Readings in

Non-violent Alternatives

by

Richard Takagaki

16th EditionFebruary 2012

This edition is designed for limited use among the studentsof University High School. It is preliminary and private

and should neither be cited nor quoted in any publications.

ALL zuGHTS RESERVED -

NOT PUBLISHED

Table of Contents(Abridged)

1. Alive in the World (Jackson Browne)2. It is One (Jackson Browne)3. Non-violence Alternatives (chart)4. Civil Disobedience: A Definition5. Dissent (J. William Fulbright)6. The War Prayer (Mark Twain)7. The Sermon on the Mount (The Book of Matthew)8. The Sermon on the Mount (The Book of Luke)9. Dhammapada: Chapter Ten: Violence10. Tao Te Ching: Chapter 3111. Einstein on Mahatma Gandhi (Aibert Einstein)12. "Gandhi Was My Greatest Teacher" (William L. Shirer)1 3. Satyagraha, Civil Disobedience, Passive Resistance, Non-co-operation

(Mohandas K. Gandhi)14. Satyagraha or Passive Resistance (Mohandas K. Gandhi)15. Satyagraha: Means and Ends (Mohandas K. Gandhi)16. The Power of Non-violence (Mohandas K. Gandhi)17. David Harris: First Views from the Outside (John Garrity)18. David Harris' Coming Out (David Harris and Joan Baez)19. David Harris' Coming Out II (David Harris and Joan Baez)20. What Would You Do If ? (Joan Baez)21. History Book (Joan Baez)22.Mrs. Beaumont (Joan Baez)23. Letter from Birmingham Jail (Martin Luther King, Jr.)24.lHave a Dream (speech) (Martin Luther King, Jr.)25. Martin Luther King, Jr.: A Bibliography26.Prayer of the Farm Workers' Struggle (Cesar E. Ch6vez)2'T.Education of the Heart-Quotes by Cesar Chixez28. A Voice of Justice, Following the Gospel (Roger Mahony)29.To Be a Man (Cesar E. Ch6vez)30. Silone's Freedom (Ignazio Silone)31. To Seek a Newer World (Robet F. Kennedy)32. Imagine (John Lennon)33. Non-violent Alternatives: A Booklist

takagaki

Alive in the World

I want to live in the world, not inside my headI want to live in the world, I want to stand and be countedWith the hopeful and the willingWith the open and the strongWith the voices in the darknessFashioning daytght out ofsongAnd the millions of loversAlive in the world

I want to live in the world, not behind some wallI want to live in the world, where I will hear if another voice should callTo the prisoner inside meTo the captive of my doubtWho among his fantasies harbors the dream of breaking outAnd taking his chancesAlive in the world

To open my eyes and wake up alive in the worldTo open my eyes and finaliy arrive in the world

With its beauty and its crueltyWith its heartbreak and its joyWith it constantly giving birth to life and to forces that destroyAnd the infinite power of changeAlive in the world

To open my eyes and wake up alive in the worldTo open my eyes and fina[y arrive in the worldTo open my eyes and wake up alive in the worldTo open my eyes and finally arrive in the world

Browne, Jackson. Looking East. "Alive in the World" Swallow Turn Music, ASCAP. 1996.

takagaki

It is OneThey shot a man into the skyThe moon and stars became his bedHe saw the sun rise seven timesAnd when he came back down he said

It is one, it is one,One world spinning .round the sunWherever it is you call homeWhatever country you come fromIt is one, it is one, it is one, it is one.

They shot a rnan in AfricaAt a time of rivalry and warHe had some dreams of a good lifeBut dreams aren't what they killed him for

Now people stand themselves next to the righteousAnd they believe the things they say are trueThey speak in terms of what dividei usTo justify the violence they do

But it is one, it is one.One world spinning .round the sunWherever it is you call homeWhatever country you come fromIt is one, it is one, it is one, it is oneOne

- the deep blue ocean

One -

the endless skyOne

- the purple mountains

One -

you and IIt's not a world of our own choosingWe don't decide where we are bornThis life is a battleground between right and wrongOne way or other we are torn

And people stand themselves next to the righteousAnd they believe the things they say are trueAnd speak in terms of what dividesusTo justify the violence they do

But it is one, it is one,One world spinning .round the sunWherever it is you call homeWhatever country you come from

It is One

It is one, it is one, it is one, it is oneIt is one, it is one, it is one, it,is oneOne

- the purple mountains

One -

the deep blue seaOne

- all of creation

One -

you and me

Broume, Jackson. Looking East. "It is one" Swallow Turn Music, ASCAP. 1996.

takagaki

l(-rf A u:r--

-I9.*s"f-syi r\ 1t,,\t rr-"-t

/\/t,/ lVssgr_ ioitl_ i1ift

o-:r-{o'-5I.,au :;,H:_I tse

1 ,(8

f+.P,;1i-r.;r.i;-s\ t- f,--

1 1q4o's

\ q5s- \

T"s, s.- __

i-^

IV

@ff*u*rlci tr,

I,l/) X

takagaki

Civil Disobedience: A Definition

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE:

: when a person lcnowinqlv and openbt disobeys a rule or law in order to protest ordisagree with the rule or law

- examples: Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. disobeyed "Jim Crow" laws insouthern states; Mahatma Gandhi in India; cesar E. chavez; Henry DavidThoreau; David Haruis; Daniel and Philip Betigan; Jesus

1. usually civil disobedience uses non-violent tactics of protest and resistance- examples: sit-ins, kneel-ins, Freedom fudes, marching, carrying signs

2. usually used after attempting to go through all official avenues of authority and appeals

3. usually person wants to suffer the legal or official consequences- example: get arrested, get convicted, go to jail and publicize it

4. query: break alaw to prove a pointbreak a law to win a point

a. drive through a red traffic light when late for workb. drive through a red traffic light in an emergency of life or deathc. fire-fighters strikingd. doctors strikinge. teachers striking

- should there be consequences?- what about amnesty?

5. query: justice : fairness

6. query: justice: equality7. query: justice: freedom8. query: equality and freedom are incompatible

9. takagaki; the means are as important as the ends, the process is as important as theproduct, "the medium is the message," "you reap what you sow," the method isas important as the goal, Machiavelli was wrong, the method is the goal

Takagaki, Richard. 1983, 201 1 .

takagaki

Dissent

TO CRITICIZE ONE'S COI.INTRY IS TO DO IT A SERVICE AND PAY IT ACOMPLIMENT. IT IS A SERVICE BECAUSE IT MAY SPUR THE COLINTRY TO DOBETTER THAN IT IS DOING; IT IS A COMPLIMENT BECAUSE IT EVIDENCES ABELIEF THAT THE COUNTRY CAN Do BETTER THAN IT IS DOING. ..This,,,saidAlbert Camus in one of his "Letters to a German Friend," is "what separated us from you; wemade demands. You were satisfied to serve the power of your nation and we dreamed ofgiving ours here truth...." (December 1943)

