To all those who think this fight is useless...

[WilliamPitt]

"When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they seem invincible. But in the end, they always fall. Think of it, always."

- Gandhi (a man who was up against forces that make our current crop look like pikers...and won)

[LaurenG]

1. For the love of Mike could somebody hurry it up a bit

I do love that quote.:hi:


edit: spelling

[Avalux]

3. I know, lol. How long does it take for truth to win?

I'm getting so very tired. :(

[pat_k]

62. Hey, "critical mass" may have been reached yesterday. . .

It is impossible for any observer to be aware of all the forces that come together to bring about massive changes. The pivotal points are only seen in hindsight. Predictions of a "long hard slog" don't actually have any basis in reality.

It's no mystery why truth always wins the day. Once recognized, truth is not unlearned. People who learn about the criminal abuses committed by the Bush Syndicate -- starting with the stolen 2000 election - never return to ignorance. The process is one way -- every day, more and more people learn the truth.

We may have reached critical mass yesterday. We may reach it tomorrow. It doesn't actually matter. We just need to know it is coming, and knowing that, we act today with the knowledge that our actions, however small, have ripple effects we may never know.

Some call it faith, some call it confidence. What you call it doesn't really matter. Just act with the knowledge that anything is possible.

[mtnester]

2. This administration is a scab that is getting picked at

pretty soon...scab gone.

Sometimes it is a slow process, but eventually.

[xiamiam]

4. after alito and the sotu i was so disgusted..and when i watched

coretta scott kings funeral i felt ashamed of myself for wanting to just get the hell out of here....i was inspired as i was reminded that while some of these battles seem impossible...they must be fought...

[myrna minx]

15. I think the Coretta Scott King funeral was the vitamins that we needed

to re-inspire and invigorate us. She was one of us. We must walk on and honor her wonderful memory. :hug:

After we win this battle, we must ensure that our children understand what is at stake. Even after all of the victories that were won by the giants before me, I was one lazy assed twenty-something liberal living a happy life in the 1990's. I woke up around the time of impeachment, but by that time the evil conservative momentum was so incredible, I didn't know what to do. We can't forget was has happened, even if the good times come along again. We can never never never forget.

[Pacifist Patriot]

48. That is exactly what it did for me. A real shot in the arm.

[GreenPartyVoter]

58. Me too. Oh my gosh, I got so much hope from it. :^)

[Joe Fields]

5. This is a fight worth fighting to the death.

The soul of our country is at stake.

[burythehatchet]

71. I would be willing to die for our cause

but I would not be willing to kill for it - Gandhi

[Ksec]

6. Good thought for the day there Willy

Truth always wins. It sometimes takes forever, but it always wins.

[leftstreet]

7. What fight are we talking about?

:shrug:

[cali]

8. Great quote. I've got another

"I believe in aristocracy, though- if that is the right word, and if a democrat may use it. Not an aristocracy of power, based upon rank and influence, but an aristocracy of the sensitive, the considerate and the plucky. Its members are to found in all nations and classes, and all through the ages. They represent the true human tradition, the one permanent victory of our race over cruelty and chaos. Thousands of them perish in obscurity, a few are great names. "

E.M. Forester

[pitohui]

9. the way of truth and love has never won

hello, gandhi was assassinated and the rest of us are still struggling, and it's year of our lord 2006

what is yr definition of winning, my definition of winning would be to live in a world where i wasn't killed for speaking out

bullshit quotes, phrased however nicely by people however nice, do not answer any questions or bind any wounds

india today is divided and will always be divided into two nations, the war between hindu and muslim will go on forever, so whatever gandhi won, besides a nice name in the history books, it isn't terribly encouraging or inspiring

i'm tired of pretending to be inspired by old quotes

it's time to be inspired by actual changes for the positive

[Ksec]

12. Geez, you need a vacation.

:)

[pitohui]

13. well i need a vacation from cheap verbiage

we have a large stretch of our nation to rebuild

talk is cheap and quotes from the dead even cheaper

if you want to inspire me, tell me something useful or inspirational you have done

but don't feed me lies, i'm tired of lies, gandhi did not "win" anything, he was killed, murdered, assassinated, he's dead jim

i'm tired of being humored, we're all adults here on this site, give me some truth

[lildreamer316]

19. Death is not losing.

It is just a tool we use to learn. People believe he was very wise now; even years after. We take his wisdom and build from there.

[WilliamPitt]

35. "gandhi did not 'win' anything"

Here's the part where I write off any future posts you may make.

Wow.

Buy a history textbook. Any textbook will do. Turn to the chapter on British colonialism. See: "End Of" and "India."

[leftstreet]

17. JFK, Bobby, MLK

They kill 'em.
We quote 'em.

:cry:

[lildreamer316]

21. If they

had not died the way they did; their actions and words would not have had as much immediate impact when they did.
Ever read Illusions by Richard Bach?

[leftstreet]

25. By your reasoning

The longer they had lived, the longer their actions would have had a longterm effect.
:shrug:

[lildreamer316]

27. No..

If they had not died a sudden and violent public death the ideals they were fighting for would not have become as important immediately as they did. The death drew attention to what they were fighting for....that person had made the ultimate sacrifice for their cause/ideas/convictions. I am not saying this is always a good thing; just that it has its place in the order of things.

[leftstreet]

30. I think several thousand impoverished homeless people in NOLA

almost 40 years after the death of MLK, almost 140 years after the death of Abraham Lincoln, could argue the points better than I.

[0007]

31. Read most of Richard Bach's books, my favorite is

"Jonathan Livingston Seagull"

[LaurenG]

23. What are you changing? Are you just criticising

because you're frustrated? Don't pretend, just do the best you can and try to love something before it's over.

[WilliamPitt]

32. Right

The British still control India, African Americans still drink from separate fountains and can't vote, neither can women, and workers are barred from organizing.

This defeatist crap makes me want to puke.

[mzmolly]

51. Define "actual changes for the positive"

please.

