How a Measure in Sonoma County is Taking on “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations”

A Conversation with Cassie King from the Coalition to End Factory Farms

During this episode of Nonviolence Radio, Stephanie and Michael welcome Cassie King, from Direct Action Everywhere, to talk about our relationship with animals, and more specifically about proposed legislation in California that aims to end factory farming. Together they explore the way our treatment of animals reflects and in fact is an expression of how we treat each other and ourselves. The depths of the cruelty with which animals are treated is revealed when we look inside ‘factory farms’ or CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations). In this kind of a profit driven environment, everyone suffers: workers, owners and animals:

"When you have over 700 cows [in a CAFO], I mean, can you imagine having 700 dogs and trying to care for them with a handful of people who, you know, are running a business and don't have all day to provide that care? And there's also a profit incentive not to provide whatever medical care they need if it's going to exceed the costs of what you can get in return from that animal. That's just how business works."

Through this new Sonoma County legislation, Measure J, activists like Cassie are hoping to make people aware of the brutality of factory farming and offer some clear steps and support on the way to ending it. In doing so, Cassie suggests we can transform our relationship to those with whom we share this planet from one of violence and domination to one of harmony and deep respect.

Transcript

Stephanie: Greetings, everybody, and welcome to another episode of Nonviolence Radio. I'm your host, Stephanie Van Hook, and I'm here in the studio with my co-host and news anchor of the Nonviolence Report, Michael Nagler. And we're from the Metta Center for Nonviolence in Petaluma, California.

On today's show, we're going to be talking about the importance of sharing our world with other species and loving our planet in a way that is supportive to all forms of life, and so much activism around climate and justice for the environment. It also includes justice for animals. 

And there is an important measure that's going to be on the ballot in November in Sonoma County, where the Metta Center is located. It's called Measure J. It's part of a Coalition to End Factory Farming and we got really curious about this because there's a lot of opposition to this ballot measure in the county that we're in.

We really respect some of the organizations that are part of that coalition. One organization in particular that we're interested in is Direct Action Everywhere (DxE). I have here in the studio with me, Cassie King, and she's the communications lead for DxE.

I wanted to hear more about their organization, especially because they're committed to nonviolence. And then hopefully Cassie can also help us to understand what's going on with this Coalition and why organizations like DxE and others are supporting it. So, welcome to Nonviolence Radio, Cassie.

Cassie: Thank you so much. I'm honored to be here.

Stephanie: It's great to have you and thanks for your time. It's great to have you here in this studio live too. So, Cassie, let's start off a little bit about Direct Action Everywhere. It's an organization that's working for revolutionary social and political change for animals in one generation. Say more about this.

Cassie: Sure  So, yeah, Direct Action Everywhere is an organization that's international. We have chapters all over the country and chapters around the world. We are united by our values, which include a commitment to nonviolence and our vision of a better world for animals, specifically revolutionary social and political change for animals.

I think most groups that are working within the animal rights movement share a similar vision, but it doesn't come up very much because there's so far to go, and we are so focused on the incremental change that we can make, we start to think in a smaller picture.

And so, something that is really inspiring and beautiful about our work and Direct Action Everywhere, that certainly inspired me and keeps me involved in this organization, is the bold vision that we have, the future that we are constantly thinking about and that we know can happen much sooner than people think. Because we've seen historically that big changes, big advances for vulnerable, marginalized groups have come in an accelerated timeline where things are moving very slowly, and then things start to change quickly, all at once.

Stephanie: Beautiful. And direct action – this is part of the name of the organization. So Direct Action Everywhere, what do you mean by ‘direct action’? And why is that so central to the work that you're doing?

Cassie: Great question. So, we are not just nonviolent in our words and our tone and in refraining from violence, but we mean Kingian nonviolence, which DxE ascribes to. And we train in this, and we go out, and we take nonviolent direct action to bring violence that's often hidden behind closed doors and under the surface and not very visible, to the surface, where people are educated about it and have conversations about it. And can actually change it.

So, we mean taking nonviolent direct action in the form of marches, protests, disruptions, civil disobedience, rescues of animals who are experiencing violence directly inside factory farms and slaughterhouses. These are all parts of the wider range of tactics that we use within Direct Action Everywhere.

Stephanie: That's really interesting to have the Kingian background of it as well. Michael, you said that you had a quote about animals. I wonder if it's an appropriate time for you to share that.