In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith. Like medicine, the test of its value is not its tastebut its effect, not how it makes people feel at the moment but how it makes them feel andmoves them to act in the long run. Criticism may emba:rass the country's leaders in the shortrun but strengthen their hand in the long run; it may destroy a consensus on policy whileexpressing a consensus of values. Woodrow V/ilson once said that there was "such a thing asbeing too proud to fight"; there is also, or ought to be, such a thing as being too confident toconform, too strong to be silent in the face of apparent error. Criticism, in short, is more thana right; it is an act of patriotism, a higher form of patriotism, I believe, than the familiar ritualsof national adulation. If nonetheless the critic is charged with a lack of patriotism, he canrenlv with Camtts ttNo I didn't lnrre rnv nnrrnfnr if nninfin^ nrrr rrrhor i.,,-i,,-+ i- ,,,L^+,,,^-

-r'J rriJ vvui.iJ. ii Pviir.rirB uul wii6i i5 ixtiij5l iii yviial wulove amounts to not loving, if insisting that what we love should measure up to the finestimage we have of her amounts to not loving." (July 1943)

What is the finest image of America? To me it is the image of a composite, or better still asynthesis, of diverse peoples and cultures, come together in harmony but not identity, in anopen, receptive, generous, and creative society. Almost two hr:.ndred years ago aFrenchmanwho had come to live in America posed the question, "What is an American?" His answer, inpart, was the following:

Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose laborsand posterity will one day couse great change in the world. Americans are thewestern pilgrims, who are carrying along with them that great mass of arts,sciences, vigour, and industry, which began long since in the east; they willfinish the great cycle. The Americans were scattered all over Europe; here theyare incorporated into one of the finest systems of population which has ever appeared,and which will hereafier become distinct by the power of the dffirent climatei:s theyinhabit.... The American is a onew man, who acts upon new principles; he musttherefore entertain new ideas andform new opinions. From involuntary idleness,servile dependence, penury, and useless labor, he has passed to toils of a verydffirent nature, rewarded by ample subsistence. This is an American....

-Michel Guillaume Jean de CrevecoeurLetters from an American Farmer (1752)

Dissent

With due allowance for the author's exuberance, I think that his optimism was not far offthe mark. We are an extraordinary nation, endowed with a rich and productive land, a humaneand decent political tradition and a talented and energetic population. Surely a nation sofavored is capable of extraordinary achievement, not oniy in the area of producing and enjoyinggreat wealth, in which area our achievements have indeed been extraordinary, but also in thearea of human and international relations, in which area, it seems to me, our achievementsshave fallen short of our capacity and promise.

My question is whether American can close the gap between her capacity and performance.My hope and my belief are that she can, that she has the human resources to conduct heraffairs with a maturity which few if any great nations have ever achieved; to be confident butalso tolerant, to be rich but also generous, to be willing to teach, but also willing to learn, to bepowerfi.rl but also wise.

I believe that America is capable of all of these things; I also believe she is falling short ofthem. If one honestly thought that America was doing the best she is capable of doing at homeand abroad, then there would be no reason for criticism. But if one feels certain that she hasthe capacity to be doing very much better, that she is fatling short of her promise for reasonsthat can and should be overcome, then approbation is a disservice and dissent the highpatriotism.

Fuibright, J. wiiiiam. The Arrogance gfPower. New york: vintage Books. 1966.pages 25-27.

Dissent

OUESTIONS

1. Define dissent. Give examples.2. Research and describe historical examples of dissent in the usA.3. Research and describe historical examples of dissent throughout the world.4. Define non-violent dissent. Give examples5. Research and describe historical examples of non-violent dissent in the USA.6. Research and describe historical examples of non-violent dissent throughout the world.7. Explain Fulbright's statement, "To criticize one's country is to do it a service and pay it a

compliment." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.8. Albert Camus wrote, "I should like to be able to love my country and still love justice."

what might Fulbright say about this? what might Henry David Thoreau say?Mark Twain? Mahatma Gandhi? Martin Luther King, Jr.? Robert F. Kennedy?Pirilip Berrigan? David Harris? Desmond Tutu? Robert Scheer? Todd Gitlin?

Read Antigone in Sophocles' Theban Trilogv. What might Antigone say about Camus'statement?

Read Robert Bolt's A Man for All Seasons. What might Sir Thomas More say aboutCamus' statement?

g. Explain why "in a democracy dissent is an act of faith." Explain why you agree or disagreewith this statement. what might Martin Luther King, Jr. say about this?

10. Explain Fulbright's "higher form of patriotism." Explain why you agree or disagree withthis concept.

11. How might Fulbright describe the ideal USA? How might John F. Kennedy describe it?Robert F. Kennedy? John Lennon?

12. How might Richard M. Nixon describe the ideal USA? How might Nixon's AttorneyGeneral John Mitchell during the Watergate hearings? Ronald Reagan? Lt. ColonelOiiver North? George H.W. Bush? George W. Bush? Dick Cheney? Donald Rumsfeld?

13. Describe your image of the ideal USA.14. Describe the USA of today: politically, socially, economically, morally, militarily, racially.

takagaki

The War Prayer

It was a time ofgreat and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war wason' in every breast burned the holy fiie of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bandsplaymg, the toy pistors popping tle bunchid firecrackers hissing *d ,pil;;g; on everyhand and far down ttre receaing and fading spread or-or, and balconils a fluuering wildernessand flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wi;; avenue gay andfine in their new uniforms, the proud iutt ".r

and motlrer, *d ,irr"rs and sweethearts cheeringthem with voices choked with happy emotion as they *ng br nightly the packed massmeetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their heartsand which they intem'rpted at Lti"r"tt *t"*a, with cyclines of apilaur", th" te-a.s runningdown their cheeks the while; in the chulghes_1h" pu#r, p*ached devotion to flag and countryand invoked the God ofBattles, beseeching rrir uiai" ou" gooa cause in outpouring of fervideloquence which moved every listener- lt was indeed "

gui and gracious time, and the half-dozen rash spirits that ventur"d to dirupprove of the waiara cast a doubt upon itsrighteousness straightway got such a siern and ansy warning that for their personal safety,ssake they quickly shrank out of sight and offendeino *o.. in that way.Sunday morning came-next day the battaiions would leave for the front; the church wasfilled; the volunteers were there, the young a*r

"lr*^'* *ir, *u.tiur dreams-visions of thestern advance, the gathering momentum, th9 ru1hini.n-g., the flashing sabers, the flight ofthe foe' the tumult, the enviloping smoke, the fiercJpu.r,iii, the surrender!--then home fromthe war, bronzed heroes, *ercomJd, adored, ,rur*.g"Jl, gora"n seas of groryr with thevolunteers sat their dear ones, proud, huppr, and envied uyitre neighbors and friends who hadno sons and brothers to send forth to ttre ilia of honor, ttrere to win for the flag or faiiing, diethe noblest of noble deaths' The service proceeded; a war chapter from the old Testamentwas read; the first prayer was said; it was foilo*"a ilv **"" burst that ,hook the building,and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing .v* *iu"ating hearts, and poured outthat tremendous invocation-

God the all-terriblelThou who ordainest,Thunder thy clarionand lightning thy sword!