[druidity33]

65. India

is far different today than it was in Gandhi's time. Look up the state of Kerala for some hopeful prospects in that region. I agree that in this day and age it is important to be vocal and not take any shit. And yeah, lately i've been into Hunter Thompson, Emma Goldman and Terrence McKenna... more apt to be inspired by a rant, rallying cry, or soul-search gesture... but i gotta say, dissin' Gandhi and his brave life is a little low...

just sayin'....

[Gregorian]

80. I understand you. I am also a perfectionist.

But I see things differently now. I see continuous struggle. Never ending fighting. On the other hand is beauty and freedom. WE WILL DIE. But we live today.

I have been so utterly disappointed. From shitty architecture, to starvation. We could have done better. We could live in a world without war. We could all get along. But then there is greed and sickness.

I hear you. Your values are noble and great. We are all learning how to live, as we live. Tomorrow may come as we want, or it may not. We just don't know.

When I cried out in anxiety over what you have expressed, my father would say- Rome is always burning.

[donheld]

94. So you're saying Martin Luther and Coretta Scott King lived and died

in vain?:cry::shrug::cry:

[mattclearing]

10. The fight isn't useless at all.

Indeed, we are doing much better than ever before.

[AtomicKitten]

11. Never had a doubt we would see the other side of this.

but thanks for the reminder

[The2ndWheel]

14. It has always won

Only to have the next generation fight the same fight, "win", have their children fight the same fight, "win", have their children fight the same fight, "win", have their children fight the same fight, "win", have their children fight the same fight....................................................................................

That's not winning, that's insanity. But you can't expect anything less from civilization.

[dpbrown]

16. Wasn't he then assassinated?

I mean, you can call that a win, I suppose.

[Ksec]

18. Yes, but it was an honorable death

He died doing the right thing. I only hope I go out so great.

[dpbrown]

20. Fight, fight, fight...and then they kill you?

What about living to fight another day?

[lildreamer316]

22. You do live.

Please see my comments above...sometimes that kind of impact is needed. They are not gone. Wonder what body that great spirit chose this time around? Hmmmm....
You can't kill an idea.
Matter is neither created or destroyed....

[Just Me]

36. Everyone dies. It's the life you live that matters.

IMHO

[IronLionZion]

96. he lives in each of us so that we may fight

Hate killed the man, but the man's memory will live in all of us for eternity. Gandhiji is immortal because of what he did on this earth.

Gandhi was killed by a radical right wing Hindu lunatic. Jinnah was a killed by a radical right wing Muslim lunatic. The problem, is the radical right wing lunatics.

Why cut my fingernails? They'll just grow back, right? :eyes:

[WilliamPitt]

33. Any cause not worth giving your life to

is a hobby.

Maybe you need to find another one.

[dpbrown]

89. I question whether assassination is the benchmark for "winning"

You wax poetic about martyrdom.

India broke apart after independence and has been at war with itself pretty much ever since.

Thanks for the advice, though.

[IronLionZion]

97. but we got independence.

That's winning. The majority of Indians don't hate each other. It's the radical right wing lunatics that are problem.

It's nice not being controlled by a small island thousands of miles away in Europe.


Did the American Revolutionaries lose in 1776? America went to war with itself 90 years later.

Look, if you like masochism, go join Rick Santorum in Opus Dei. I hear he has chains and stuff. :eyes:

[dpbrown]

105. The US civil war didn't last 50 years with threat of nuclear winter

Thanks for the snide rejoinder about masochism, though.

Assassination is not the hallmark of a successful movement. Rosa Parks didn't have to die to move the civil rights movement forward.

The death of the Kennedy brothers successfully set back the Democratic Party. Nixon, who ran unsuccessfully against John Kennedy in 1960, was left to ascend. From him, Reagan. And Reagan directly set the media and corrupt corporate stage for the Bushes.

Indian independence devolved into internecine war between Pakistan and India that is still going on today, with assassinations of India's leaders, and the takeover of Pakistan by a military dictatorship. Wives are still burnt on pyres in India, ritual rape is practiced in Pakistan, honor killings continue.

Rationalizations like, "It's nice not being controlled by a small island thousands of miles away in Europe" sound like Donald Rumsfeld's "Democracy is messy" justifying the destruction and devolution into civil war the US occupation has caused in Iraq.

The Mahatma's instruction to use peaceful resolution of conflict died with him, while people co-opt his name to justify their often violent visions of superiority over others.

Che Guevara's image is used to sell women's underwear for multinational corporations.

I suppose he won, too.

[IronLionZion]

106. Don't underestimate the power of positive thinking.

or the destructive defeatist power of negative thinking. Who has won with a cynical attitude? If you think you're going to lose, then you've already lost.

I've lived in India and visit every two or three years. Never have I seen any type of violence directed to me or my family because of our religion. Noone I know has ever been burnt alive on a funeral pyre. In fact, that shows how much you know. They burn dead bodies, a policy which I support and hope my own body is cremated after I die. The practice of wives throwing themselves onto their husband's pyre is an ancient practice that rarely happens in modern times. I guess in the West, people just jump off buildings or shoot themselves when they lose hope.

Don't do me the disservice of falsely portraying my people in a primitive way. India has changed radically since partition. Where my family is from - the state of Kerala; Hindus, Muslims, Christians, and even Jews get along just fine and celebrate each other's holidays and work together to achieve goals like our 99% literacy rate.

It's been proven that educated people are less prone to senseless violence. There will always be violence you see. So we have to do the best we can with what we have to reduce it.

So what productive pursuits are you up to?

"Be the change you want to see in the world." - M.K. Gandhi

[havocmom]

24. This nation was forged by fewer than all of us

working under much more difficult conditions with less tools.

[The2ndWheel]

34. But at the same time

There were were giant losers in the forging of this country. But hey, we got freedom and democracy out of it. There would be no America without genocide and slavery, so the people who fight against whatever it is that we're fighting against now, don't always win. Sure, there is a Ghandi here and there, but we have an entire country to prove, beyond any doubt, that power usually wins.

