Human Responsibility and Nonviolent Communication

Whatever happens in the field of this consciousness, we are responsible for. That is, if I am violent, I am adding violence to that consciousness common to all of us. If I am not violent, I am not adding to it; I am bringing a totally new factor to that consciousness. So I am profoundly responsible: either to contribute to that violence, confusion and terrible division, or, as I recognise deeply in my heart, in my blood, in the depth of my being, that I am the rest of the world, that I am mankind, that I am the world and the world is not separate from me, then I become totally responsible, which is rational, objective, sane. — Jiddu Krishnamurti

We as individuals are responsible for everything that is happening in the world at present. Whether there is conflict or there is harmony, it is the human responsibility on s/he acts. Responsibility for harmonious coexistence entails respect for human relationships, respect for values and ethics and seeing the other person as a human being.

In the context of human interconnectedness as we human beings are all part of the cosmos comprising of nature and all other living beings, we must realize that we are not separate from a particular event. It could be a conflict, an act of violence or an act of nonviolence. We must realize that whatever happens to an individual, a nation or to a group of people is happening to each one of us.

Here it is important to point out that when we are stressing on the essence of human responsibilities, we are trying to seek a balance between the notions of freedom and responsibility. Also underlining the importance of responsibility means we are encouraging greater engagement and involvement of citizens in a society. Greater engagement or involvement is likely to mean greater respect for established values and ethics. If we are indifferent and act irresponsibly, not only we are going to be harmed but in the process harm others also. For instance, if human beings maximise their freedom by plundering the natural resources of the earth, then both we and the future generations will suffer.

In the above backdrop, it is pertinent that the communication process of both individuals and the society at large should be responsible. Responsibility is the key word and it is an integral part of nonviolent communication.

Here let me cite the explanation of nonviolent communication given by Senior Gandhian, Natwar Thakkar (Kundu, 2018):

“To me nonviolent communication literacy would mean how our communication efforts should be nonviolent; how our ability and capacity to communicate not only with ourselves but with our family and society be nonviolent in all aspects and overall how the entire process of communication whether between individuals, groups, communities and the world at large should be nonviolent in nature. This would entail deep understanding of the art and science of nonviolence and its centrality in all our daily actions. It’s not just verbal and nonverbal communication, nonviolent communication literacy would also include whether our thoughts and ideas are nonviolent or not. This would also mean how we can rid of our preconceived notions of individuals or groups with whom we want to communicate and stop evaluating them to suit our own ideas. More than often we are attuned to think in terms of moralistic judgments which may be our own constructions. By developing deep understanding of the art and science of nonviolence and integrating it in our communication practices we could get over with biased and moralistic judgments; this in turn could contribute to emotional bridge building.”

The critical explanation we get from the above explanation of Natwar Thakkar echoes the centrality of responsibility in our communication process. We need to be responsible to avoid labelling individuals or groups; instead focus on plurality in our communication. We should be responsible to ensure that we adhere to nonviolence in our speech, action and thoughts. We should be responsible to contribute to emotional bridge building through our communicative efforts.

Here we shall use one of the finest examples of responsibility in communication, a lesson from one of the greatest proponents of nonviolent communication- Mahatma Gandhi. This is an excerpt from Gandhi’s Autobiography:

The trial began. The Government pleader, the Magistrate and other officials were at a loss to know what to do. The Government pleader was pressing the Magistrate to postpone the case. But I interfered and requested the Magistrate not to postpone the case, as I wanted to plead guilty to having disobeyed the order to leave Champaran and read a brief statement as follows:

‘With the permission of the Court I would like to make a brief statement showing why I have taken the very serious step of seemingly disobeying the order passed under section 144 of Cr. P.C. In my humble opinion it is a question of difference of opinion between the Local Administration and myself. I have entered the country with motives of rendering humanitarian and national service. I have done so in response to a pressing invitation to come and help the ryots, who urge they are not being fairly treated by the indigo planters. I could not render any help without studying the problem. I have, therefore, come to study it with the assistance, if possible, of the Administration and the planters. I have no other motive, and cannot believe that my coming can in any way disturb public peace and cause loss of life. I claim to have considerable experience in such matters. The Administration, however, have thought differently. I fully appreciate their difficulty, and I admit too that they can only proceed upon information they received. As a law-abiding citizen my first instinct would be, as it were, to obey the order served upon me. But I could not do so without doing violence to my sense of duty to those for whom I have come. I feel that I could just now serve them only by remaining in their midst. I could not, therefore, voluntarily retire. Amid this conflict of duties I could only throw the responsibility of removing me from them on the Administration. I am fully conscious of the fact that a person, holding, in the public life of India, a position such as I do, has to be most careful in setting an example. It is my firm belief that in the complex constitution under which we are living, the only safe and honourable course for a self-respecting man is, in the circumstances such as face me, to do what I have decided to do, that is, to submit without protest to the penalty of disobedience.

‘I venture to make this statement not in any way in extenuation of the penalty to be awarded against me, but to show that I have disregarded the order served upon me, not for want of respect for lawful authority, but in obedience to the higher law of our being, the voice of conscience.’ …. Before I could appear before the Court to receive the sentence, the Magistrate sent a written message that the Lieutenant Governor had ordered the case against me to be withdrawn, and the Collector wrote to me saying that I was at liberty to conduct the proposed inquiry, and that I might count on whatever help I needed from the officials. None of us was prepared for this prompt and happy issue.

Mahatma Gandhi was in Champaran to take up the cause of the indigo peasants. He wanted to go and conduct enquiry by meeting the peasants. However, he was denied permission and was served summons from the local court. Here it is pertinent to critically analyze Gandhi’s statement. It echoes how a conscientious responsible citizen with strict faith in the established law of the land argues his case. Gandhi pleaded guilty of disobeying the law yet he used his strategy of nonviolent communication to put across his determination to stand up for the indigo peasants who were exploited by the planters.

Gandhi pointed out on the essence of responsibility of a person holding a public life and how s/he should be able to set up an example. He said he was ready to face the consequences for disobeying the orders yet he wanted to do his duty for the indigo peasants.

This encapsulates the true essence of nonviolence communication- adopting a principled and ethical approach in our communication approach. It also points on the essence adhering to one’s duty especially for those who are exploited.

To conclude what we learn from Mahatma Gandhi and from the explanation of Natwar Thakkar, nonviolent communication entails the spirit of responsibility not only towards oneself but for the world at large. It entails strict adherence to values and ethics. It in fact entails intertwining of human values with human responsibility.