The War Prayer

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleadingand moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was that an ever-mercifuland benignant Father ofus all would watch over our noble young soldiers and aid, comfort,and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless thern, shield them in the day of battle and thehour of peril, bear them in I[s mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in thebloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and countryimperishable honor and glory-

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, hiseyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his headbare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturallypale, even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way;without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side and stood there, waiting. With shut lidsthe preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished itwith the words, uttered in fervent appeal, "Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord ourGod, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The ctrqnccr tnrrr.hed hic qrrn rnnfinnad hirn fn cfpn qcidA-rxrhinh the cfqrtlarl minicfardid-and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience withsolemn eyes in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

"I come from the Throne--bearing a message from Almighty God!"

The word smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived irhe gave no attention.

"He has heard the prayer oflfis servant your shepherd and will grant it if such shall be yourdesire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import-that is to say, its fullimport. For it is like unto many ofthe prayers of merq in that it asks for more than he whoutters it is aware of--except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is itone prayer? No, it is two-one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of ftrm Whoheareth all, supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this-keep it in mind. If youwould beseech a blessing upon yourse[ beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon aneighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it,by that act you are possibly prayrng for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may notneed rain and can be injured by it.

fhe War Prayer

"You have heard your servant's prayer-the uttered part ofit. I am commissioned of Godto put into words the other part of it-that part which the pastor, and also you in your hearts,fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant thaiit was so! youheard these words: 'Grant us tle victory O Lord our God!' fhaiis zufficient. The whole ofthe uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary.When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which foflo*victory-must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God the Fatherfell also the unspoken part ofthe prayer. He commandeth me to putlt into words.

LISTEN!

"O Lord of our Fatler, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle-be Thounear them! With thenr, in spirit, we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesidesto smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with ourshells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us todrown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded *rithi"g in pain; help us tolay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their un-offendrng widows';vith unavailing griel help us to turii therrr out r'oofless with their iirtiechildren to wander unfriended the wastes oftheir desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst,sports ofthe sun flames of zummeq and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn withtravail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it-for o* .uk", who adoreThee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the whitesnow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is theSource of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset andseek His aid with humble and contrite hearts.

AMEN.

After a pause: "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, Speak! The messenger of the MostHigh waits."

was believed afterward that the man was a iunatic, because there was no sense in what heItsaid.

Twain, Mark. The War Prayer. 1923.

The War Prayer

OUESTIONS

1. Who is Mark Twain?2. Where and when does Twain's story take place?3. How does the preacher view God? War? His country?4. Who is the stranger? What is his view of God?5. Compare Twain's "lunatic" with the following:

a. Fulbright's "dissentef'b. Thoreau's individualc. Tolstoy's Christiand. Hesse's "man ofthe spirit"e. Mahatma Gandhi's wtyagrahaf Robert F. Kennedy's "youth"g. Joan Baezh. David Harrisi. Bufly Sainte-Marie's "IJniversal Soldier,'j. Bob D5,lank. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Dreaml. Pete Seeger's "Adam the Inventor"m. Henry Mller's "Alcoholic veteran with the washboard cranium"n. Robert Sheer's "True Patriot"o. Philip Berriganp. Daniel Berriganq. Cesar Chavez's compesinor. St. Matthew and St.Luke's Sermon on the Mounts. JohnLennon

6. Explain how you are, or could be, Iike Twain,s ,,lunatic.,,

takagaki

The Sermon on the Mount(The Book of Matthew)

Maffhew: Chapter 5

5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, hisdisciples came unto him:5:2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.5:4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.5:10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom

ofheaven.5:i I Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner

nf erril qoeincf r;nrr fclcelrr fnr mrr cqLp,

rvr rru rq\v.

5:12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecutedthey the prophets which were before you.

5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoevershall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be indanger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in dangerof the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right

cheek, tum to him the other also.5:40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke

aiso.5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.5:42 Gwe to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou

away.5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine

enemy.5:44 But I say unto you, Love vour enemies, bless them tha,t eurse,vou, do good to them tlat

hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

2The Sermon on the Mount(The Book of Matthew)

5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun torise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust-

5:46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicansthe same?

5:47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even thepublicans so?

5:48 Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

The Holy Bible. King James Version. 1611.

OUESTIONS

1. Compare Matthew's version of The Sermon with Luke's.2. Who was Matthew? When did he live and wdte? Who was Luke? When did he live and

urrifc?3. Query: Jesus overturns a theory ofjustice that goes back to the time of Hammurabi.4. Query: Jesus was the first non-violent revolutionary.4. Compare Jesus' Sermon on the Mount with the Hindu theory of ahimsa (non-violence).5. Compare Jesus' Sermon on the Mount with the Buddhist theory of karuna (compassion)

takagaki

The Sermon on the Mount(The Book of Luke)

Luke: Chapter 6

6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye poor: for yours is thekingdom of God.

6:21 Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be frlled. Blessed are ye that weep now: forye shall laugh.6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their

company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man'ssake.

6:23 Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, yow reward is great in heaven: forin the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.6:24 But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation.6:25 Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye

shall moum and weep.6:26 Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the falseprophets.6:27 B]ut I say unto yor: which hear, Love yo,;r enemies, dc gcoC tc them which hate you,6:28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.6:29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer aiso the otherjand him that taketh

away thy cioke forbid not to take thy coat also.6:30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them

not again.6:31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank irave ye? for sinners also love those thatlove them.6:33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners alsodo even the same.6:34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also

lend to sinners, to receive as much again.6:35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend., hoping for nothing again; and your

reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: foii,Jir kind unto theunthankful and to the evil.

6:36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned:

forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together,

and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that yemete withal it shall be measured to you again.

6:39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fallinto the ditch?

2The Sermon on the Mount(The Book of Luke)

6:40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.6:4i And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam

that is in thine own eye?6:42Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine

eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite,cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull outthe mote that is in thy brother's eye.

6:43 For a good tree bringeth not forth comrpt fruit; neither doth a comrpt tree bring forthgood fruit.

6:44 For every tree is known by his ovm fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs. nor of abramble bush gather they grapes.

6:45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; andan evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for ofthe abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to

whom he is like:6:48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a

rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and couldnot shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an houseupon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell;and the ruin of that house was great.

The Holv Bible. King James Version. 1611.

OUESTIONS

1. Compare Luke's version of The Sermon with Matthew's.2. Ouery: this sermon is the essence of Jesus' doctrine of social justice.3. Ouery: Jesus was the first non-violent revolutionary.4. Explain the influence of The Sermon on the Mount on the following:

a. Leo Tolstoy b. Henry David Thoreau c. Mohandas K. Gandhid. Martin Luther King, Jr. e. Cesar E. Chavez

5. compare The Sermon with Hinduism's theory of ahimsa (non-violence).with Buddhism's theory of kqruna (compassion).

takagaki

Dhammapada: Chapter Ten: Violence

All tremble at violence;Ail fear death.

Seeing others as being like yourself,Do not kill or cause others to kill. (129)

A11 tremble at violence;Life is dear for all.