[havocmom]

38. The fight goes on

It will as long as there are people

Doesn't lessen the feat of overthrowing the greatest military power of the day, does it? It was done before and will be again. The population of Iraq is teaching that to the greatest military power of thisday.

Anyone who wants to just give up is invited to put me on ignor. They will have greater peace that way.

[The2ndWheel]

39. Very true

"It will as long as there are people"

Kind of makes it all...I don't know...what's the word...

"It was done before and will be again."

That's right. And then again after that, and again after that, and again, and again, and again. But not every time(see people already on this land mass before the Europeans). Again, seems like it's something...damn, what's that word...

"Doesn't lessen the feat of overthrowing the greatest military power of the day, does it?"

What doesn't? The founding of the country being as a result of oppression? Yeah, that does cheapen it a bit.

Good for them though, they defeated the British; then turned around and almost eradicated an entire people. I guess that was worth it.

[Call Me Wesley]

26. The time itself takes time, but what History thaught us is exactly that.

All that we are is the result of what we have thought. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him.
If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him.
- Shakyamuni

[Misunderestimator]

28. And so do the good fall. So basically, in the end, everyone falls.

And life goes on. Well, some lives go on.

[enid602]

29. Not useless, but unfortunately most difficult.

Remember, even after the Right falls (and I think they will), they have so many safeguards in place to ensure control in the future. They've poisoned the SCOTUS for the next 30 years. They've spent so much (and ruined our credit to such an extent) that they know we can't return to any form of progressive/compassionate government, much less socialism. They still own/control the media. They've introduced a new form of super-partisanship (and breaking/bending all rules to get your way, no matter what), ensuring that the government will never work as well as it once did.

Unfortunately, once Bush falls, I feel that the real revolution will just then be starting. Some have called for a Gingrich-style 'contract to restore America,' and the 'Band of Brothers' are stirring things up as well. I think the democratic leadership should broaden the scope of our short-term mission, and call for nothing short of a '2nd Republic.' a 2nd Republic admits that the first one failed, and would end the Democrat tendency of making nice with the enemy after yet another failed Republican putsch.

[DemoTex]

37. Another timely Gandhi quotation:

"First, they ignore. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." - Gandhi

[newswolf56]

40. Your notion about Gandhi is wrong and therefore dangerously misleading:

Gandhi (a man who was up against forces that make our current crop look like pikers...and won).

In historical fact, the forces against which Gandhi and his followers arrayed themselves were infinitely civilized compared to the forces we are battling now. Had they not been so civilized -- had Gandhi been opposed for example by the forces of the Third Reich, or the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere, or the fascists of Italy or Spain, or the modern-day fascists of Chile, or the theocrats of Iran -- Gandhi and his followers would have simply been exterminated, and all memory of them methodically purged from history.

Which is of course the ultimate weakness of non-violence: it is only successful against adversaries sufficiently civilized that they themselves are predisposed to avoid violence.

Note in this context the ultimate lesson of Tienanmen Square: by gunning down an estimated 5,000 non-violent demonstrators, the Chinese guaranteed there will be no further democratic resistance in China for at least two decades -- probably more like an entire century.

Look also at Vietnam: the original protests against the Diem Regime in South Vietnam were non-violent protests. These were led by Buddhists who opposed the Roman Catholic Diem's efforts to impose Christian theocracy on South Vietnam. The Buddhists failed, abysmally and completely -- even after Buddhist monks began immolating themselves as an ultimate act of defiance. In fact the opposition to Diem was utterly powerless until the National Liberation Front unleashed its military organization, the now-legendary Viet Cong.

There is a profoundly disturbing short story that illustrates how ultimately useless non-violence is in the face of determined violence. In it, global politics have been forever changed by the fact that in 1940 the United States elected a Republican, thereby going fascist, allying itself with the Axis and refusing to defend Britain (all of which nearly happened). Thus Hitler did not attack the Soviet Union, and thus the Axis won, victory on a scale and magnitude the "Thousand-Year Reich" is now and forever a reality. Consequently the Indian Viceroyalty has been divided between the Germans in the north and west and the Japanese in the south and east, and Gandhi and the leadership of the Indian independence movement are all German captives. The story focuses on the wrenching ethical quandary besetting the German commander of the occupation forces, who personally deeply respects and perhaps even admires Gandhi, but nevertheless orders Gandhi and his colleagues shot, and orders the German Army and the SS to continue decimation of the populace -- massive round-ups, with the execution of every tenth prisoner -- until the demonstrations cease. Which of course they do.

While other U.S. administrations have clearly been responsive to non-violence -- note in this context the (temporary) successes of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. -- the Bush Administration has already signaled just as clearly it is not: it is the only administration in U.S. history to wantonly violate the Bill of Rights by openly utilizing torture, illegal surveillance and illegal detention, not to mention election-theft and the deliberately genocidal policies so vividly demonstrated in both the aftermath of Katrina and the Bush Medicare Prescription Drug Lord Benefit. Historically speaking, this is the most overtly, methodically tyrannical administration in U.S. history -- one that is clearly fascist and indeed comes ever closer to being an American counterpart of the Third Reich, torture chambers, concentration camps and all.

Were civil disobedience to break out on so massive a scale it would interfere with corporate profits, I have no doubt -- no doubt at all -- this administration would suppress it with maximum brutality: there would be ten thousand Kent States, a thousand Ludlow Massacres, a hundred exterminations of leaders publicly assassinated just as King, Malcolm X and Robert Kennedy were murdered or slain more mysteriously as Fred Hampton and Karen Silkwood were killed. (Note particularly in this context the battlefield training of the National Guard in urban warfare -- like the now-absolute and eternal control over the judiciary granted by the Alito appointment, obviously part of the corporate/fascist/Bush scheme to tyrannize America.)