Michael: Oh, this quote has been around for 2000 years, so almost any time would be appropriate. It's from a Greek, philosopher working in Rome. His name was Porphyry, which means purple. Don't ask me why. And he's not so much famous for himself, but because he systematized the work of a really brilliant philosopher whose name was Plotinus. So, we don't know exactly where this came from, whether it's his or his masters. 

But anyway, it's a wonderful quote. It's very simple. It says, “What we do to animals, we're going to do to one another.” And therefore, it's imperative for us to be kind to animals. There's been a long tradition of vegetarianism in philosophical circles in the West for a long, long time and I think Porphyry is kind of a leading light in that, a founder.

Stephanie: I lived in a meditation center in the Marin County area and there would be space to graze cows on the land from a local dairy. They would move them over to the land and graze them so they'd have access to food and water.

And I just remember feeling so uncomfortable with the whole process. That you see these beautiful creatures, and you know that maybe while they're there, they're having, like, a brief moment of their life where they are quite happy. But there's this kind of tension in my heart every time I'd see them, because I'd feel like this isn't a way for us to live as a society.

I feel like one of the issues that I felt most passionate about is that I would love to live in a world where we're just not allowed to treat animals in this way, where we see them as products, not as creatures worthy of dignity and respect. Often you see folks who have worked with these animals for so long, they kind of get desensitized to their well-being because of the money factor involved.

And we sometimes see care not being given quickly enough because of the desensitization process that happens to human beings, and also the different stresses that are happening with people that have to take care of the animals. It's a huge burden, I think, on the human beings who are also caring for these farms to maintain them. Often they're passed down through families and they’re passed down with debt and they can't get out of them.

So, just thank you for the work and the vision that DxE is holding and to help protect animals. But also that that deep and firm commitment to nonviolence where that understanding is that you see that the people who might – that we're not against human beings in this process either, that we understand that on any side of an issue, there are human beings who might not want to be in the position they're in, but there's not much choice or there's not much sympathy even for them.

Michael: You know, I'm remembering now something. Cassie. When I was at the university, because of my position in peace and conflict studies, a lot of activists for various issues would come to me for support. And one of the groups that I cared most about was animal protection. But I was very frustrated not being able to help them because they were not nonviolent.

They were abusive in their language and their tactics. They actually promoted ill will against people who were abusing animals at a very extreme degree. So that's one of the reasons I'm really, really happy to see this development with DxE, that you're supporting nonviolence. That resonance between means and ends is very powerful.

Cassie: Absolutely. And I think what you are describing is a perfect example of what I was talking about earlier with violence that is hidden below the surface or tension that not everyone is aware of.

And for you, you're aware of it. You're thinking from the perspective of those cows and thinking about what exploitation they might be experiencing, what violence they might face. And other people might just see those cows outside eating grass and think, “That's beautiful. That's scenic. This adds to the ambiance. This is part of the nature that I want, from my perspective, to see.”

And we hear that a lot from people who see animals in nature and think about animals as part of nature. They are. We are as well. Humans are animals. But they're having their own experience of that environment and we often aren't thinking about their experiences or what things they're being subjugated to outside of that small picture that we see.

And so it can be challenging work to shift the perspective people have when they're only seeing a small piece of the puzzle, or when they're not seeing the animals at all, and they're just seeing the packages with cartoon animals – Rocky and Rosie, the chickens, who are wearing pearl necklaces and these kind of caricatures of happy animals that are very far from the reality.

But that's part of what's hidden that we're trying to bring to the surface. And bringing that through investigatory work that actually shows people the conditions animals are living in and through conversations that can help people understand that animals are not here for us. They're here living their lives just as we are here living our lives.

Stephanie: And there are ways of living more harmoniously, and there are actions that we can take.

So, I want to switch over to discussing this Measure J, of which Direct Action Everywhere is only one of many organizations, part of a coalition, to end factory farming. So, why don't you catch us all up to speed for people who are listening to this show who don't live in Sonoma County who are living in New York or South Africa. What is this measure?

Cassie: Sure. Well, you should really care about this even if you're not in Sonoma County because it is a historic, first of its kind, groundbreaking ballot measure to prohibit factory farming, formerly called concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs. That's the Environmental Protection Agency's term and definition, which Measure J copy pasted into the text of the measure.