Seeing others as being like yourself,Do not kill or cause others to kill. (130)

If, desiring happiness,You use violence

To harm living beings who desire happiness,You won't lind happiness after death. (131)

If desiring happiness,You do not use violence

To harm living beings who desire happiness,You wili frnd happiness after death. (132)

Don't speak harshly to anyone;What you say will be said back to you.

Hostile speech is painful,And you will meet with retaliation. (133)

Whoever uses violence to harmThe nonviolent and innocent

Quickly goes to one of ten conditions:Intense pain or great loss,Bodily injury or insanity,Serious illness or vicious slander,Oppression from Rulers or the loss of relatives,Houses consumed by fire or wealth destroyed.

And with the breakup of the bodyThe unwise one falls to hell. 037-l4O)

Buddha. Dhammapada. (Gil Fronsdal, translator). Boston: Shambhala Pubiications. Inc. 20A5.pages 35-36,37.

takagaki

Tao Te Chine, Chapter 3l

Even the finest arrns are an instrument of evil.A spread ofplague,And the way for a vital man to go is not the way of a

soldier.But in time of war men civilized in peaceTurn from their higher to their lower nature.Arms are an instrument of evil,No measure for thoughtful menUntil there fail all other choiceBut sad acceptance of it.Triumph is not beautifrrl.He who thinks triumph beautifulIs one with a will to kill,And one with a will to killShall never prevail upon the world.It is a good sign when man's higher nature comes

forward,A ba

takagaki

Einstein on Mahatma Gandhi

A leader of his people, unsupported by any outward authority: a politician whose success

rests not upon craft nor the mastery of technical devices, but simply on the convincing power

of his personality; a victorious fighter who has always scorned the use of force; a man of

wisdom and humility, armed with resolve and inflexible consistency, who has devoted all his

strength to the upiifting of his people and the betterment of their lot; a man who has

confronted the brutality of Europe with the dignity of the simple human being, and thus at all

times risen superior.

Generations to come, it may be, will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh

and blood walked upon this earth.

Einstein, Albert. "Mahatma Gandhi" Essays in Humanism. New York: Philosophical Library,Inc.1950. page94.

QUESTIONS

takagaki

"Gandhi Was My Greatest Teacher,

Gandhi was my greatest teacher, not only by what he said and wrote and did but by theexample he set. Granted that I was a poor student, what did he teach me?

....The greatest single thing was to seek the Trutl1 to shun hypocrisy and falseness andglibness, to try to be truthful to oneself as well as to others, to be skeptical of the value of mostof life's prizes, especially the material ones, to cultivate an inner strengtlq to be tolerant ofothers, oftheir acts and beliefs, however much they jarred you, but not tolerant of your ownfaults...,

There was much else that Gandhi taught me: the value of contemplation and how toachieve it in the midst of the pressures and distractions of life in the 20tr Century. ... Thenecessity to discipline your mind and body and to keep your greeds and your lusts and yourselfishness and your worldly ambitions in check; the obligation to love, to forgive and not tohate.

Shirer, william L. Gandhi: A Memoir. New york: Simon and Schuster. 1979.(as reviewed by Robert Kirsctq Los Angeles Times. 13 January l9g0).

O.UESTIONS

1. According to Gandhi, what is the "greatest single thing,,?2. What is hypocrisy? Give examples.3. What is glibness? Give examples.4. Why is it important to shun hypocrisy, falseness and glibness?5. Why is it important "to be skeptical of the value of most of life's prizes, especially the

material ones"?6. Why is it important to cultivate "an inner strength,,?7. Why is it important to be "tolerant of others, of their acts and beliefs, however much theyjaned you"?8. Why is it important to "not be tolerant of your own faults,,?9- Why is it important "to discipline your mind and body and to keep your greeds and your

lusts and your sel-fishness and your.Norldly ambitions in check"?10. Why is it important to love?11. Why is it important to not hate?

takagaki

Satyagraha, Civil Disobedience, Passive Resistance, Non-co-operation

Satyagraha is literally holding on to Truth and it means, therefore, Truth-force; Truth issoul or spirit. It is therefore, known as soul-force. It excludes the use of violence becauseman is not capable of knowing the absolute truth and, therefore, not competent to punish. Theword was coined in South Africa to distinguish the non-violent resistance of the Indians ofSouth Africa from the contemporary 'passive resistance' ofthe suffiagettes and others. It isnot conceived as a weapon of the weak.

Passive resistance is used in the orthodox English sense and covers the suffiagettemovement as well as the resistance of the Non-conformists. Passive resistance has beenconceived and is regarded as a weapon ofthe weak. Whilst it avoids violence, being not opento the weat it does not exclude its use if, in the opinion of a passive resister, the occasiondemands it. Howeveq it has always been distinguished from armed resistance and itsapplication was at one time confined to Christian martyrs.

Civil Disobedience is civil breach of unmoral statutory enactments. The expression was, sofar as I am aware, coined by Thoreau to signify his own resistance to the laws of a slave State.He has left a masterly treatise on the duty of Civil Disobedience. But Thoreau was not perhapsan out and out champion of non-r'iolence. Probably, also, Thoreau llrrited his breach ofstatutory laws to the revenue law, i.e., payment of taxes. Whereas the term Civil Disobedienceas practiced in 1919 covered resister's outlawry in a civil, i.e., non-violent manner. Heinvoked the sanctions of the law and cheerfully suffered imprisonment. It is a branch ofSatyagraha.

Non-co-operation predominantly implies withdrawing of cooperation from the State that inthe non-co-cperator's view has become comrpt and excludes Civil Disobedience of the fiercetype described above. By its very nature, non-co-operation is even open to children ofunderstanding and can be safely practised by the masses. Civil Disobedience presupposes thehabit of willing obedience to laws without fear of their sanctions. It caq therefore, bepractised only as a last resort and by a select few in the first instance at any rate. Non-co-operation, too, Iike Civil Disobedience is a branch of Satyagraha which includes all non-violentresistance for the vindication of Truth.

Gandhi, M.K. Non-violent Resistance (Eeryagahe). New York: Schocken Books. 1951.pages 3-4.

Satyagraha, Civil Disobedience, Passive Resistance, Non-co-operation

OUESTIONS

1' Who is M.K. Gandhi? How might his background and environment have influenced hisphilosophy oflife?2. Define satyagraha-3. Explain why you agree or disagree with Gandhi's theory that "man is not capable ofknowing the absolute truth.',4' Explain why you agree or disagree with the theory that if a person is incapable ofknowing the absolute trut[ it must follow that heis not competent to punish.

Explain how this theory relates to Dostoyevsky's views on crime and punishmentas expressed by Father Zossima in The Brothers Karamazov. To Hesse,s conceptof the miraculous transcendence of opposites. To fatilit Cibran,s..Crime andPunishment" in The Prophet.

5. According to Gandhi, what is passive resistance?6. According to Gandhi, what is civil disobedience?7. According to Gandhi, what is non-co-operation?8. What was the Suftagette Movement? Who were some of the leaders in the U.S.Suftagette Movement?9. What is a non-conformist? What might J. William Fulbright say about this in

The Arrogance gfPower?10. what might Martin Luther King, Jr. say about this reading? compare Gandhi,s

ideas with King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail.,,11. What might Cesar E. Chavez say about this reading?

takagaki

Satyagraha or passive Resistance

Question: Is there any historical evidence as to the success ofwhat you have called soul-force or truth-force? No instance seems to have happened of any ,atio, havi;g risen throughsoul-force. I still think that the evil-doers will not ".ur"

doing wil withoui physicalpunishment.