Rather than fantasize about Gandhian civil disobedience or, far more suicidally, fantasize about the even more illegal and therefore patently absurd notion of revolution (utterly impossible in a nation already deprived of military training for two full generations: the real reason Nixon abolished the draft) -- we are far better served by acknowledging the dread fact that we have indeed been reduced to an ultimate state of powerlessness hitherto unknown in American politics: powerlessness of a degree so absolute its only historical analogy is to medieval serfdom. For it is only by starting from this hideous and brutal realization of terrifying truth (which includes the fact we have been hopelessly betrayed by most of our politicians) that we will be able to devise the strategy and tactics that might someday restore our freedom -- and perhaps salvage our constitutional principles as well.

And in all of this we should never forget that the adversaries Gandhi confronted were civilized Englishmen, while the adversaries we confront are barbaric American capitalists -- not only the most savage subspecies of Homo Sapiens Sapiens that has ever lived, but masters of the most brazenly fascist politicians in U.S. history.
_________
Footnote: Sorry I don't remember the name of the short story I cited above or even the name of its writer; I read it perhaps 20 years ago as part of several short-story collections I studied when I was determining whether I had sufficient talent -- which I do not -- to write fiction myself.

[Beam Me Up]

41. Excellent reply! Thank you.

:thumbsup:

I agree. We have to be realistic about our situation here. This is why I believe 9/11 is such an important issue. It has the possibility of revealing the layers of deception that have colored every aspect of our social lives. In any case, we can't combat an enemy we can't identify. And by 'enemy' I mean precisely that--not merely a political opponent. Where we are now is the result of calculated actions taken over decades to create the conditions necessary for the overthrow of the constitution. For all practical purposes they've already made it irrelevant.

[leftstreet]

42. Could this be it?

The Last Article", a short story by Harry Turtledove, is an alternative history tale that describes a Nazi invasion of India and the reaction of the Germans to the non-violent resistance and pacifism of Gandhi and his followers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Article

[newswolf56]

46. Sounds as if it could be. The failure of Gandhi to understand...

the elemental differences between British and German imperialism rings a bell, and if indeed the German commander is in something of a quandary (which the Wikipedia entry seems to omit), then it probably is the story. Sorry I still don't remember the author's name -- it was 20 years ago at least.

[Pooka Fey]

78. I wish I could just nominate this post, & your post about the CSK funeral

And your tag line is the perfect footnote to your message. Thank you for this - and I disagree with your assessment that don't have enough talent to write fiction. You write beautifully. :hi:

[Fiendish Thingy]

91. You may be right, but haven't been proven to be, yet...

"Were civil disobedience to break out on so massive a scale it would interfere with corporate profits, I have no doubt -- no doubt at all -- this administration would suppress it with maximum brutality: there would be ten thousand Kent States, a thousand Ludlow Massacres, a hundred exterminations of leaders publicly assassinated just as King, Malcolm X and Robert Kennedy were murdered or slain more mysteriously as Fred Hampton and Karen Silkwood were killed. (Note particularly in this context the battlefield training of the National Guard in urban warfare -- like the now-absolute and eternal control over the judiciary granted by the Alito appointment, obviously part of the corporate/fascist/Bush scheme to tyrannize America.)"

This hasn't happened yet under the current regime; when it started to happen last time, in the 60's, that was the turning point...yes, things are different now, but unless the Bush regime attempts a Tianenmen style massacre, AND the MSM doesn't cover it, AND the internet is censored/shut down as it is in China, then your premise is false. Remember, even the MSM covered the tragedy of Katrina, that, despite Bushco PR efforts, began to show the cracks in the facade...

[newswolf56]

100. I don't know what history you've been reading about the '60s...

but I was there, often at the very epicenter of the Countercultural Rebellion, whether as a journalist writing in both the mainstream and underground press, or as a Civil Rights, anti-Vietnam War and Back-to-the-Land activist, and I can testify with absolute certainty that what we are confronting now is infinitely worse than the Nixon oppressions.

Also, you've gravely misunderstood what happened during those years.

While the Civil Rights Movement temporarily achieved many of its goals -- "temporarily" because American racism is as relentless as ever, to such an extreme that all the accomplishments of the New Deal and the Great Society have been maliciously abolished precisely because they were indeed helping the nation's most disadvantaged economic and racial minorities -- the Anti-Vietnam War Movement was a failure from the beginning.

The examples of Kent State and Jackson State prove the point. Beyond the initial but hopelessly disorganized expression of student rage, and the development in New York City of a brief but intense outpouring of red-armband student revolutionary fervor that elderly Russians said reminded them of Petrograd in 1917, the massacres at Kent State and Jackson State marked not the escalation of resistance but instead the collapse of the movement -- the onset of mortal fear and the end of all hope that handed the Nixon Regime the total victory reflected two years later in the McGovern debacle: undeniable proof that America likes its protesters dead or permanently crippled, its presidents authoritarian and its foreign policy ever more Nazified.

What dealt the final death-blow to the anti-war movement was Nixon's abolition of the draft: the denial of universal military training and the creation of a professional military caste -- both essential prerequisites to fulfillment of the corporate oligarchy's long-term plan to impose an absolutely revolution-proof fascism. Most of the anti-war movement had disbanded after the Kent State and Jackson State killings demonstrated that protesting could be as deadly dangerous as the armed combat the protesters had sought so desperately to avoid; with the brave and notable exception of a handful of dedicated pacifists, the remnants -- their ranks reduced by nearly two-thirds -- halted their protests as soon as the draft ended, which occurred the following year.

This disheartening two-part conclusion is significant because it reveals beyond any doubt the hopelessly selfish, hopelessly bourgeois character that had been the anti-war movement's undoing from the very beginning -- a character that nevertheless achieved a major ruling-class goal by setting in place a hitherto-unprecedented hostility between the draft-exempt economic elite and the blue-collar and low-income classes. Tragically, this hostility remains unabated to this day and is therefore obviously a now-permanent feature of the American political landscape, forever obstructing the working-class solidarity essential to any genuinely progressive reform and thereby guaranteeing fascism's eternal dominance.