Currently, there are no limitations on how big a factory farm of animals can get. There are facilities in the county with hundreds of thousands of birds confined indoors their entire lives. And these are the kinds of places, again, that people don't see, they don't see inside of. And so, Measure J is starting huge conversations locally and also nationally and beyond with the press coverage and just social media and people talking in their networks about what this measure means and where they stand on it, which I think is very powerful.

And as you said, there's a coalition behind it. There are many reasons to oppose factory farming. There are environmental groups, there are nurses and veterinarians supporting this. There are also small animal farmers. And people are coming from a variety of backgrounds and different primary reasons for supporting Measure J. But we all agree that CAFOs need to go, that CAFOs are harming all of us and all of the things that matter most.

And so, it's really interesting, the question that it’s raising for people about where they stand. And if you're a Sonoma County voter, how you will be voting because you have seven more weeks and your vote is very important on this local issue that obviously impacts our community and our environment and what's happening to animals and workers here in our community. But also could have huge ripple effects for shifting the Overton window and showing people what's possible to achieve in our lifetime for animals.

Stephanie: And let's talk about CAFOs, concentrated animal feeding operations in Sonoma County. This is targeting a small number of farms in the area. So, this isn’t anti-farm. It's not an anti-farm bill. This is an anti-factory farm.

Cassie: Right. It's a prohibition on concentrated animal feeding operations which are defined based on how many animals they have and how much waste there is as a result of that and how it's polluting the local environment. So yes, there are over 3000 farms in Sonoma County, including over 700 animal farms. Most of which are very small or relatively small, and certainly not CAFOs.

But we, in the research team with the Coalition to End Factory Farming, through hundreds of hours of researching through satellite imagery, through government records, through contacting the EPA and the local water boards that govern Sonoma County, we've identified 21 facilities at most that are above those limits. It's very possible that that is overestimating and some of those 21 have downsized or – yeah, it's an overestimation, so it may be fewer. But if it's 21, that's still only about 3% of farms, animal farms in the county. Much, much less of all farms.

And these are facilities that are the largest and the most destructive and threaten all these other farms in some of the same ways that they threaten us by polluting the water and endangering our health, but also because they outcompete these other farms.

And so, that's why even some small animal farmers are aware that CAFOs are bad for their business, where they're trying to do something that they feel is better and having a hard time competing.

Stephanie: Thank you.

Michael: You know, Cassie, back in the day, E.F. Schumacher wrote this book called “Small is Beautiful” which really shifted our whole approach to economics. During the war – he was German – and during the war, he was interned in the UK. Complicated reasons. But he was asked to look over a group of cows where the farmer had been drafted. And so, he was happily counting those cows one night when an old farmhand from nearby came up to him clucking and said, “This is not right.”

He said, “If you count them, they'll never thrive.” In other words, if you regard them as things and not as creatures, as fellow beings, they will not thrive. You know, and that's partly physical and partly just an emotional thing.

Cassie: And that is one of the concerns with these massive farms as well. In these chicken farms with hundreds of thousands of chickens, they have an accepted industry standard mortality rate where they assume that chickens are going to die every week. And that's just accounted for. It's not something that they are working desperately to prevent because it's just part of the industry to assume that when you're cutting corners, when you have that many animals and not enough care, individualized care for them, when they're crowded together and stressed in their living conditions, some of them are going to die.

And with dairy facilities as well. When you have over 700 cows, I mean, can you imagine having 700 dogs and trying to care for them with a handful of people who, you know, are running a business and don't have all day to provide that care? And there's also a profit incentive not to provide whatever medical care they need if it's going to exceed the costs of what you can get in return from that animal. That's just how business works.

Stephanie: You know, there's such a push back against J in Sonoma County. Some of the reasons I'd love to talk to you about them, as I've had conversations with neighbors and businesses. One of them is that the concern that the coalition isn't a local coalition. That these are folks that don't live in Sonoma County, primarily coming from Berkeley and other places that don't understand our county, don't understand how good our county is with animals. And yet they see that Sonoma County is a test ground for big legislation that can happen all over the country. So, yeah, they feel that this is an overreach by groups that aren't local.

Cassie: I wish people would come and join our events and talk to us and meet some of the incredible, longtime lifelong activists and residents who are part of this campaign, and even just talking to their own neighbors. This is something that a lot of people are concerned about locally, what's happening to animals, the investigations that have exposed criminal animal cruelty in these facilities which the people here do not support.

