M.MAS 7/22/15 their visibility and influence, but they are also barely three years old.16 While the rhetoric of 969 and Ma Ba Tha leaders is well documented, less understood are the discourses of non-elites in Myanmar. How do people perceive the threat to Buddhism that 969 and Ma Ba Tha leaders describe? Are there persistent features of the way such narratives circulate in different parts of the country? Identifying such features is the first step towards understanding how these narratives are being produced, who is contributing to their production, and the social and historical factors that lend them their animating power. Understanding the production of narratives about religious conflict in Myanmar is necessary if responses are to be crafted – by domestic or international actors – that help to lessen violence or promote peace and reconciliation. Similarly, understanding the ways narratives of threat are being mobilized is important so that they are not unintentionally strengthened. Discourse about violence in Myanmar can contribute to the mobilization of that violence, and all who speak about violence need to consider the relationships between their own discourse and conflict.17 Such considerations are impossible without listening to the ways nonelites discuss religious conflict. Listening need not equate with agreement, nor entail ignoring the voices of marginalized minorities. But it is a necessary first step. Necessary because it will lead to better responses, and because it is an ethical matter and way to de-escalate a growing sense among Buddhists that their fears and perceptions are being ignored. Research for this paper consisted of a series of ‘Listening Project’ interviews with 78 local residents of six Myanmar cities. Interviews were conducted with members of the four main religions in Myanmar, but the bulk of the interviews were conducted with Buddhists. This Listening Project can help us answer an empirical question: what are the ways in which people who perceive Islam as a threat to Buddhism justify this sense? But because conflict is ongoing, it can also help us frame an important political question: what are influential actors in Myanmar society doing that directly or indirectly contributes to violence, or to peace and reconciliation? After first introducing research methodology and basic findings, this paper focuses on understanding how people talk about religious conflict, and seeks to deepen an understanding of the way a narrative of threat and self-defence that is visible in the rhetoric of religious and political leaders circulates in the discourses of non-elites. From this it draws two important conclusions regarding common understandings of violence in Myanmar, and clarifies the nature of three questions that point to urgent next steps for policy makers, activists, academics, and all who may be interested in reducing conflict or promoting peace and reconciliation. Research methods: Listening in six Myanmar cities Research for this paper was carried out as a part of the Myanmar Media and Society (M.MAS) Research Project, established as a partnership between St Antony’s College, Oxford University, and the Myanmar ICT for Development Organization (MIDO). Launched in January 2015, the M.MAS project has consisted of two interrelated components: First, trainings in qualitative research skills18 and comparative scholarship on collective violence in other times and places19 for activists20 in six cities: four cities that 16 The roots of the ‘969’ movement stretch further than three years, but the movement began its rise to contemporary prominence at the end of 2012; Ma Ba Tha was formed in January 2014. 17 For an insightful development of this argument in the Indian context, see Paul R. Brass, Theft of an Idol: Text and Context in the Representation of Collective Violence (Princeton University Press, 1997); Paul R. Brass, The Production of Hindu-Muslim Violence in Contemporary India (University of Washington Press, 2003). For an exploration of the relationship between discourses about Myanmar and politics within Myanmar, see Elliott PrasseFreeman, “Fostering an Objectionable Burma Discourse,” Journal of Burma Studies 18, no. 1 (2014): 97–122, doi:10.1353/jbs.2014.0010. 18 Training focused on two areas of qualitative research: interviewing and participant observation. 19 Training focused on research by three authors: Jonathan Leader Maynard, “Rethinking the Role of Ideology in Mass Atrocities,” Terrorism and Political Violence 26 (2014): 1–21, doi:10.1080/09546553.2013.796934; Brass, 3