-

G- ar.tdhi: The poet Tulsidas has said: "of religion, pity, or love, is the root, as egotism ofthe body' Therefore, we should not abandon pit! ro ionj as we are alive.,, Tiris appears tome to be a scientific truth. I believe in it as ..r.h as I befieve in two and two being four. Theforce of love is the same as the force of the soul or truth. we have evidence of its working atevery step' The univ_erse would disappear without the existence of that force. But you ask forhistorical evidence- It is, therefot., ,"".r*r.y to know what history means. The Gujaratiequivalent means: "It so happened." IfJhgt is tle meaning of history, it is possiure to givecopious evidence. But, if it means the doings of kings uri "*p"rorr.'tt "i.'"* be no evidenceof soul-force or passive resistance in such tirtory. fo, *ot expect silver ore in a tin mine.History, as we know it, is a record of the **, oith" world, and so there is a prorrerb amongEnglishmen that a nation which has no history that is, no wars, is a happy nation. How kingsplayed, how they became enemies of one *oth.., how they murdered one another, is foundaccurately recorded in history, and if this were alithat hadiappened in the world. it wouldhave been ended i?ng ?go-, Ifthe story ofthe universe had commenced with wars, not a manwould have been foynd alive today. 'ihore people who have been warred against havedisappeared as, for instance, the natives of Australia of whom hardly u.ur"*u, left alive bythe intruders' Marlq please, that these natives did not use soul-for.. i, self-defense, and itdoes not require much foresight to know that the Australians will share the same fate as theirvictims' "Those that take the sword shall perish by the i*ora.' with us ttre prorr"ru is thatprofessional swimmers will find a watery grave.

The fact that there are so many men still alive in the world shows that it is based not on theforce of arms but on the force or-truttr or rove. rhereforilhe greatest *o orortunimpeachable evidence of the success of this force is to 6e found in the fact that, in spite ofthe wars of the world, it still lives on.

Thousands, indeed tens of thousands, depend for their existence on a very active workingofthis force. Little quarrels of millions of families in their daily lives aisapi# before theexercise of this force. Hundreds of nations live in peace. History does not and cannot takenote of this fact' Flistory is really a record of very intemrption oithe "r.n

*orking of theforce of love or ofthe soul. Two brothers qra..ei; one ofihem repents and re-awakens thelgye tlat was lying dormant in him; the two again begin to live in peace; nobody takes note ofthis' But if the two brothers, through the interventioriof sori"itorc'or-ro*.'ot"nir reasorq takeup anns or go to law-which is another form of the exhibition of brute force-their doingwould be immediatelv noticed in the press, they would be the talk of their neighbors andwould probably go down to history. And whaiis true of families and communities is true ofnations' There is no reason to believe that there is one law for families and another for

Satyagraha or Passive Resistance

nations- History the4 is a record of an intem-rption of the course of nature. Soul-force, beingnatural, is not noted in history.

Question. According to what you say, it is plain that instances of this kind of passiveresistance are not to be found in history. It is necessary to understand this passive resistancemore fully. It will be better, therefore, if you enlarge upon it.

Gondhi. Passive resistance is a method of securing rights by personal suffering; it is thereverse of resistance by arms. I use soul-force. For instance, the Government of ilie day haspassed a law which is applicable to me. I do not like it. If by using violence I force theGovernment to repeal the law, I am employing what may be termed body-force. If I do notobey the law and accept the penalty for its breactq I use soul-force. It involves sacrifice ofself.

Everybody admits that sacrifice of self is infinitely superior to sacrifice of others.Moreover, if this kind of force is used in a cause that is unjust, only the person using itzuffers. He does not make others suffer for his mistakes. Men have before now doie manythings which were subsequently found to have been wrong. No man can claim that he isabsolutely in the right or that aparticular thing is wrong because he thinks so, but it is wrongior irim so iong as that is his deliberate judgment. It is therefore meet that he should not dothat which he knows to be wrong, and suffer the consequence whatever it may be. This is thekey to the use of soul-force.

Question. You would then disregard laws-this is rank disloyalty. We have always beenconsidered a law-abiding nation. You seem to be going even beyond the extremists. Theysay that we must obey the laws that have been passed, but that ifthe laws be bad, *" ,n rridrive out the law-givers even by force.

Gandhi: Whether I go beyond them or whether I do not is a matter of no consequence toeither of us. We simply want to find out what is right and to act accordingly. The realmeaning of the statement that we are a law-abiding nation is that we are iassire resisters.When we do not like certain laws, we do not break the heads of law-giveis but we suffer anddo not submit to the laws. That we should obey laws whether good or bad is a newfanglednotion- There was no such thing in former days The people disregarded those laws th-ey didnot like and suffered the penalties for their breach. tt is contrary to our manhood if we obeylaws repugnant to our conscience. Such teaching is opposed to religion and means slavery. Ifthe Government were to ask us to go about without any clothing, rlLrld we do so? If I were apassive resister, I would say to them that I would have nothingio do with their law. But wehave so forgotten ourselves and become so compliant that *" do not mind any degrading law.

4.,

Satyagraha or Passive Resistance

Gandhi (cont.): A man who has realized his manhoo{ who fears only God, will fear noone else. Man-made laws are not necessarily binding on him. Even the Government does notexpect any such thing from us. They do not say: "You must do zuch and such a thing," butthey say: "ffyou do not do it, we will punish you." We are sunk so low that we fancy that itis our duty and our religion to do what the law lays down. If man will only realizettrat it isunmanly to obey laws that are unjust, no man's tyranny will enslave him. This is the key toself-rule or home-rule.

It is a superstition and ungodly thing to believe that an act of a majority binds a majority.Many examples can be given in which acts of majorities will be found to'have been wrongand those of minorities to have been right. All reforms owe their origin to the initiation oiminorities in opposition to majorities. If among a band of robbers a knowledge of robbing isobligatory, is a pious man to accept the obligation? So long as the superstition that menshould obey unjust laws exists, so long will their slavery exist. And i passive resister alonecan remove such a superstition.

To use brute-force, to use gunpowder, is contrary to passive resistance, for it means thatwe want our opponent to do by force that which we desire but he does not. And, if such a useof force is justifiable, surely he is entitled to do likewise by us. And so we should never cometo an agreement. We may simply fancy, like the blind horse moving in a circle round a mill,that we are maicing progress. Those who believe that they are not bound to obey laws whichare repugnant to their conscience have only the remedy of passive resistance opln to themAny other must led to disaster.

Gandhi, M.K. Non-violent Resistance (Saryagahd. New york: schocken Books. 1951.pages i5-i9.

OI]ESTIONS

i. Define history.2. Explain Gandhi's definition of history as "a record of the wars of the world."