And the government is failing to address that. The government, the current regulations, are failing to protect our water. We have waterways here that are listed as impaired by the EPA. And nothing's being done about it. And there are a lot of people who are very grateful, even when someone from Marin or Berkeley or elsewhere comes to volunteer and help. They say, “Thank you for coming to help me and in my county.”

You know, the proponent who's the official proponent of the ballot measure, who's signed all the paperwork and is the main person in touch with the county is Samantha. And she's a lifelong resident of Santa Rosa. And she's putting out the call, “I want anyone from anywhere to help because my government isn't listening to me. Because I've reported these things, and they won't do anything about it. So, we need people to step up and help.”

But yeah, that I think completely misses the point about how this benefits all of us here in the county and people beyond. But it really is benefiting this community, and we should be accepting help from anywhere.

Stephanie: Well, why are people saying that it unfairly targets small farms? That's not something that I seem to understand from what J is about.

Cassie: Right. It's not what J is about. It's not in the measure text. And I think that comes from misinformation from the Farm Bureau, which is the Sonoma County Farm Bureau is leading the opposition to Measure J, and from others, some of whom might just be confused and unwittingly spreading misinformation.

But it's not targeting small farms. As I mentioned already, there are at most 21 facilities that would be impacted, and even those facilities wouldn't be required to shut down. They could downsize over the period of three years. So, until November 2027, to below that limit from the EPA to below 125,000 chickens if they're raising chickens for meat. Below 82,000 chickens of egg laying hens. Below 700 mature dairy cows.

I think that part of where that's coming from is this pride that people have in doing things better in Sonoma County. And to those people, I say, “Yes, let's do better. Let's lead the way. Let's continue to set a better example.” But we can't ignore the bad actors and the CAFOs that do exist in our county that are hiding behind smaller farms and hiding behind the reputation that we community members have for caring about sustainability and caring about protecting animals, and using that as a disguise for some of the things that are happening behind closed doors.

Stephanie: That's very helpful.

Michael: Yeah. You know, one of Gandhi's main planks on his whole platform was called cow protection. And people often misunderstand it and think it was a fetish. But actually, cow protection meant exactly what you're talking about, Cassie, and what Porphyry was talking about. That if you care for animals, you will care for humans, and vice versa.

And if you look way back in his tradition, one of the earliest statements from the Rigveda, a very, very ancient text, that lay at the roots of the Hindu tradition was – and if you don't mind, I'll quote it for you in Sanskrit, [Sanskrit]. “Do not injure that faultless cow, Aditi.” Where Aditi, the goddess of the sun, etc., etc. is symbolized, if you will, as a cow for this very reason. Because cows were of course central to the Indian economy, as they were for almost all Indo-European economies at that stage.

And so, yeah, again, this was, if you understand it, a right. Cow protection was a symbol for nonviolence everywhere.

Cassie: That's beautiful.

Stephanie: So, for those of you just tuning in, we're speaking with Cassie King, who is part of the Coalition to End Factory 

Farms here in Sonoma County, that's Measure J. and we're just talking about the intent of the measure and its intended impact, and trying to clear up some misconceptions about Measure J that seem to be floating around in the area because there's a strong, lobby, a powerful lobby. So, talk a little bit about the money that's opposing J.

Cassie: Sure. So, the opposition has already raised over $1 million, which is far more than the Coalition to End Factory Farming has. And it's unfortunate that the way that things go generally is the side that raises and spends more money is usually the side that wins. We know that we're up against big, big ag and big money. And we also know that the facts are on our side and morals are on our side, so we think we have a chance.

We know that there is strong polling, both locally and across the nation, that people are opposed to CAFOs. They want to see CAFOs phased out. And federal legislation to phase CAFOs out has even been introduced by Democratic senators. But unfortunately, that's been stalled as well.

So, we know we're up against big lobbyists. Big Ag actually spends more money on lobbying than Big Oil and other groups that you might think spend more. It's actually Big Ag. Some of the funding the opposition has gotten here locally has come from the National Pork Producers Council in Iowa, which is flabbergasting, because there are no pig farms here in Sonoma County that are CAFOs. This won't impact the pig exploitation industry. But they do believe that what happens here in Sonoma County can spread. And we believe that as well. That's something that we are agreed upon.

And it's something that needs to spread. We need to address these factory farms in Iowa and North Carolina and everywhere that are endangering animals and endangering public health and possibly brewing the next swine flu or the next Covid 19. We don't know. We don't know what's coming, and we need to stop these factory farms before that happens.

