In our work in the Middle East, we come at the world through the lens of story and a firm belief that there are other ways to change the world than raw politics and bluster of threats and counter threats.
We hear the slogans of End Child Poverty, End Pollution or End Terror, as in the War on Terror. They are cliches. From the point of view of narrative psychology, a story to end something only summons terminal energy- What happens after you end something? The real work is about beginning something else. If we can end X, what is the Y we are beginning. That makes for a far more compelling story. The slogan we hear most in our work is End the Occupation. Its a fair plea but it is a story that success will kill. It is so much more than ending something. One has to end the occupation as the first step to freeing a people to be able to build a nation of their own.
The same could be for Peace Talks or Peace Deals- if you want to know the dynamism of this word ” peace”, go to a funeral- We say Rest In Peace. Peace is a low energy story, unless it is part of a bigger story, such as Building a Future, or Progress, or Human Rights, or Freedom or Democracy, even Happiness- These are far more compelling titles to peace.
This way of thinking got us musing about the controversy over BDS, Boycott and Divestment and Sanction, that one side interpret as an attack, and the other as their weapon to force change. Any parent knows that if you keep catching your kid doing the wrong thing, you soon become the ogre. You have to use positive re-enforcement as much as if not more than punishment. So what about a new campaign that uses the insight of how a story of change works and how to build the energy of initiative, not termination.
We might call it AIR which stands for Affirm, Invest and Reward. Any persons or any actions or any policies that we believe further the path to a better future, we affirm, and we focus on investing in the businesses that employ and train young people and build capital, and we reward behaviors that we believe work for the future. The supporters of BDS claim that their way is non-violent, but what makes it controversial to many is the underlying intent- to deny access or investment as a means to force change. We are taking something away, not adding anything. BDS Supporters point to South Africa as their model, but South Africa had the ANC and Mandela working for change within. Embargoes and boycotts fit what we call the story game of war– economic war, tariff war, trade war. We know that story from how Japan got provoked into more aggression in World War 2. It may work, and it may be the only effective strategy a David has against a Goliath. But what if there was another way? Is it worth exploring?
What if the new story became Affirm, Invest and Reward? What a difference that might make? It certainly is a new story. I can surely get mad at you from blocking me, but if your choices are not about attacking me but about living your values and exercising your rightful preferences about where you invest, what you buy, and who you support? Then what is the objection? What if doing right doesn’t always have to start a fight?
In the fallout from what may be another failed negotiation, the BDS drums will beat ever louder and the forces that will want to discredit it, silence it, boycott it ( with a certain irony) will grow ever louder. The conflict will endure another chapter of mindless controversy. Perhaps the best way to respond is not to respond at all. Just simply say people are exercising their liberties. Its a free country. people can affirm, invest and reward as they see fit. That surely is what BDS is meant to demonstrate anyway, when the fog of war clears.