pollute more than small countries like Lithuania, the report says, and are on pace to overtake Ireland, Belgium, and Austria by 2020. Overall, Canada has become one of the world`s highest per-capita green house gas producers.

The project is also under scrutiny from KAIROS Canada, a multi-denominational group working for social change. Last spring, the organization sent a delegation to investigate the Alberta oilsands (see their conclusions here). After talking with local workers, native groups, and oilsand bosses, KAIROS is concerned at how the project has barelled forward, and is calling for independent reviews of the damage done to the environment, local health and native rights.

Photo courtesy of KAIROS Canada

Our world has an energy crisis, and national leaders aren’t eager to step forward with a plan. With the oilsand industry`s interests to protect, Canadian leaders have seemed less enthusiastic to join global action on climate change (we dropped out of our Kyoto Accord commitment and have been slow replacing it with a firm plan.

World leaders will meet in Copenhagen this December to discuss their next steps. While global warming’s effects seems to be growing, the world hasn’t yet agreed how to react. KAIROS Canada has a campaign called KYOTOplus, where you can sign a petition encouraging our government to commit to a bold new global plan. More importantly, they also call on ordinary Canadians to change their lifestyles so our international brothers and sisters don’t suffer the costs of a polluted world.

After all, no one can blame only the big players. Consumers have filled their lives with eight times more gadgets than we had thirty years ago. There are few energy saving rules for all our home electronics, which need an astounding and ever-increasing power supply.

Last month, Greenpeace activists punctuated their argument by occupying one of the oilsand mines for 30 hours to stop production. The organization is an extreme voice for environmentalism, and many people might disagree with their radical methods. But Canadians should still examine what’s happening in our own backyard, and consider whether we are faithful stewards or irresponsible looters. If the world has an oil addiction, Canada is building roadblocks on the path towards recovery and sustainability.

by Scott Cressman
Retold from the book “War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning,” by Chris Hedges.

The year is 1992. The Bosnian War has begun, using ethnicity and religion to tear neighbours apart based. Violence is rising between the nation’s three groups of people, Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats.

Rosa and Drago Sorak live in the town of Gorazde, some of the few Christian Serbs in this Muslim area. As the conflict grows, their two sons are killed. They suffer death threats and their town is bombed. The couple has a baby girl, but no electricity, gas, or water. Food becomes scarce and the parents can do little as other infants die and their own daughter weakens.

Then, one morning there is a knock at their door. It’s Rosa and Drago’s Muslim neighbour, Fadil Fejzic, offering half a litre of milk for the baby. Fadil has milked his cow during the night so snipers can’t shoot him. He does this for the next 442 days, bringing milk for the “enemy” child, ignoring the disapproval and threats of his own community. The baby lives. The families move to avoid the fighting, but they survive the war.

Fadil Fejzic stood his ground against the pressures of war and hate, but not because he was part of an international organization or a missions team. He saw how he could slow the tide of violence in his home community, and he acted. Without fund-raisers, a support team, or public praise, a life was saved. This man’s actions may have been overlooked as a tiny moment in a much bigger war, but he demonstrated how even small individuals can make an impact by mixing love and selflessness.

by Scott Cressman

Did you know that Sept. 21 was the International Day of Peace? Since 1982, the United Nations has devoted one day in September to stopping war and the pain it creates. For years, the world has been slow to embrace this occasion, but now the peace movement may gaining speed.

This was a day to act and reflect on all the ways war costs us. True, the twenty-first is over now. But saving lives during a specific 24 hours is not what’s important; it’s finding an attitude and inspiration to work toward peace everyday in big and small ways. From the UN website: “International Day of Peace is also a Day of Ceasefire – personal or political. Take this opportunity to make peace in your own relationships as well as impact the larger conflicts of our time. Imagine what a whole Day of Ceasefire would mean to humankind.”

Maybe this is a good chance to think about how we can reduce armed conflict and promote safety for others around the world. You might also find inspiration in this full-length film on YouTube about the years one man devoted to developing this peace campaign.

The Day of Peace organizers’ goal is “peace-building,” which means not just stopping existing conflicts but creating a new environment of friendliness and tolerance. That sounds a little like just a vague, utopian ideal. But inside this slogan, there’s an attitude and an ambition that says mistrust and violence doesn’t have to be humanity’s default setting. Instead, we can try to build something better. Let’s grab that optimism and run with it, no matter what day the calendar says.

by Scott Cressman

Most Canadians have probably never heard of Muriel Duckworth, the pacifist and activist from Nova Scotia who died Saturday. Neither had I, but now I wish Canadians knew this peacemaker better. She seems like the kind of Christian who grabs Jesus’ ideas of peace with both hands and won’t let go. Judging from these admiring articles from the CBC and the Associated Press, her strong voice and efforts earned real results and respect.