Explain why you agree or disagree with his definition.3. Explain why you agree or disagree with Gandhi's theory that without satyagraha,

the world would have been destroyed long ago.4. Gve examples of people who depend on satyagraha for their very existence.5. Gve evidence to support the theory that "soul-force is not notedin history.,, 6ive

evidence to refute it.6. Write a history of the USA which includes examples of the use of satyagraha.7. Write a history of the world which includes examples of the use of satyagraha.8- According to Gandhi, what is the difference between body-force and soul-force?

Satyagraha or passive Resistance

OIIESTIONS (cont.)

9. Gandhi writes, "Everybody admits that sacrifice of self is infinitely superiorto sacrificeof others." Explain why you agree or disagree with this statemeni theory What might aSocial Darwinist say about this theory. What might Jesus say? What might Buddha say?

10- Gandhi writes that if soul-force is used "in a cause that is unjust, only th-e person using itsuffers." Give evidence to support this view. Gve eviderri to refuie it. '

11. Explain why "it is contrary to our manhood if we obey laws repugnant to our conscience.,,Explain why it is not.

12. Gandhi writes, "It is a superstition and ungodly thing to believe that an act of amajorityblnds a minority." Explain why yo11 agree or disagrie with this statement. What mighiThoreau say aboyt this? A u.S. politician? Thomas Jefferson? Dostoyevsky,sRaskolnikov in Crime and Punishment? Nietzsche's "superman"? Hermann Hesss,eDemian? Tom Robbins' Bernard in Still Life with Woodpecker? John Stuart Nfill?James Madison?

13. Ouery: in a democratic society, the basis for government is that a political act of amajority binds a minority.

14- Gve evidence to support Gandhi's statement that "Ail reforms owe their origin to theinitiation of minorities in opposition to majorities." Give evidence to refute it.15. Ouery: the so-called American Revolution was initiated and supported by a small

minority of American colonists.16. Ouery: most ofthe so-called political revolutions, a.g., Americarq Frenclq Russian,

chinese, cubaq were not revolutions for they all used violence.17. Explain how you might begrn to condition yourself to practice Gandhi's theory of

non-violent resistance.18. Explain why you should begin to condition yourselfto practice Gandhi's theory of

non-violent resistance. Explain why you should not.19. Ouery: what with the increased threat of weapons of mass destructioq it is in every

one's enlightened self-interest to resolve conflicts by non-violent means only.20. Ouery: it is of the highest priority that each of you become more like Gandhi,s

non-violent resister, Fulbright's "dissenter," Thoreau's individual, Tolstoy,scbristia4 Hesse's "man of the spirit," Robert F. Kennedy's..youth.,,

takagaki

Satyagraha: Means and Ends

Question'. Why should we not obtain our goal, which is good, by any meanswhatsoever: even by using violence? Shall I think of the means when I have to deal with athief in the house? My duty is to drive him out anyhow. You seem to admit that we havereceived nothing, and that we shall receive nothing by petitioning. Why, then, may we not doso by using brute force? And, to retrain what we may receive we shall keep up the fear byusing the same force to the extent that it may be necessary. You will not find fault with acontinuance of force to prevent a child from thrusting its foot into fire? Somehow or other wehave to gain our end.

Gandhi: Your reasoning is plausible. It has deluded many. I have used similar argumentsbefore now. But I think I know better now, and I shall endeavour to undeceive you. Let usfirst take the argument that we are justified in gaining our end by using brute force because theEnglish gained theirs by using similar means. It is perfectly true that they used brute force andthat it is possible for us to do iikewise, but by using similar means we can get only the samething that they got. You will admit that we do not want that. Your belief that there is noconnection between the means and the end is a great mistake. Through that mistake even menwho have been considered religious have committed grievous crimes. Your reasoning is thesame as sa5'ing that we can get a rose though planting a noxious'weed. If I want to cross theocean, I can do so only by means of a vessel; if I were to use acart from that purpose, both thecart and I would soon find the bottom. "As is the God, so is the vota4/," is a maxim worthconsidering. Its meaning has been distorted and men have gone astray. The means may belikened to a seed, the end to a tree: and there is just the same inviolable connection betweenthe means and the end as there is between the seed and the tree. I am not likely to obtain theresult flowing from the worship of God by laying myself prostrate before Satan. If, therefore,ary" one were to say: "I want to worship God; it does not matter that i do so by means ofSatan," it would be set down as ignorant folly. We reap exactly as we sow. The English in1833 obtained greater voting power by violence. Did they by using brute force betterappreciate their duty? They wanted the right to voting, which they obtained by using physicalforce. But real rights are a result of performance of duty; these rights they have not obtained.We, therefore, have before us in England the force of everybody wanting and insisting on hisrights, who shall give them to whom? I do not wish to imply that they do no duties. Theydon't perform the duties corresponding to those rights; and as they do not perform thatparticular duty, namely, acquire fitness, their rights have proved a burden to them. In otherwords, what they have obtained is an exact result of the means they adopted. They used themeans corresponding to the end. If I want to deprive you of your watch, I shall certainly haveto fight for it; if I want to buy your watch, I shall have to pay for it; and if I want a gift, I shallhave to plead for it; and, according to the means I employ, the watch is stolen property, myown properfy, or a donation. Thus we see three different results from three diflerent means.Will you still say that means do not ma-tter?

Satyagraha: Means and Ends

Gandhi (cont.): Now we shall take the example given by you of the thief to be driven out. Ido not agree with you that the thief may be driven out by any means. If it is my father whohas come to steal I shall use one kind of means. If it is an acquaintance I shall use another;and in the case of a perfect stranger I shall use a third. If it is a white man, you will perhapssay you will use means different from those you will adopt with an Indian thief. If it is aweakling the means will be different from those to be adopted for dealing with an equal inphysical strength; and if the thief is armed from top to toe, I shall simply remain quiet. Thuswe have a variety of means between the father and the armed man. Again, I fancy that Ishould pretend to be sleeping whether the thief was my father or that strong-armed man. Thereason for this is that my father would also be armed and I should succumb to the strengthpossessed by either and allow my things to be stolen. The strength of my father wouid makeme weep with pity; the strength of the armed man would rouse in me anger and we shouldbecome enemies. Such is the curious situation. From these examples we may not be able toagree as to the means to be adopted in each case. I myself seem clearly to see rvhat should bedone in all these cases, but the remedy may frighten you. I therefore hesitate to place it beforeyou. For the time being. I will leave you to guess it, and if you cannot, it is clear you will haveto adopt different means in each case. You will also have seen that any means will not availto drive away the thief. You will have to adopt means to fit each case. Hence it follows thatr;nrrr drrtrr ic nnf fn rlrirrc arrrqrr flra +1"ioTI-.., ohr. ,-6o6.

',^" l;l'-Jvu uq.J io riv. .v ui i 1v qvrqJ Llrv Lltlwl WJ qry ttMIlrJ J\rU lfl\l.