Stephanie: That is interesting because as the one of the arguments are against J, is that this is coming from people that don't live in Sonoma County. What you're telling us is that the opposition to J is coming from people who don't live in Sonoma County either.

Cassie: Yeah, definitely. There's a lot of funding coming from out of the county.

Stephanie: Right. Okay. That's interesting. And okay, so there's another group of people that I really respected in terms of their business practices around dairy in the area. And they've come out against J, saying that it's too vague in terms of how it will be applied. One of the arguments that I’vee heard time and again is that it's poorly written.

And that because it's poorly written, that if this farm or dairy wants to bring their cows in in bad weather, that it would then look like a CAFO. And they think that it's more humane to be able to let their animals come in. Have you heard this argument?

Cassie: Yes. And thank you for making space for me to address that because I really don't want people to be falling for these things, whether it's intentional or people are just confused, it's really going around.

So, first of all, Measure J was drafted by a Sonoma County attorney with help from many organizations who gave feedback, including local groups, including the Sierra Club, including a lot of groups that the draft legislation was brought to for feedback. So, I certainly don't think it's poorly written. And insofar that you think it is, take it up with the EPA because they – you know, the bulk of this measure is their definition, which is not ambiguous. It might be a little bit much to read because there are multiple criteria for what makes something a CAFO, but that's to capture the nuance of what can sometimes make a place a very major polluter.

But the primary way is the number of animals. And in Sonoma County, the only CAFOs we have are those that meet the federal definition of a large CAFO by exceeding that threshold, which I've already listed. So, it's about the numbers. And there's a very good reason to be concerned about facilities that are that size.

The 45 days component that is getting people tripped up is purely part of the definition of an AFO or an animal feeding operation. And you can understand why the definition for an AFO needs to be included within the definition for a CAFO, because it is a prerequisite. Just like for a facility to be a factory farm, it has to be a farm. We can't just say any city of people is a factory farm because we have that many people. It's not even a farm. Right?

So, the 45 days of confinement is coming purely from is this a facility where animals are confined for a significant enough period that their waste concentration, if that’s a large facility is going to be a concern? And it's not what Measure J is prohibiting at all. Animals can be confined indoors, even 365 days out of the year. Many are. And that's not going to change with Measure J. 

And to people who are concerned that animals should be brought inside when it's cold or when it's raining. Absolutely. My animals live indoors with me. My bunnies are indoor rabbits and don't go outside very much. And maybe they should. You know, but we should definitely be thinking about what these animals deserve and what's in their best interest. And the 45 days component is just part of the definition of an AFO, not what will be changed.

So, it's unfortunate that people think just taking animals inside for 45 days in the winter months is enough to make them a CAFO. It's not. And I hope you can go back to your friends and help spread that information.

Stephanie: I have one more question for you in terms of these misconceptions that I'm hearing. And I appreciate your passion about the issue and your willingness to try to clear the air about this. It's been very helpful.

So, the other concern that I read about was that Sonoma County farms would be unfairly punished for violating these rules and that it wouldn't change the issue systemically, so that we’d just be punishing Sonoma County farmers with J. And then restaurants would still be serving these animals or the animal products, and then they'll have to go out of Sonoma County to get them. So, then Sonoma County farmers will lose their business. They'll lose the kind of farm to table experience that is really beautiful. And people have spent so much time and energy making that experience here in Sonoma County. And that people would be unfairly punished and these kinds of consequences would unfairly target Sonoma County producers, but then people would just get it from other places, so.

Cassie: Yeah, I think there's a lot of misunderstanding in that as well, because the opposition is so greatly exaggerating the impact of Measure J in terms of how many farms will be impacted. And so, if you remember that it's the 21 largest farms at most that would have to downsize to below a moderate limit. And these are facilities that already supply to major chain stores like Costco and Safeway, and are sold all over the country.

These are companies that have a huge amount of product going out of the county already. When you consider all of that, you see there's really not much impact on local food, which is something that people do love about Sonoma County. They love being able to know their farms. They love the farm to table movement.

But one of those reasons that we love local food is because we think that we can see it. We can see the conditions, we can know where it's coming from. And these 21 facilities are not that kind of facility. They don't want you to see it. They don't want you to know. And they are fighting very hard to convince people that there's nothing wrong with the animals or with the environment. 