In the final analysis, the anti-war protests of the '60s and '70s not only failed but dealt the American body politic a blow from which it cannot possibly recover, not now, not in a thousand years: the class antagonisms so engendered are indeed that extreme precisely because they are self-perpetuating. Meanwhile, withdrawal from Vietnam was forced on the United States not by domestic protests but by the armed might of the Viet Cong, the North Vietnamese and the Soviet Union. Thus the Countercultural Rebellion was not only unable to stem the relentless advance of American fascism, but was actually manipulated to solidify fascism's eventual victory. As for the Watergate Affair, that was merely a convulsion within the ruling class itself, precisely as Howard Zinn (A People's History of the United States), Noam Chomsky and a variety of other avowedly Leftist writers portray it. Lastly, the death of the Soviet Union nearly two decades later guaranteed the global triumph of fascism forever.

The positive legacies of the Countercultural Rebellion were in entirely different (and deliberately unpublicized) realms. The Back-to-the-Land Movement lingered on for at least another decade, acting out its true though premature prophecy of post-apocalyptic survival, but its rural communes eventually collapsed due to a combination of factors, chiefly the failure to develop a unifying eco-political analysis and the continuing reign of terror imposed by the armed vigilante groups typically organized by Christian fundamentalists with local law-enforcement protection and -- quite possibly -- federal encouragement. Ultimately the Counterculture's only lasting contributions were the feminist renaissance, the environmental movement, and the resurrection of the female aspects of the divine aka the Great Goddess, whether as metaphysical reality, socio-political metaphor or scientific formulation (i.e., the Gaea Hypothesis). But even these legacies -- formerly taken pretty much for granted -- are now threatened with obliteration by capitalism's post-Soviet resumption of its innate tyranny: its ultimate achievement in the ever-more-tyrannosauric policies of the Bush Regime and the triumphant hybrid of fascism and theocracy summed up in the Alito appointment. The capitalists have won, and all that remains is the conversion of the planet into One Big Sweatshop -- a process already well underway here in the U.S.

As to the relative magnitudes of oppression, its Nixon-era modalities did not remotely approach the methodical genocide of the Katrina aftermath -- genocide confirmed again by what should properly be called the Bush Medicare Prescription Drug Lord Benefit, which even after the intervention of at least 34 state governments is exterminating thousands, especially AIDS patients, by deliberate denial of vital prescription drugs. Not since the Indian Wars has U.S. government policy so brazenly reflected the epicentral value of capitalism: that the sole measure of an individual's worth is profitability -- the extent to which one is either wealthy (and therefore protected as a member of the ruling class) or is exploitable for wealth (and therefore oppressed as an always-expendable worker). These outrages are not accidents: they are deliberate expressions of carefully formulated policy -- policy to which the modern precedents are to be found only in Nazi Germany.

Nor did the Nixon Regime ever threaten any protesters with sedition charges (conviction for which is punishable by death), as Bush officials are already doing:

http://progressive.org/mag_mc020806

To put this horrific reality in further perspective, during the period of rebellion you describe as "the '60s" -- actually more like a 30-year span starting with the Beats in the mid-'50s and ending in the Reaganoid '80s with the utter nihilism of cocaine-stoked greed -- we rebels faced only two major federal campaigns of oppression. These were the leftover McCarthyism of the FBI's COINTELPRO, which sought to counter the '60s protest movements, and the CIA's far more deeply motivated (and far more effective) Operation CHAOS, which recognized in the Countercultural Rebellion a threat not only to capitalism but to patriarchy in general and therefore targeted all countercultural institutions, applying a variety of tactics to infiltrate and destroy not only the alternative press but communes, community organizations, countercultural schools, even spiritual study groups. Well-versed in mythology at the best Ivy League universities, CIA analysts apparently (and correctly) recognized the resurrection of the goddess-ideal as the ultimate threat to the patriarchal world-order and responded accordingly, destroying forever any hope the Counterculture might at last achieve genuine unity around just such a symbol.

Those were paranoid times, to be sure, but the paranoia was nothing like the gut-rending fear the wakeful experience today, facing a federal government carefully organized from top to bottom for oppression of a magnitude Nixon only dreamed of and Hitler would applaud: literally, as if Heinrich Himmler had come back from the dead and resurrected his dread Sicherheitsdeinst -- the Reich Security Service (RSHA) reincarnated as the Department of Homeland Security, complete with warrantless arrests, imprisonment without trial, torture and murder. As Al Gore himself says, never in U.S. history has liberty been so threatened.

[IronLionZion]

99. Civilized Englishmen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amritsar_Massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_wars

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War

"white man's burden" indeed.

[newswolf56]

101. Apparently you never heard of the Indian Wars, in which Wounded Knee...

was the norm rather than the exception; the anti-Irish riots in the Northeast (in which Irish women, children and men were dragged into the streets and beaten to death); the anti-Chinese riots in the West (in which uncounted thousands were murdered); the massacres of workers (Boston, Ludlow, Everett, the Mingo County War, the Coal Creek War etc. ad nauseum); the singularly American penchant for lynching (continued to this day in the crucifixion-murder of Matthew Shepherd); the American appetite for war crimes (unique in the modern world and demonstrated not only at My Lai but at Abu Ghraib) -- a savagery so horrifically long-lived (and so obviously endemic to our serial-murder culture) that no other nation can possibly compare.

By any and every historical standard imaginable, the English are infinitely more civilized than we.

And please don't do me the malicious dis-service of putting words in my mouth I never said: "white man's burden" is your misappropriation, not mine.

[IronLionZion]

103. Well I'm grateful that the english came to "civilize" my people

I had no idea America was so violent! You mean the good ol USA actually killed people?!?!?!
:sarcasm:

Too bad the English who settled America weren't so civilized.

I'm Asian Indian. So you might understand how I feel about the english. Or maybe you don't because you don't understand how the english came to conquer so much land in Asia, Africa, Australia, and elsewhere. People don't just hand their land over to a foreign empire just because they are "civilized". A good many people had to die before that happened.

The Brits didn't leave India because of one elderly nonviolent Indian. They left because a lot of Indians wanted them to leave. There were just too many people. When that many people want you out, you have to leave.

Your nazi story is just a bit too hypothetical. You can't say what "might" happen because India has not been tested like that. Nonviolence is the first resort. Violence is the second.