Let us proceed a little fuither. That well-armed man has stolen your property; you haveharboured the thought of his act; you are filled with anger; you argue that you want to punishthat rogue, not for your own sake" but for the good ofyour neighbours; you have collected anumber of armed men. you want to take his house by assault; he is duly informed of it, he runsaway; he too is incensed. He collects his brother robbers, and sends you a defiant messagethat he will commit robbery irr broad dayiight. You are strong, you

Satyagraha: Means and Ends

Gandhi (cont.): do not know what prompted him to steal. You, therefore, decide that, whenyou can, you will destroy the man's motive for stealing. Whilst you are thus reasoning withyourself, the man comes again to steal. Instead of being angry with him you take pity on him.Henceforth, you, therefore, keep your doors and windows open, you change your sleeping-place, and you keep your things in a manner most accessible to him. The robber comes againand is confused as all this is new to him; nevertheless, he takes away your things. K But hismind is agitated. He inquires about you in the village, he comes to learn about your broad andloving heart, he repents, he begs your pardon. returns you yotrr things, and leaves offthestealing habit. He becomes your servant, and you will find for him honourable employment.This is the second method. Thus, you see, dif[erent means have brought about totallydifferent results. I do not wish to deduce from this that robbers will act in the above manneror that all will have the same pity and love like you, but I only wish to show that fair meansalone can produce fair results, and that, at least in the majority of cases, if not indeed in all,the force of love and pitv is infinitely greater than the force of arms. There is harrn in theexercise of brute force, never in that of pity.

Now we will take the question of petitioning. It is a fact beyond dispute that a petition,without the backing of force, is useless. However, the late Justice Banade used to say thatpetitions served a usefi-rl purpose because the5r..^.,s1s a means of educating people. The5, givethe latter an idea of their condition and warn the rulers. From this point of view, they are notaltogether useless. A petition of an equal is a sign of courtesy; a petition from a slave is asymbol of his slavery. A petition backed by force is a petition from an equal and, when hetransmits his demand in the form of a petition, it testifies to his nobility. Two kinds of forcecan back petitions. "We shall hurt you if you do not give this," is one kind of force; it is theforce oTarms, whose evil results we have already examined. The second kind of force canthus be stated: "If you dc not concede our demand,'we shall be no longer your petitioners.You can govern us only so long as we remain the govemed; we shall no longer have anydealings with you." The force implied in this may be described as love-force, soul-force, or,more popularly, but less accurately, passive resistance. This force is indestructible. He whouses it perfectly understands his position. We have an ancient proverb which literally means:"One negative cures thirry-six diseases." The force of arms is powerless when matchedagainst the force of love or the soul.

Now we shall take your last illustration, that of the child thrusting its foot into fire. It willnot avail you. What do you really do to the child? Supposing that it can exert so muchphysical force that it renders you powerless and rushes into fire, then you cannot prevent it.There are only two remedies open to you----either you must kill it in order to prevent it fromperishing in the flames. or you must give your own life because you do not wish to see itperish before your very eyes. You will not kill it. if your heart is not quite full of pity, it ispossible that you will not surrender yourself by preceding the child and going into the fireyourself. You. therefore, heiplessly allow it to go to the flames. Thus, at arry rate, you are not

Satyagraha: Means and Ends

using physical force. I hope you will not consider that it is still physical force, though of alow order, when you would forcibly prevent the child from rushing towards the fire if youcould. That force is of a different order and we have to understand what it is.

Remember that, in thus preventing the child, you are minding entirely its own interest, youare exercising authority for its sole benefit. Your example does not apply to the English. Inusing brute force against the English you consult entirely your own, that is the national,interest. There is no question here either of pity or of love. If you say that the actions of theEnglish, being evil, represent fire, and that they proceed to their actions through ignorance,and that therefore they occupy the position of a child and that you want to protect such a child,then you will have to overlake every evil action of that kind by whomsoever committed and,as in the case of the evil child, you will have to sacrifice yourself. If you are capable of suchimmeasurable pity, I wish you well in its exercise.

Gandhi, M.K. Non-vioient Resistance (Sat-vagraha). New York: Schocken Books. 1951.pages 9-14.

OUESTiONS

1. According to Gandhi, why is a person's means as important as his goal? Expiain why youagree or disagree with him.

2. Explain Gandhi's statement that "real rights are a result of performance of duty."Give examples of the rights and duties Gandhi is referring to.

3. According to Gandhi, what are the alternative ways of driving out a thiefl Which methodwould you condition yourself to perform? Why?

4. According to Gandhi, what are the alternative ways of dealing with a known thief? Explainwhich method you prefer and why.

5. Evaluate the following purposes of punishment:

A. deterrent B. rehabilitationC. protect individual D. protect other peopleE. protect power structure F. vengeanceG. justice

6. Who is Scylla? Charybdis?7. Explain why you asree or disagree with Gandhi's theory that "the force of love and pit is

infinitely greater than the force of arms."8. According to Gandhi, what is petitioning? How does petitioning educate people?

Satygraha: Means and Ends

OUESTIONS (cont.)

9. According to Gandhi, what are the two kinds of force that can back petitions? What kindof force would you use? Why?

10. Give evidence to support the theory that a person can be governed only so long as hewants to be. Give evidence to refute it.

11. According to Gandhi, what are the alternative ways of dealing with a child who wants torush into aflre? Explain which method you prefer and why.

12. Define child. Define adult. What are the altemative ways of dealing with an adult whowants to rush into a fire? Explain which method you prefer and why.

13. Ouery: Gandhi's theory of satyagraha assumes that every person has a conscience andthat it can be affected by love and pity.

i4. Ouery: according to Gandhi, ultimately a person must be willing to die rather than kill.15. Ouery: to believe in Gandhi's theory of non-violent resistance is to be insane.16. Ouery: the people who believe in Gandhi's theory of non-violent resistance are the only

sane people.

takagaki

The Power of Non-violence

Nonviolence in its dynamic condition means conscious suffering. It does not mean meeksubmission to the will of the evil-doer, but it means the pitting of one's whole should againstthe will of the tyrant. Working under this law of our being, it is possible for a single individualto defy the whole might of an unjust empire to save his honour, his religion, his soul and laythe foundation for that empire's fall or its regeneration.

Active Force

The nonviolence of my conception is a more active and more real fighting againstwickedness than retaliation whose very nature is to increase wickedness. I contemplate amental and, therefore, a moral opposition to immoralities. I seek entirely to blunt the edge ofthe tyrant's sword, not by putting up against it a sharper-edged weapon, but by disappointinghis expeciation that I would be offering physical resistance. The resistance of the shoulci that Ishould offer instead would elude him. It would at first dar.rle him, and at last compelrecognition from him, which recognition would not humiliate him but would uplift him. It maybe urged that this again is an ideal state. And so it is. The propositions from which I havedrawn my arguments a.re as true as Euclid's definitions, which are none the less true because inpractice we are unable to even draw Euciid's line on a blackboard. But even a geometricianfinds it impossible to get on without bearing in mind Euclid's definitions. Nor maywe...dispense with the fundamental propositions on which the doctrine of Satyagraha is based.

I admit that the strong will rob the weak and that it is sin to be weak. But this is said of thesoul in man, not of the body. If it be said of the body, we could never be free from the sin ofweakness. But the strength of soul can defy a wbole world in arms against it. This strength isopen to the weakest in body.