Ms. Duckworth was an outspoken pacifist during World War II, a position that made her unpopular with her neighbours. Decades later, she worked with Oxfam and led the national Voice of Women group against the Vietnam War by focusing on war’s real victims and causes. She brought Vietnamese women to Canada to share their stories, and also condemned our country’s support for the war through arms dealing. More recently, she remained dedicated to justice by speaking out through the Raging Grannies activist group.

Although I didn’t know her personally, Ms. Duckworth’s Christian faith seemed a major inspiration to her. She was first a United Church member, then the Quakers’ stronger emphasis on peace-making drew her to join that group. Her work for peace kept others from forgetting the costs of war, an example anyone who advocates peace should remember. Although what she said was not always popular, Canada later awarded her both the Order of Canada and the Lester B. Pearson Peace Medal.

Muriel Duckworth lived a life that embraced radical peace-making moulded after Jesus by following this motto:

While there is a lower class, I am in it
While there is a criminal element, I am of it
And while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.
-Eugene V. Debs

by Scott Cressman

What will we be remembered for?

I had this discussion with my friends recently. When our children and grandchildren look back at how we lived at the beginning of this century, what will make them roll their eyes in disbelief? What will make them mutter “that generation was so wrong about…”?

I might shake my head at the past decades’ over-sized SUVs, lack of seatbelts, or asbestos use, but am also sure my descendents will do the same towards me.

Predicting the future is a tricky task, but I think my generation could be judged for how it uses water. Of course, we can be dangerously careless with all the resources we’ve been given. But water is so vital to our survival: we need fresh water to drink, to stay clean, and to grow crops. No wonder the biblical writers portray water as the symbol of life itself.

The ever-growing number of human beings on our planet means we need to get better at sharing water very soon. At this point in history, it’s easy to take the stream from our taps for granted. Golf courses soak the fairways too keep them lush and green. At home, we take long showers, and flush liters down the toilet.

Many people around the world already don’t have this luxury. Recent data is hard to find, but the World Health Organization reported in 2002 that one sixth of the world’s population lacked a clean water source. That’s more than 1 billion people, mostly Asian and African, who suffer various diseases from unclean water. Everyday, thousands die from drinking tainted water. Understand and appreciate that the stuff which flows to us so easily is a life-or-death struggle for many of our global neighbours. That’s a hard message to hear and even harder to act on. (Check out UNICEF’s website and this WHO report for more information.)

What will we be remembered for? Will 2009 be a year when people said no to excess, waste, and inequality? Can you find ways to flush toilets less, water lawns less, and avoid guzzling more water than your share? Are we alert enough to see where society is failing and steer our lifestyles towards a new course?

What do you think? What will be this generation’s legacy?

Scott Cressman is from small-town New Hamburg, Ontario. He has wrestled a journalism degree from Carleton University, planted forests in B.C., and served in a Mennonite summer camp. Now, he teaches English to South Korean children.

Believing in a peaceful revolution needs to be more than just reading (or writing) a blog. It should be more than a bumper sticker or a catchy slogan. How can we reject violence in our daily lives? How can we inspire others to see peace in our actions and attitudes?

In a new feature called “Real Peace-Makers,” the iamrevolting blog will look at real people, people like you, who have stood up for their beliefs and worked for peace. If you know anyone who fits the description, email MCC.iamrevolting@gmail.com. We would love to tell these stories.

As a person who acts as a true peace-maker, you may often faces real risks. When you rock the boat, you might get a little wet. Today, our story comes from a new Christian, a woman who worked as a boder service guard. After eight years monitoring the border, the Canadian Border Service Agency changed its policy to require all guard to carry and train with a weapon. Because of her new commitment to Jesus’ way of peace, this woman felt she could not obey her job’s new requirements. Yet she did not want to lose her job either. She wanted some help in preparing for an important meeting with her employer where she could express her deeply-held convictions and ask for exemption from the “arming initiative.” A MCC employee wrote a letter of support for her based on the Canadian Charter’s article on her right to freedom of religion and conscience, and Canada’s own history of making provisions for conscientious objectors. Her pastor and others provided additional counsel. The young woman later reported that the meeting with her employer had gone very well, and that she had been assigned to a new position which would maintain her status in the organization but not require her to be armed.