[newswolf56]

104. Appreciate your perspective, probably more than I can convey:

I'm mostly Celtic, with an American Aboriginal great-great-great grandmother: Scots, Irish, Mohawk.

But I still maintain the British withdrawal from India was as much a tribute to the (civilized) acceptance of reality as it was to Gandhi and his millions of supporters.

Had India belonged to the United States (as Iraq does now and forever), the war would still be going on -- just as it is, for example, in the Philippines today. The U.S. departs only when confronted by superior military force, as in Vietnam, i.e., the National Liberation Front's Viet Cong, the North Vietnamese Army and ultimately the Red Army of the Soviet Union. With the USSR gone and China hopelessly compromised by capitalism (and the fascist politics that are the inevitable extension of its economics), there is no such force on the planet -- nor will there ever be again.

The brief flaring of liberty between the Enlightenment and the present was just that, an ephemeral glimpse of human potential before the descent of another dark age, this one destined to last forever: U.S. control of space and the weaponry and surveillance technology so facilitated means the emergence of progressive movements (much less their empowerment to the point of taking over a country) is now utterly impossible, because the U.S. government in service to global capitalism now and forever possesses both the capability and the intention of ruthlessly suppressing all such movements at birth. Unlike any government in human history, the U.S. has also the wealth, might and savagery to retain that capability for eternity -- or rather for however much longer humanity survives.

[in_cog_ni_to]

43. Truth and love and HEROES!

My husband told me 5 years ago that eventually one or more of our HEROES WILL come forward and save this country. It looks like he was right. :)

[newswolf56]

44. To the poster above who cited the Coretta Scott King funeral...

as a moment of inspiration, and other posters who agreed, let me state here and now that I found that funeral to be instead a dreadful example of the horrific magnitude of all we have lost and how truly powerless we have become:

First, there was the unspeakable obscenity implicit in the fact George Bush was able to force himself on the memorial service; and

Secondly, there was the absolute proof of absolute powerlessness in all the grotesque truths against which the other speakers all so rightfully railed: the deliberately genocidal aftermath of Katrina -- not to mention the methodical destruction of the social-service network -- all of which demonstrate beyond any doubt not only the dreadful temporariness of Dr. King's achievements but the everlasting nature of American racism.

Once again, the relevance of this Paul Krugman essay, perhaps the most important such work since the American Revolution itself:

http://www.pkarchive.org/column/091905.html

Lastly, there was the painful fact that our powerlessness was in every possible sense underscored by the presence of George Bush: not only undeniable proof all protests will be ignored and therefore be reduced to meaninglessness, but the most damning proof possible of how utterly insignificant we are in the eyes of the cabal that now rules us.

For these reasons and many others, the memorial service put tears of bitter hopelessness in my eyes as nothing has done in my entire lifetime: the poignant aspirations of the Civil Rights Movement (of which I was a part); the undeniable fact all the movement's achievements are undone forever; the obscene hypocrisy of George Bush himself -- the chief oppressor and the ultimate accomplishment of global capitalism -- allowed to prattle over the coffin of a great woman who in real life was the antithesis of everything he represents: she is gone, and we will not see the like of her and her husband again. But oppression is back a thousand times stronger and -- because there is no force on earth strong enough to overcome it -- it is now obviously with us until our species itself becomes extinct.

[H2O Man]

45. Interesting thread, Mr. Pitt.

I enjoy reading the rather wide range of responses here. Some people are aware of Gandhi being assassinated, though they do not seem to appreciate the relationship between his struggle for the liberation of India from British rule, and the conflict that resulted in his death.

Others point out, sometimes in lengthy form, what Ho Chi Minh summed up in a sentense: "Had Gandhi been born in Vietnam, the French would have killed him on the day of his first public protest."

Yet they overlook the essential tactic of a revolutionary, be it Gandhi or Ho ..... and that was to make an unconscious people conscious, and to create a self-awareness that allowed their people to see themselves -- and their opposition, in all of its manifest forms -- differently than they did when they accepted oppression. And, by no small coincidence, both Gandhi and Ho made use of historic saying, teachings, and even poems, not unlike your OP.

[Just Me]

55. Yes. It's about spreading "awareness". I see that. eom

[H2O Man]

56. Indeed.

Sometimes we are exposed to a lack of awareness in the most surprising of places. There are many who mistake ignorance for perspective. That was what Gandhi attempted to change.

[leftstreet]

63. And yet, strangely, we're more aware than we've ever been.

The television has become the most effective weapon in the war on the peasants. A daily barrage of consumer-oriented information interspersed with breaking news as the Emperor sheds another item of his clothing, only to be re-framed as "humor" while we all learn to roll our eyes and say, "Duh. Politicians are corrupt? Tell me something I DON'T know."

[H2O Man]

69. Television

is a cross between hypnotism and novocaine. I would hesitate to say that it has created any large scale sense of awareness .... perhaps Jerry Mander sums up the results of television best in his book "In the Absence of the Sacred (The Failure of Technology & the Survival of the Indian Nations)." It was his follow-up to "Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television."

An example of the damage that tv does to the human brain can actually be found elsewhere on this thread, where someone speaks about Gandhi and his errors in comprehending the Nazi threat. This was based on a short story, apparently, and not a tv show .... but the same lack of insight, specifically the inability to note the distinction between fact and fiction, comes in to play. Gandhi spoke and wrote at length about the differences between the British Empire and the Nazis.

Your point about "consumer-oriented information" is right on target.

[leftstreet]

70. I meant its power in "manipulating" a large scale sense of awareness

Defining what form the awareness takes.

If George Bush is guilty of impeachable offenses, have no fear, the evening stand-up comedians will comfort you with what's "funny" about it.

[H2O Man]

87. Yes.

I was in full agreement with what you wrote. Sorry if my response sounded otherwise .... I thought that you had hit upon one of the key issues, one that too many people take for granted or simply overlook completely.

