“Non-violent Communication: a language of life” is not just a book for diplomats, or politicians, but a book for everyone who wishes to improve their well-being, behavior, and outlook on life. NVC will be my first term that I will compare and contrast with the term, “interpersonal communication,” from the classroom textbook (Chapter 1). The second term that I will look at is “public communication” in relation to an example of public communication that my book’s author has given (Chapter 1). The third term that I will look at is the “horn effect” in comparison with the explanation from my book (Chapter 3). The fourth term that is “values” with relation to Rosenberg’s values as described in his book (Chapter 2). The fifth term that I will analyze from the text book is “perception” with an example of perception given in his book (Chapter 3). And lastly, the sixth term that I will look at is “enculturation” in comparison with an example by Arun Ghandi given in Rosenberg’s book, “Non-violent communication: a language of life” (Chapter 4).
Non-violent communication, or NVC, is a term used widely in the book and it seems most similar to the concept of interpersonal communication offered by the classroom text book. NVC and interpersonal communication both seem to describe communication as being culturally necessary for our day to day lives in order to be healthy emotionally, intellectually, and ethically. Both suggest that people might die, which can be the end result of poor communication. However, the major difference is that NVC just by what I’ve read includes a whole different outlook than just “interpersonal communication,” and is by appearance, more complicated than it looks. NVC appears to have a four-step process that involves a lot of self-analysis. My book starts of describing the NVC process by saying to paraphrase, we first start out with being subjectively self-aware, which has an impact on our own wellness; second, being objectively self-aware about our emotions within our environment; third, look at what creates our emotions culturally and individually; then lastly, looking at what actions we take, which can either improve or deteriorate our daily lives (pg. 6 of NVC).
In the text book, public communication is communication given to an audience (not via EMC but via face-to-face). In a public speech that Rosenberg gave to a large audience of Palestinian Muslim men, there was a man who was vehement against American action in Palestine (page 13-14 of NVC). He decided to receive questions from him that were angry and pointedly anti-American. In the end, he invited him to have food at his home for a Ramadan dinner because he ended up explaining his reason for being in Palestine. NVC can be found in the form of public communication, so they are similar terms, and NVC tends to be primarily a human form of communication. The fact that he let him vent his rage was a sign that they could understand each other despite being from different regions of the globe, and that culture is not a boundary but a unique difference that is to be cherished.
The horn effect, from the text book, is what happens when we attribute a negative emotion or quality to a person we dislike. NVC goes one step further to ask us how we should respond upon hearing a negative comment from someone we dislike or like if the tables were turned so to speak (pg. 49-50 of NVC). There are apparently four ways in which we can respond interpersonally. Firstly, we inwardly respond in a negative manner to a negative comment, or, we essentially blame ourselves. This in effect prevents us from responding in the correct manner, and should be avoided, according to the principles of NVC. Secondly, we might blame the sender of the message, or we blame others. This, again, should be avoided, because like blaming ourselves for our actions, we in effect accept the judgment that we have received. Thirdly, we accept our own emotions and intrapersonal thoughts and merely respond in a seemingly less menacing way. This is better than the first two because, it accepts responsibility for our actions whether they be right or wrong. Fourthly, we respond in a way that is sensitive to the other person, avoiding any menace altogether. This is the best method for responding to a negative action, because it in effect takes responsibility and we get what we want because we make it clear what bothers us and we are more respectful.
According to the textbook, value is simply a bipolar quality of there being something right or wrong with a particular idea. While Rosenberg assumes we understand what value is in this book, he explains how to avoid “moralistic judgments” or judgments based on our own values when comparing them with someone else who appears to not share the same values. Rosenberg coins a new term, called Life-alienating communication or LAC, which is different from NVC, in that it may cause us to behave violently toward each other and ourselves if used. Drawing comparisons with other people in terms of achievement or physical appearance is also life-alienating as well as denying responsibility. Value judgments on the other hand are not to be confused with moralistic judgments, because deciding what is valuable and not is a part of life, while moralistic judgments are made on people “who fail to support our value judgments” (pg. 17 of NVC).
Interpersonal perception, according to the textbook, is a process of understanding other people and seeing what they’re like. We give meaning to their actions. NVC requires a lot attention to interpersonal perception, which, when given the chance to be perceptive, might be in the end a misperception. In a case between a co-worker and a student of Rosenberg’s in Rosenberg’s book, the co-worker is infuriated with the level of teen pregnancies that are going on statistically (pg. 62-63 of NVC). But at the end of the dialogue, she becomes less infuriated and more understanding because the student has used the principles of NVC, making the co-worker feel that the two of them weren’t “’worlds apart’” (pg. 64 of NVC). The co-worker was in effect having a misperception about teens, and she in fact didn’t connect with relationships between young teens.
In the classroom textbook, enculturation is the process of creating a cultural person through “learning.” In Rosenberg’s book, he gives an example by Arun Ghandi of how he was before he became nonviolent, (or before the NVC process), when he was growing up. He was subjucated to constant beatings by white and black men for his color in South Africa, which instilled a lust for revenge in him. This was a part of his culture at his time, racism that is. And so, when he was finally sent to visit his grandfather (the actual Ghandi we read about in literature), he learned how to lose that part of himself that was violent and he changed his attitude (pg. XV of NVC). Change has to come from within ourselves in order to further the cause of peace. And he gives plenty of examples of how things “are not enough”, such as building a huge nuclear arsenal that insinuates peace through fear, and amassing powerful armies or subjugating our workers using passive violence.
In conclusion, NVC is a process that should be learned by everyone. It is a process that mostly requires one to empathize by employing a simple four step process. There are negative consequences that can appear in our lives when NVC isn’t used, when we don’t follow the examples of great people, such as Ghandi. If we don’t go through a process of learning the NVC either through trial and error and rediscovering the processes for ourselves, there might be a huge learning curve for us in the future.