But the evidence speaks to all the problems that are there. That, you know, nearly every stream and river in Sonoma County is polluted, is listed as impaired by the EPA with nitrates and phosphates, with pathogens, things that are heavily linked to animal waste from CAFOs. So, the evidence is there. They don't want people to discuss it. But we're doing the work to bring those conversations to the surface.

Stephanie: Thank you so much, Cassie King, for joining us today on Nonviolence Radio. How can people learn more about Measure J and any websites, any information about anything at all?

Cassie: Yes. Please go to the website, YesOnJ.vote to see the information that I've been sharing in more detail. We have the measure text there and a great explainer video. We also have photos from the Sonoma County CAFOs that I'm talking about, and an interactive map where you can see these 21 facilities, where in our county they are. Click on them, see how many animals they have. And you will not find that on the opposition website.

The opposition website doesn't even link to the measure text. And they use stock photos that are not from Sonoma County. So, if you want to see the facts, I would say go to YesOnJ.vote.

Stephanie: Thank you so much for joining us.

[Music]

Stephanie: Well, this song is called “Carnival of the Animals.” And so, I thought that was an appropriate little transition piece for our interview with Cassie King about Measure J.

Nonviolence Report

So, let's turn now to more nonviolence with Michael Nagler and his Nonviolence Report.

Michael: Thank you so much, Stephanie. Yeah. I'd like to start my report with a quote. This is a quote from the famous Daoist founder, Lao Tzu. And his quote is, “When people no longer fear force, they bring about greater force.”

So, this was really central to nonviolence. Both Gandhi and King said the first maneuver that you have to undertake to be effective in nonviolence is to conquer your fear. So, when people will no longer fear force, they don't just become passive, they bring about greater force. And the name of that greater force is nonviolence.

Well, given that we recently heard from an animal rights activist, Cassie King, I'd like to talk about two aspects of Measure J that line up very well with nonviolence. One is, it is attempting to expose a wrong in order to cure it. And, for example, Martin Luther King was often accused of fomenting conflict and division.

And he said repeatedly and quite correctly, we are not fomenting conflict, we are exposing conflict. That harm and violence, which we would now call structural violence, was built into the system, and we're not going to get rid of it if we don't confront it. So that is very much what Measure J is asking for us to do.

It's important, when you do that, not to be against the human agent who may be causing the injustice or the harm. Now, this is really central in nonviolence. You're against the injustice, not the person who may be perpetrating it, for whatever reason.

The other thing I really like about the campaign is that they have published something called The DxE’s Roadmap to an Animal Bill of Rights.

Stephanie: Well, I just want to clarify on that. Direct Action Everywhere is only one organization as part of that coalition. So, we need to really be clear to not conflate those two.

Michael: Thank you. Thank you, Steph. Yeah, I'm talking about Direct Action Everywhere, in particular. And they have published a Roadmap to an Animal Bill of Rights, which I looked over, and which is very well thought out, a very good timeline. And I think this kind of careful strategic planning is often missing in nonviolent campaigns. So, I'm very, very glad to see it.

It's part of the growth of both volume and sophistication in nonviolence that we've been seeing for some time now. This is a very, very hopeful development.

Well, I’d like to talk now about a couple of dates. One is that we recently passed September 11th, of course. And when the original September 11 happened, I wrote a book called Hope or Terror, in which I pointed out that it was on September 11, 1906, that Gandhi actually launched Satyagraha in South Africa.

So, there are many other synchronicities that pile on here. One is this was the date in 1973 when a CIA engineered coup brought down Salvador Allende in Chile. Also, Vinoba Bhave, probably Gandhi's most – oh, I don't know, I don't know how to put it exactly – his most active follower, immediate follower, who launched a tremendous reform campaign for land distribution in India. He was born on September 11th, 1895. So, there's four synchronicities around that date. And I don't know how to explain that.

But another date, very different now, going up ten days, September 21st. It was September 21st, 40 years ago, that people around the world came together in San Francisco, which was the birthplace of the United Nations, to celebrate the passage of the UN resolution establishing the International Day of Peace, which is now part of our calendar.

And so, 40 years later, on this Peace Day, people came together at the Civic Center Plaza to support – or will come together in the Civic Center to support that. So, if you're in San Francisco or in the Bay Area, you may be interested in knowing that on the 21st from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the San Francisco Civic Center Plaza, there's going to be that celebration.