TV has also created a belief among many people that everything is scripted, and that no matter what happens in the world, the great script-writers are responsible. People in other countries are not viewed as distinctly human beings, behaving in distinctly human ways.

My oldest brother, who became as insane as Nietzsche in later life, used to say that television was like the printing press, but that its potential was being limited to publishing only comic books. I think that many comic books were superior to 95% of the crap on television.

[leftstreet]

92. LOL

Straight up! :thumbsup:
Bring back comic books.

[Just Me]

66. So, strange,...that, I was thinking about "perspective" earlier today.

I thought about a case I was working on (in my former life as an attorney). A guy ran a red light and crashed into my client. He admitted the same. It wasn't malicious and didn't involve any drugs or whatever. He just wasn't paying attention.

A lady, who knew the guy from church, INSISTED during a deposition that the light was green. According to her testimony, she was driving approximately three cars behind him and she was completely convinced the light was green when he drove through it.

There were five witnesses, in addition to the defendant, who testified the light was red when he went through it. Nevertheless, she was insistent, absolutely certain that the light was green! *LOL* She also talked about what a wonderful Christian he was and how he contributed so much to their church and taught Sunday school, etc.

She was a nice old lady. Her perception, though, was obviously skewed by her,...belief or loyalty or something,...perhaps, her judgment of the man who ran the red light as a "good" person.

[glitch]

60. Wow. Well done. nt

[mikelewis]

77. It's odd that this conversation would come up...

Earlier today, Rev. Lowery's speech led me to the website of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. I came across a section on non-violence that got me wondering just how practical non-violence truly is. In an unavoidable direct confrontation with another person, where the question is truly life or death, what defense does non-violence offer? Can non-violence overcome violence in a world where there are truly violent and wicked people? I guess what I'm asking is can there be a non-violent police force? Can society be controlled without the threat of violence? If non-violence isn't practical for direct personal attacks, how can it be translated into a way of maintaining order in a nation?

[H2O Man]

83. Gandhi advocated

participation in the ambulance services in WW2. Clearly, different situations call for different tactics. For another example, we can look at the gospels: there is a city that Jesus hurries out of when a group of people want to stone him for telling the truth, and there is a city he enters willingly to face certain death for telling the truth. There are reasons for the different tactics, and if a person is interested, it is an interesting topic for consideration.

I have participated in non-violent public demonstrations, including one where a person struck me with a board. (Luckily, it hit me on the head, breaking the board; I kept that board, as a reminder.) I could have reacted violently, or non-violently. And in January, while my young daughters waited in our driveway for their ride to school, a human being who had no business thinking about my girls stopped his car, rolled down his window, and began backing slowly towards them. I began moving quickly towards him: he put his car in forward, and drove off. As a human being, I am able to distinguish between situations.

[mikelewis]

90. So non-violence ha a practical application in affecting...

social change because it appeals to the collective humanity of the group or ideal being protested but on a micro level, in situations where force is needed to stop violence, force is justified and even required? So, it is left to the individual to make the determination when to use which tool?

I am very interested in learning how non-violence can be used in a practical application towards stemming the rise of violence and discord being fostered by the growing right-wing ideology. In Cleveland, street violence and shootings are rising every year. Our Police force has been shaved to the point that criminality, more often than not, goes unpunished. This has led to a rise in street violence and violent crimes. How can a campaign on non-violence be applied to help stem the rising tide of urban violence? How can we trust in the compassion of thugs and thieves and create a situation where they are confronted by their own humanity and thus humbled by compassion? How can non-violence be a useful tool to combat disorganized crime and create a safe environment for the residents of a street, town or city?

Non-violence works when confronting the government because on a macro level, the general population usually believes they're benevolent. When non-violence is attacked by violence, the image of the "benevolent dictator" or "benevolent society" is called into question. The inevitable question arises, "How can a benevolent society attack peaceful protestors and still claim that they are benevolent?" In a one on one confrontation, that collective morality can not be relied upon. Or can it? I am not experienced enough with this concept to understand it's practical uses and would honestly appreciate your thoughts on this topic. I read your paper on civil disobedience and I found it very illuminating but it failed to address the the concept of non-violence in a micro-confrontation.

I'm used to simply beating the living shit out of whatever threatens me and killing it if necessary. I have trusted my capacity to deliver violence as a means to keep me and my family safe. Though I deplore violence, I know how effective the threat of violence can be in bringing about the desired result. After reading about (and finally trying to comprehend) the actions of Martin, Gandhi and Jesus, I see there is power in compassion. Non-violence is not cowardice in the face of danger, it takes more bravery to accept the blow and remain on course than it does to get embroiled in an altercation and side-tracked by violence. Yet, to adopt this method of defense requires a faith in the universal goodness of man. I'm not sure I have much faith in that concept.

[FreedomAngel82]

47. Thanks for that quote

It is hard sometimes but it's nice to have a reminder.

[Katherine Brengle]

49. Amen. n/t

[mzmolly]

50. One of my favorite quotes of all time.

Thanks for the much needed reminder.

[Dogmudgeon]

52. Foolproof Method

I use the following method to know when it's okay to fight for freedom, justice, and America; and when it's not:

Brainwaves present = Fighting okay
Brainwaves absent = Fighting not okay

--p!

[spanone]

53. Gandhi....thanks for that. Great reminder.

[SmokingJacket]

54. This is what it means to have faith, I think...

If you sincerely believe in God, or a god, you believe that God is good, and that good will ultimately triumph.

Being nonreligious, I'm not so sure. As glad as I am that Hitler lost the war, I don't think that it was fated to be so. I think we were lucky, and I think we fought better because we weren't motivated by hate, loathing, and the desire to subjugate the entire world.

However, I do believe that as citizens of the world we must act -- ALWAYS -- in order to further the good, as we see it.

[Just Me]

59. Having "faith" in our CAPACITY to do good doesn't require a belief,...

,...in a supreme being. I don't adopt any particular religion as my own. However, I KNOW there are greater things at work than me or you or the speckle of dust our race (the human race) represents in the universe.