This young woman willingly risked her job to challenge common thinking and give testimony to her faith and commitment to peace. She is a modern-day conscientious objector.

By Michael Bueckert

Our society is running out of energy. But in the crucial quest to find the right energy source for Saskatchewan’s future, our hands have been tied. The ‘powers that be’ have chosen nuclear power as their preferred fuel of the future, and have pushed aside debate on other options. We need to revise how we discern nuclear energy’s appropriateness in our communities, by drawing on the wisdom of the agrarian author Wendell Berry:

“I am moreover a Luddite, in what I take to be the true and appropriate sense. I am not ‘against technology’ so much as I am for community. When the choice is between health of a community and technological innovation, I choose the health of the community. I would unhesitantly destroy a machine before I would allow the machine to destroy my community.”

Recently, I attended a public consultation on uranium development in Saskatoon. These meetings are being brought to a dozen Saskatchewan communities to gauge public support for the Uranium Development Partnership report, a report commissioned by the provincial government and spear-headed largely by industry representatives. The biased report, an appeal for expanding mining, enrichment of uranium, and ultimately nuclear power, is clearly not the independent assessment of Saskatchewan’s energy future that we need. The consultation process is flawed; the question posed is not whether nuclear development will occur, but how. This means that a wider range of options, including energy efficiency and renewable sources, are essentially off the table.

The positive side of the consultation process is that, across the province, most in attendance have been critical of the proposed development. Citizens have been very vocal in their concerns for their communities, and I picked up on two alternative options that came up again and again; 1) reducing overall energy consumption through voluntary simplification and energy efficiency, and 2) decentralising power sources, with small-scale renewable energy projects.

Too often, these voices have been dismissed by nuclear proponents as “irrational fear-mongers,” or anti-nuclear lobbyists trying to disrupt the natural and inevitable flow of industry, to the detriment of hard-working citizens everywhere. But the truth is that alternatives to nuclear power are not being discussed seriously, and the consultation process itself seems to have the aim of silencing any meaningful debate.

Further, it seems that the pro-nuclear position requires a heck of a lot of faith. It requires too much faith in the future technological development of waste disposal (we still don’t know how to dispose of radioactive waste safely); faith that our reserves of uranium will last long enough (some predictions range from 40 to 80 years); faith that the health impact of exposure is minimal to the environment and therefore to the health of our own bodies; faith in the ability to recover the costs involved in start-up; faith that the industry will not be used to further nuclear weapon proliferation; and ultimately faith in our ability to avoid ecological collapse without a reduction in growth.

This is a faith that I do not have. As I was reminded by several pro-nuclear speakers, capitalism requires investors to take risks, and we must do so if Saskatchewan is to remain competitive. This seems absurd, as the potential benefits of nuclear power are so hastily given priority over the security of our community’s well-being.

We must resist the temptation to put economics before health. We must refuse to let industry proponents dismiss legitimate claims as “irrational” and fear-based. And we must continue to champion the needs of our community, that is, Creation itself, against the needs of an abstract future economy and the needs of our public and private corporations. I hope that the public outcry against the uranium consultation process in Saskatchewan will lead to a meaningful examination of the impact of nuclear development, so that we can finally set our priorities straight.

Michael Bueckert is an intern at MCC Saskatchewan and a student at Canadian Mennonite University.

The world spent $1.46 trillion (USD) in 2008.  That number is mind-boggling, so big that it’s nearly impossible to imagine so much money. How many ways could that money have improved the world?  Even more scary, global military spending grew by 45 per cent in the last decade.

When it comes to military spending, the United States is in its own, super-heavyweight weight class.  America spent $607 billion, eclipsing second-place China’s $85 billion, France’s $66 billion, and the United Kingdom at $65 billion.

These numbers come from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.  Check out all their information at their site.

I couldn’t help but think about our military obsession while I sat in a strange place: a movie theatre.  Hollywood’s new Transformers movie flashed across the screen, three hours of soldiers, guns, rockets, and robots in disguise.  The biggest and flashiest fighting technology saves the day.  A saviour in a machine.

So, robot soldiers are our heroes and we spend more on war than true peace.  It’s clear where this world puts its faith.  Those who believe in a better way to find peace should speak up.