And I'd like to talk now about a few resources that are available for us to get active in nonviolence. One is very pertinent right now because we have an upcoming ballot choice in November that many people are saying is a very consequential and maybe critical for democracy in America, which indirectly means democracy in the world.

And Waging Nonviolence, a group that we often talk about here on this show, has created something called Democracy Is A Verb. And it's, again, a very well thought out document that can really address how to move things in a more nonviolent direction.

Another is a certification, especially for leading and engaging nonviolence. And it's a Training For Trainers. It's an eight-week online course with a good friend of ours, Rivera Sun. That'll be Tuesdays in October and December.

Two more – The Peace Alliance, also a group that we rely on a lot and are very glad to see them thriving, have scheduled a zoom gathering on the theme “Self-Care for Peace Builders.” And I think this is something that is often overlooked.

I know I had a student who went down to Colombia. She came back to Berkeley saying that she got through it fine, pretty unscathed. And then one day she was walking across Shattuck Avenue, and she had a terrific panic attack.

So, this was a form of PTSD that had happened to her because of what she had seen in Colombia. And it's very important for long-term dedicated peace activists to be able to monitor their own well-being, and to get help from others. So again, this is a qualitatively new or at least much expanded development in nonviolence – taking care of ourselves.

And finally, in this category, Safoora Arbab will be teaching a course called, The Framework of Nonviolence: Alternate Socio-Political Models. And that'll be from October 7th to November 18th. Arbab is spelled A-R-B-A-B.

Now, going back again for a moment to Waging Nonviolence. Someone named Margaret Salamon, who is a clinical psychologist, become a climate activist and thought leader, is now the executive director of the Climate Emergency Fund. She is the founder of The Climate Mobilization, which helped pioneer the Climate Emergency Declaration campaign that led to more than 1400 governments declaring a climate emergency. Now that is an example of a non-confrontational, constructive program in nonviolence that had a tremendous impact. And she's got a book out now called, Facing the Climate Emergency: How to Transform Yourself with Climate Truth. People have been really loving this book. And again, it's Margaret Klein Salamon.

You know, there is a Journal of Pacifism and Nonviolence. And the second issue of the second edition, seven years now out, it includes a special, quite relevant now, a special on Nonviolence and Pacifism in Islamic Traditions. You know, before this, one of the only resources we had – though it was a very good one – went back to 1953, and there was by, again, someone that I've been in touch with over the years, Mohammed Abu-Nimer. N-I-M-E-R. And his book was called, Nonviolence and Peace Building in Islam. So, now we have the Journal of Pacifism and Nonviolence, including a special on that issue.

I might point out this is a little bit less encouraging, but NPR has brought it out recently. And again, it's a good example of – well, I would call it an anomaly in the theory of paradigm shifts. Because in the militaristic paradigm, when you exert more force and hurt people more, you force them to do what you want or stop doing what you don't want.

However, as NPR points out, there have been 20 years of war, including a lot of casualties, including a lot of fatalities, against the Taliban. And there's no evidence whatsoever that it has stopped them. On the contrary, they're getting stronger and stronger. So, this is why we need to have that nonviolence alternative.

Now, there's a new organization which, again, is very hopeful and hopeful looking. It's called the Israeli-Palestinian Confederation. And I attended a meeting of theirs online. And they voted in a constitution. I voted yes, incidentally. And 100% of the participants on both sides, Israeli and Palestinian, voted in a very well formulated Declaration of Peace.

I want to share with you a couple of nice quotes from that meeting that I attended. The Israeli part of the team, it was an Israeli and a Palestinian, Maoz Inon and Aziz Abu Sarah. Maoz said, “To yield to hatred, to yield, to go to revenge, means to lose our freedom.” And incidentally, in the Jewish calendar, this is the month of Elul, which is based on the value of forgiveness.

So, when you yield to hatred, you lose your freedom. And Aziz echoed that by saying, “You're being a slave to the people who injured you.” In his case, actually, his brother was slain. So, he says very shrewdly, “You can't control what other people do, but you can always control your own reaction.” And he said something that resonated very powerfully with me about the work they're doing. He said, “Even if it saves one life, that's our mission.”

And that reminded me that both the Koran and the Torah have an almost identical quote, which is, “He who saves a life, it is as though he saved the entire humanity.” So, let's ponder that for just a little bit.