We are part of that, but don't CONTROL it. If we weren't so damned self-centered, life would be so much easier,...for all of us. IMHO.

[SmokingJacket]

61. I have absolute faith in our capacity... just not in the inevitability

that it will all turn out well.

I know there are things out there completely beyond my imagining, thing much greater than me, totally beyond what my poor idiot brain can comprehend. But is it "good"? I have no idea.

All we can do is try and make life better for others -- and ourselves -- here on Earth. That much makes perfect sense to me.

[Just Me]

74. It's comforting, wonderful really, to know that others, like you,...

,...want to contribute to a better life for everyone. :hug: Ya' see, we ALL live in this mystery called, "life". No one controls the universe or the future: influences it, yes,...but NEVER controls it.

Working through that mystery, together,...makes the burdens of the unknown a lot lighter.

Thing is, there's plenty to go around. But for the greedy, no one on this planet would hunger or be without clothing or shelter or fail to control pregnancies or pollute/kill the earth or create stockholds of WMDs or spread AIDS or die from lack of health care or life-saving drugs. There is such abundance,...being withheld,...by those who choose to advantage themselves, exploit anything and everyone. They are a sickness, a malignancy to their own.

Anyway, no God or Supreme Being is responsible for the sorrows and suffering that SOME human beings impose upon this earth, upon their own race. The only reason I sense or know that those malignant individuals will ultimately face the consequences that they deserve is because, there is something bigger than me and them,...functioning quite well,...in spite of it all.

[upi402]

57. thanks for that

good luck wishes to democracy and the usa.

[Ellipsis]

64. ...

“Love is the strongest force the world possesses, and yet it is the humblest imaginable”


 Mahatma Gandh

[Junkdrawer]

67. It's going to get MUCH worse before it gets better...

and that thought depresses me quite a bit...

[proud patriot]

68. I have this quote in 3 places in my home

keeps me going as well as the Soldiers Families who
thank me for my yard and car . :hi:

[Disturbed]

73. America is in deep trouble.

"These new conservatives would have us trade in our democracy for a corporatocracy, a form of feudal government most recently reinvented by Benito Mussolini when he recommended a "merger of business and state interests" as a way of creating a government that would be invincibly strong. Mussolini called it fascism." Thom Hartmann

The Neo Fascists will not give up their power without a fight.

[proud patriot]

79. Yep

luckily most of the neo nazi are cowards

[Cleita]

72. Yeah, but sometimes it's a long wait...too long.

When Henry Kissinger and the CIA staged a coup in my mother's country Chile, I was a young woman. Now I'm an old bat and dictator Augusto Pinnochet is just being brought to justice and it won't bring back those who died under his regime.

I'm not trying to be a downer but I really hope we can hurry up the fall of this newly established emperor.

[mnhtnbb]

75. Where is our Gandhi?

Where is the leader we need? Who will it be?

[helderheid]

81. please take a close look to the quote on my sig line

[byronius]

76. Gandhi knew the British so well. Under any other circumstances

I'm sure he would have thought of something that would work. He was a thinker. The few, the powerful. The We. Mr. Pitt, I wonder if you have ever read Harlan Ellison's 'Repent Harlequin, said the TickTock Man?' I think Gandhi would have fully appreciated the Harlequin's tactics. And for the United States? The Gentleman Who Is My Avatar was clearly thinking of Gandhian/Alinsky Reality Revolution. Yeah, maybe Gandhi wouldn't get press time anymore over here, and would therefore fail to advance his cause; conversely, maybe he would think of something new to thrill, amaze and change the lives and perspectives of the American people. Sorta like my Avatar did.

Something new. Hmmm. What can't you say here, gentlemen, in this forum? If we're so smart, what to do, what to do, something new for the TickTock Man. Hmmm.

The Gentleman Who Is My Avatar surely pushed the line back, before committing suicide ten days after the election of George H. Bush, by taking an overdose of barbiturates and lying down fully clothed under his bed covers, near an open window. Brave, yes. Effective, yes. A proponent of nonviolent 'guerrilla theater'. I believe so, especially at his peak, in altering the American cultural mind. After all, he is responsible for me, to a great extent. Hmmm. Avatars. Safety in Avatars. Hmmm. What to do. TickTock.

Mr. Pitt, perhaps you have inspired me to something. Something new.

[mdmc]

82. think of it, always

peace and low stress

[KitchenWitch]

84. WillPitt - thank you for this!

:yourock:

[leftchick]

85. Study: New (repuke electronic voting) Machines Await 4 in 5 Voters

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_hi_te/voting_machines

Fewer voters will cast their ballots by punching a card or pulling a lever in this November's elections as the country continues to turn to newer, electronic machines, according to a study released Monday.

While the study says old systems that were prone to error are on their way out, experts also note that means many Americans will be voting on unfamiliar equipment this fall.

At least four out of five registered voters will use the newer generation of machines — either ATM-style touchscreen machines or ones that ask voters to fill in the blanks, a vast change from the contested 2000 presidential election that spurred states and Congress to push for improved equipment.

Back in 2000, just over half the voters had access to the latest technology

[kentuck]

86. This thread reflects the hopelessness that is creeping over our nation...

We are not that different from the rest of America. We only put it into words. But, as many have said, we cannot give up. We must endure. We will be victorious. Truth will win out.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

88. Wow! Will Pitt quoting an Anarchist!

[Marleyb]

93. Empires fall when the people rise up

How many folks have to die before we wise up?

[radio4progressives]

95. the answer my friend, is blowing in the wind.... n/t

[IronLionZion]

98. Solidarity Brother! K+R nt

[PBass]

102. Being a progressive is a life-long endeavor

There's no magical day when "we win" and suddenly there's no more injustice, poverty, racism, wars of choice, corruption, etc. Be in it for the long haul.

Along the way, there will be victories AND defeats. Remember that we are firmly on the side of what is good and just, and have some fun along the way when you can.

[American liberal]

107. That's my sig. line. and my hope for the future. n/t

[KoKo]

108. The fight is not useless but our Party is useless.....why bother anymore.

:puke: