The Bridge Builder and the Warrior
In
my last piece on language I quoted Elif Shafak who wrote that wars arise over
little more than semantics: “In a world beset by mistranslations, there is no
use in being resolute about any topic, because it might as well be that even
our strongest convictions are caused by a simple misunderstanding.” I hold in
high regard such Buddhist equanimity. But not without question. To balance
things out, let me dedicate this writing to the opposite movement in me, and
juxtapose Shafak’s quote with one from Martin Luther King Jr., who once argued
against impartiality in quite unambiguous terms: “The hottest place in Hell is reserved
for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.”
This
is the paradox between the bridge builder and the warrior, one that I embody as
my own most poignant inner conflict.
The bridge builder
I am
characterised by a genuine interest in the wide range of human expression, a
social scientist and philosopher with an ability to hold contrast, darkness,
raw emotions, uncertainty and nuance with relative comfort. I spend a fair
amount of time in introspection, navigating life on a particularly calibrated
moral compass while trying to suspend my judgments and embrace the limits of my
knowing. When I was given a tribes colour by people of the Ojibwe Nation, it
was purple – colour of all tribes. I am drawn to the apex of the bridge, to
hold the middle ground when the field is polarising. My reflex desire is to
reach out to and reconcile both sides of a divide, whether it’s encouraging myself
to walk the bridge into the wider world, or fighting off bias about two
identity groups I have no personal affiliation with. This is why I ended up on
a remote hilltop in Northern Ireland, giving months of my life in service to a
peace and reconciliation centre in a postwar society. I am a bridge builder,
and one of the values I police myself on most vehemently is humility and a
dedication to the apprentice’s emptiness – an acknowledgment of my not-knowing,
leaving space to be filled. I spend most of my time on the sideline observing,
waiting, and soaking and soaking up a never-ending supply of facts and stories.
The warrior
And
yet this humility and nuanced understanding have backfired on me in recent
months. I swallowed back my knowledge and eager momentum to hone my capacity
for patience and generosity, spending nine months voluntarily mopping floors,
filling and emptying teapots, and shepherding screaming blindfolded kids around
our hilltop. And in that humble role I let important professional opportunities
pass me by. Meanwhile, intellectual under-stimulation, a curbing of my personal
and professional autonomy, and a tantalising proximity to the work I came here
for yet which remains inaccessible, have frustrated my strict discipline of
humility to a point where another aspect of me broke through. A readiness to
take a stand and declare myself in the world, an unwillingness to wait any
longer to be invited into practice by others. A warrior spirit is slamming its
fist on the table of my internal dialogue, with a proud certitude and dogged
focus on self-actualisation, rebelling against nuance and humility. But a
warrior implies an antagonist, and what a paradox that is.
Warriors of Ulster
Of
all the words I’ve heard in my time here so far the words that have echoed in me
most were about the young men of this country susceptible to recruitment by the
still active paramilitary groups, because of a felt sense that they have “missed
out on the war”. It rung in my ears not because of some self-righteous
nose-wrinkling, but because of an honesty you wouldn’t readily come across in
the moralistic circles I live my life amongst. ‘Dulce bellum inexpertis’ (war is
sweet to those who haven’t experienced it), said the 15th century
Dutch humanist Erasmus in response to the popular glorification of war. I never
experienced war – though I doubt I won’t see it in my lifetime – and so there
is glorification of the heroic struggle happening inside me. That, too, is why
I ended up on a remote hilltop in Northern Ireland, giving months of my life in
service to a peace and reconciliation centre in a postwar society. Conflict
tourism is a concern in Northern Ireland, with nosy foreigners coming to gape
at the wounds and scars of others’ suffering.
The
young men’s honesty is this: They spoke directly into the natural fact of life
that we are all, at the end of the day, tribalists, big monkeys wanting status,
sex and power. The testosterone raging in pubescent boys (and girls) is a
biological phenomenon that can’t be suppressed and moralised away without the
risk of it resurfacing in dangerously cathartic forms down the line. The drug
of revolution and galvanising ideals is potent, and tugs at all the human
heartstrings of belonging, purpose, and identity. A fellow volunteer here said
“I don’t believe we have a natural propensity for violence, but we do have a
natural craving for striving and overcoming.” We live in a dualistic universe,
and we as individuals learn and grow in dialectics. We need an antithesis, a
counterforce to struggle and grow against, to synthesise into an ever-evolving
version of ourselves.
The
young men also spoke directly from their ancestral legacy. In myth, the four
provinces of Ireland were endowed with special gifts. Whereas the other
provinces got gifts like storytelling and music, Ulster was endowed with the
special gift of war. A fateful gift that was. Both in myth and history, Ulster
has been a place of warriors since time immemorial, characterised by a zealous
passion for their land, a trait by no means diminished in the Ulster of today.
From pre-Christian times where a warrior cutting off his own hand in a mad
frenzy of possessiveness to ‘win’ Ulster in a race was to be celebrated
throughout the centuries to come by Gaelic earls and kings of Ulster from the
O’Neills to the Magennis to the Clanna Ruadraige, up to modern times where his
red hand flies defiantly on Loyalist flags who feel themselves as much ‘terrae
filii’ (sons of the land) as the Republicans who would see Ulster restored as
part of a Gaelic Ireland. But the love of the Ulster warriors for their
motherland translated into a fanatical notion of possession of their motherland that keeps them in perpetual strife
with each other, whatever ways their divisive identity lines are drawn, to the
grief of their mothers, women, children, and the land itself. This is an old,
old problem. Once, in the times of the Ulster king Conchobar, the sons of
Ulster were cursed for their self-absorbed competitiveness and subsequent
disregard and neglect of the motherland they claimed to love so much, by the
goddess Macha who avenged the humiliating, unaided, public birth of her twins
in the mud by making the Ulster warriors be overcome by the pains of labour
whenever they’d need their strength. The latest outburst of war among the sons
of Ulster, the Troubles, was the resurfacing of the old pattern. Perhaps their
struggle is not so much about ideological differences between two warring clans,
who honestly have everything in common from their Christian faith to the love of
their land, but a struggle spawned by their misguided relationship with the
feminine and the motherland.
The Troubles ended with a general denunciation of violence, and a commitment to finding other means to settle ideological differences. But with coming of age rites of passage having eroded in our contemporary societies, with an ongoing class war caging disadvantaged youth in shortsighted localised mentalities, and with feminine qualities of emotional intelligence and a caring disposition (finally) gaining cultural prevalence in a society that excludes young lads from socialisation into that culture, where do the young lads go with their inborn warrior vitality? What antithesis is still morally justified to strive and overcome in a postwar society? Why the shockingly high rate of suicide among young men in Northern Ireland? Why the spike in paramilitary recruitment among them? Why the radicalisation of marginalised Muslim youth in Europe? Why the rise of populist nationalism across the West? Why the polarisation towards militant rightwing and leftwing politics?
The Troubles ended with a general denunciation of violence, and a commitment to finding other means to settle ideological differences. But with coming of age rites of passage having eroded in our contemporary societies, with an ongoing class war caging disadvantaged youth in shortsighted localised mentalities, and with feminine qualities of emotional intelligence and a caring disposition (finally) gaining cultural prevalence in a society that excludes young lads from socialisation into that culture, where do the young lads go with their inborn warrior vitality? What antithesis is still morally justified to strive and overcome in a postwar society? Why the shockingly high rate of suicide among young men in Northern Ireland? Why the spike in paramilitary recruitment among them? Why the radicalisation of marginalised Muslim youth in Europe? Why the rise of populist nationalism across the West? Why the polarisation towards militant rightwing and leftwing politics?
The times we live in
We
live in times of great moral conflict. We have island nations facing
Armageddon, an unending influx of refugees sitting at the fence of Fort Europa,
the lifting of the veil off the ugly face of our centuries-old rape culture pandemic, hate speech modeled
by our political leadership and normalised in mainstream discourse, the vast
majority of human population under the yoke of poverty and in the iron fist of
corporate oligarchy, the invisible marine world (70% of our planet’s surface
and the majority of animal biomass) suffocating on our plastics and petrol if
not fished up and tossed back dead as by-catch, the Doomsday Clock back to two
minutes to midnight with superpowers waving their hydrogen bombs in each
other’s faces, as we are freefalling towards the two existential crises facing
our world today: nuclear war and anthropogenic climate change. Most of all,
understandably, we have a rampant complacency and paralysis. These topics are
an instant switch-off for most.
But
we can’t look away and hope to love our world into wholeness, wistfully wishing
for peace between all things. Not in a world half of whose nature is made up of
intrinsic suffering. To cede and over-accommodate to structures enforcing
control in the misappropriated name of peace and justice, is to choke our own
inner brilliance. I see it here in Northern Ireland on an institutional level,
where organisations in the charity sector have cultivated a fearful bureaucracy
in compliance with an ever-tightening straight jacket of health & safety
regulations, duty of care and liability risk management. In giving in to such external
tyranny, the tyranny is transferred on to the inside of the institution,
stifling the brilliance of the people that make it up, and sabotaging its own
evolution as an organisational entity. Regulations such as these I hear too
often used as an excuse for eroding the margin of humanity and life-giving
flexibility out of the system. That is a dangerous bridge to build, and here a
warrior-rebelliousness is a healthier response, both from the people within the
institution to challenge its asphyxiation, and from the institution itself, to
be braver and bolder and speak truth to power.
Marianne
Williamson wrote “It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us, but
our playing small does not serve the world.” “The hottest place in Hell is
reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict.” The
hottest place in hell Dr. King spoke of is the regret of failed fulfillment,
failed self-actualisation once it’s too late and it’s all over. We must
continue to grow into our own and take a stand. As individuals,
institutions, and as a global population, we mustn’t fear to shine our
brilliant light on the darker corners of the world. So who am I to judge any
warrior for taking whichever stand has galvanised their craving hearts? And
likewise, who am I to chide the paramount importance of holding the radical
centre amidst the divisions in a frantic world? So where does the bridge
builder with the warrior heart position herself? Who will the bridge builder
allow herself to antagonise, and to whom does the warrior extend a hand?
The synthesis
This
Martin Luther King Jr. said also: “Power without love is reckless and abusive.
Love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love
implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power
correcting everything that stands against love.” Adam Kahane likened the
navigating of the balance between power and love to the narrow strait Odysseus
had to sail between the jagged rocks of Scylla and the whirlpool of Charybdis.
I can hold both certitude and humility, I can walk the line between power and
love, navigate the strait between the rocks and the whirlpool. The resolution
of the paradox of the warrior and the bridge builder is that they are each other’s antithesis, that they are
the antagonists in me that evolve each other towards their greater synthesis.
And similarly, the warriors of Ulster would do well to dilute their ideological
certitude with a healthy dose of humility. And the wishful peacemakers afraid
of confrontation would do well to speak out sharply against the errors in the
system. Where does the bridge builder with the warrior heart position herself? On
the apex of the bridge, where she can hear and be heard by all tribes in the
certitude of her synthesis.
![]() |
| Sunset on the Sea of Moyle |

Comments
Post a Comment