He pointed out that the peace movements on both sides in Israel and Palestine are very, very active, but their actions are still invisible. The mass media typically, and for a long time now, reacts when there's an act of violence. And you can kind of understand why they would, but they naturally overlook long term, slow, positive developments. And this is what we really have to redress. We have to fix this. Because if people want to choose between nonviolence and violence, they have to know that nonviolence is a real choice, and there are organizations doing it.

In this conversation, there was a filmmaker named Lynn Feinerman, and she quoted Gandhi, saying, “Love always wins.” I’ll just round off this topic by mentioning that Aziz Sarah pointed out – this is, again, very, very interesting and very helpful. He pointed out that he had just come from Rwanda and from Bosnia-Herzegovina. These are places that saw horrendous violence and everyone said they'll never get over it. They'll never get back to normal. But what he saw was that people in both of these countries, the peace agreements are working. People are not seeking revenge, despite the incredible harm that they underwent. And so, it does show that there is a way, even in a conflict like what we're seeing now in Gaza.

People who've been listening to the Nonviolence Report will not be surprised to know that we pay a lot of attention to what goes on in one organization, which is an example of a movement, and that is Nonviolent Peaceforce.

In fact, when I was in one of the early meetings that started Nonviolent Peaceforce some 15–20 years ago, I remember some very cogent suggestions that what we were doing was not starting an organization, but a movement. So, I think it's both. And in reality, Nonviolent Peaceforce is probably the largest of about 20 organizations that are doing this kind of unarmed civilian protection, as it's now called. And a very important part of the nonviolent alternative because it addresses conflict at its most extreme and most intense.

So, on the 29th of the month, Mel Duncan, a very good friend and founder of NP, and someone that we interviewed recently, Amira, will be sharing the results of the assessment team that they sent to the West Bank with an eye on Gaza and enable them to make a series of recommendations at the UN and in Washington DC coming up in October.

And here's a quote, kind of hard, but I'd like to share it with you. It's quite important. Quote, “We respond to the killing of our sister Aysenur, no doubt meant to intimidate international unarmed civilian protection, not by pulling back, but by pushing forward.” So, this is a great example of how violence can be counterproductive. The case that we're referring to, of course, is a Turkish American activist, with NP, who was slain by an IDF soldier a couple of days ago.

Another place that nonviolence is active in and where a lot of violence is happening – really, really severe violence right now, is in South Sudan. And one thing that Nonviolent Peaceforce did there was work with the people in the community – that's critical always – to launch what they called a weapon free zone in South Sudan.

They did this with the strategic placement of five signs, where bloodshed resulted from different clans tended to gather at a particular location. So, they went to those critical locations and put up those signs. They created five weapon-free zones. It was followed by a launch event in November of 2022, and was attended by representatives of humanitarian agencies on the ground – a women's organization, youth protection teams. 

And it may be an example of something that is sometimes a gray area in my understanding of nonviolence, and that is what is the value of symbols? I like to say – and I think it's true – that symbols are overused. And sometimes we don't realize that they have to be backed up by something concrete in order to be effective. But in this case, it does seem that the mere posting that this is now officially a weapons free zone, has helped, has kept down the violence.

Now Nonviolent Peaceforce, of course, is also training peacemakers, for example, in the Philippines, where they've been active for a long time. There’s one area where they went into as early as 2022, where they were able to resolve clan feuds. Fourteen of these feuds, called “rido” in Tagalog, the Philippine language. And so, they prevented what would be the equivalent of 716 acts of violence annually in that area. Whoever said that nonviolence doesn't work?

So, thank you very much for listening and look forward to talking to you again in our next episode of the Nonviolence Report.

Stephanie: Well, thank you so much, Michael Nagler, for your beautiful Nonviolence Report. People can find out more by visiting our website, MettaCenter.org, for listening to this show again and sharing it, finding the news, finding links to the articles that you were talking about.

We want to thank our guest today, Cassie King, who came to talk to us about the Coalition to End Factory Farms here in Sonoma County, which is going to be Measure J on the ballot.

I want to thank Matt and Robin Watrous, for their editing and transcribing of this interview and all of their work, to Sophia Pechaty and Annie Hewitt, to Bryan Farrell over at Waging Nonviolence for helping to syndicate the show, to all of our listeners at our beloved radio stations, including across the Pacifica Network, thank you very much. And to you, all of our listeners, learn everything you can about nonviolence.

And until the next time, please take care of one another.