Peace in Translation

In an unexpected addition to my job description, I am now becoming highly involved in MCC LAOS’ team of young peace educators. This is a brand new initiative and so progress is slow, both in terms of waiting for funding to come through and in terms of defining who we are as a team, and what it is we’re setting out to accomplish. “What is peace?” is a question we wrestled with at a recent meeting. Language barriers aside, peace is a very flexible word and it must be put into context if it is to have any meaning at all. And so I launched into an explanation of “Negative Peace” as the absence of war and direct violence, and “Positive Peace” as the presence of justice and over all well being.

“Ahhh,” said the soft spoken young woman on my left, “then we must not tell the children that this is about peace, for in Lao we have only the word ‘Santiphab’, which means the absence of war. We must tell the children that this about happiness.” This idea made me anxious right away.

“Oh no!” I warned, in my calmest and most culturally appropriate tone of voice, “Happiness is not the same as peace. A person can be very happy themselves even though everyone around them is suffering!” Around the table eyebrows raised and people quickly looked away to hide their amused smiles. Someone reached out gently to touch my arm.

“To Buddhist people, it is not possible to be happy while others suffer needlessly. No one who is selfish can also be happy. The children will understand.”

I learned an important lesson about peace building across cultures that day. I also began to wonder: when did the idea (so prevalent in North America culture) come about, that one can be happy so long as their personal needs are met? Here in Laos, on the other side of the world, I am working for peace, but the need for peace builders back home is just as strong.