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than themightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. Destruction is not the law ofthe humans. Man lives freely by his readiness to die, if need be, at the hands of his brother,never by killing him. Every murder or other injury, no matter for what cause, committed orinflicted on another is a crime against humanity.

Nonviolence is like radium in its action. An infinitesimal quantity of it embedded in amalignant growth acts continuously, silently and ceaselessly till it has transformed the wholemass of the diseased tissue into a healthy one. Similarly, even a little of true nonviolence acts ina silent, subtle, unseen way and leavens the whole society.

The power of Non-violence

Matchless Bravery

An armed soldier relies on his weapons for his strength. Take away from him his weapons--his gun or his sword,. and he generallybecomes helplesJ But a person who has truly realizedthe principle of nonviolence has the God-given strengh for his weapon and the world has notknown anything that can match it.,1 A small bodv of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alterrne course ot hrstory.

Nonviolence of the strong is any day stronger than that of the bravest soldier fully armed ora whole host.

Exercise in Faith

The hardest metai yieids to sufficient heat. Even so the hardest heart must melt beforesufficiency of the heat of nonviolence. And there is no limit to the capacity of nonviolence togenerate heat.

Every action is a resultant of a multitude of forces even of a contrary nature. There is no\^/aste of energy' So we learn in the books on mechanics. This is equally true of human actions.The diffbrence is that in the one case we generally know the forces at worlq and when we do,we can mathematically foretell the resultant. In the case of human actions, ihey result from aconculTence of forces of most of which we have no knowledge. But our ignoi'ance must not bemade to serve the cause of disbelief in the power of these forces. Rather is our ignorance acause for greeter faith. And nonviolence biing the mightiest force i, tr,";*ld and also themost elusive in its working, it demands the greatest eiercise of faith. Even as we believe inGod in faith, so have we to berieve in nonviolence in faith.

violence like water, when it has an outlet, rushes forward furiously with an overwhelmingforce' nonviolence cannot act madly. It is the essence of discipline. But, when it is set going,no amount of violence can crush it. For full play, it requires unsullied purity and anunquenchable faith...

A Science

Ahimsa is a science. The word 'failure'has no place in the vocabulary of science. Failure toobtain the expected result is often the precursor to further discoveries.If the function of himsa is to devour all it comes across, the function of ahimsa is to rushinto the mouth of himsa In an atmosphere of ahimsa one has no scope to put his ahimsa to thetest. It can be tested only in the face of himsa.

The Power of Non-violence

Violence can only be effectively met by nonviolence. This is an old, established truth...thatthe weapon of violence, even if it was the atom bomb, became useless when matched againstnonviolence. That very few understand how to wield this mighty weapon is true. It requires alot of understanding and strength of mind. It is unlike what is neededln military schoois andcolleges. The difficulty one experiences in meeting himsa with ahimsa arises from weakness ofmind.

The I)eed, not Doer

'Hate the sin and not the sinner'is a precept which, though easy enough to understand, israrely practised, and that is why the poison of hatred spreads in the world.

This ahimsa is the basis of the search for truth. I am realizing every day that the search isvain unless it is founded on ahimsa as the basis. It is quite proper to resist and attack a system,but to resist and attack its author is tantamount to resisting and attacking oneself For we areall tarred with the same brush, and are children of one and the same creator, and as such, thedivine powers within us are infinite. To slight a single human being is to slight those divinepowers, and thus to harm not only that Being but with Him the whole world.

Man and his deed are two distinct things. Whereas a good deed should call forthapprobation and a wicked deed disapprobation, the doer of the deed, whether good or wicked,always deserves respect or pity as the case may be.

Those who seek to destroy men rather than manners adopt the latter and become worsethan those whom they destroy under the mistaken belief that the manners will die with the men.They do not know the root of the evil.

It is the acid test of nonviolence that, in a nonviolent conflict, there is norancour leftbehind, and in the end the enemies are converted into friends. That was my experience in SouthAfrica, with General Smuts. He started with being my bitterest opponent and iritic. Today heis my warmest friend.

The principal implication of ahimsa is that the ahimsa in us ought to soften and not to stiffenour opponents' attitude to us; it ought to melt him; it ought to strike a responsive chord in hisheart.

As ahimsa-its, can you say that you practice genuine ahimsa? Can you say that you receivethe arrows of the opponent on your bare breasts without returning them? Can you say that youare not angry, that you are not perturbed by his criticism?

By reason of life-long practice of ahimsa, I claim to be an expert in it, though veryimperfect. Speaking in absolute terms, the more I practice it the clearer I see how far I amfrom the full expression of ahimsa in my life. It is his ignorance of this, the greatest duty of manin the world, which makes him say that in this age nonviolence has little r"op. in the face ofviolence, whereas I make bold to say that in this age of the Atom Bomb unadulteratednonviolence is the only force that can confound all the tricks put together ofviolence.

Source: The Mind gf Mahatma Gandhi

takagaki

David Harris: Firut Views from the Outside

In the twenty months ofDavid Harris' confinement, the politics of dissent in this countryhas swung over Aom protest and marches to pipe bombs and snipers. The Movement, if itever existed, has disintegrated into vicious, squabbling splinters ofWeathermen and RedGuards and disaffected Panthers and Manson cultists and freeJance saboteurs. In the twentymonths of David Harris' confinement, he has been brooding over the brutalization ofrevolutionary politics and the lessening regard from all quarters, for the value of human life.

'?eople have worked themselves into a corner," he says from his hilltop. "They're lefttaking out their frustration and following a lot of fantasies. I think there are a number ofwords people are very attached to-I mean words like peagg, words like freedonr, words likeliberation-and when people chase a word like that through life, they run into the fact that ifthey're gonna have to be serious about changing their whole Iives in order to get them.Because there's nothing easy about gettlqg those things. To get them is going to be astruggle."

Those who feel cornered, he says have begun to run offin three different directions. "Thefirst direction is what's been called that 'random violence.' You get frustrated. If you wantthings quickiy and you can't have 'em quickly you get very frustrated. And then you startfalling back on tools that you somehow believe are gonna make things happen fast-but don'tmake them happen fast. And what you fall into instead is a fantasy. I think those people havefallen into that same American John Wayne fantasy that Marines are dying for over Vietnam.They're still playing John Wayne running down the hill shooting Japs. Because they reallybelieve that that's power. And that that's manhood. I think that what that violence gives themhas nothing to do with political effect. Nobody has made any political successes through theuse of violence. All they've succeeded in doing is disintegrating the political atmosphere.They've fallen into a misunderstanding that makes 'nuisance' into political strength. Theythink that ifyou can annoy people enough you're politically strong. And the second trap theyfall into is to think you're strong if people are afraid of you.

"And so they pick the American paranoia, right down the line, which is 'Armed Marxists.'Americans have been breeding a fear of armed Man

David Harris: First views from the Outside

What if the armed Marxists win? What ifthey overturn the American illusion by mimickingit? *Ifthey win, they'll do the sarne ******* thing. They may talk about freeing all politicalprisoners, but if they're faithful to their own ideology and faithful to their own style of action,one of the first things they'll do is take a *** ** {< ***** like me and put me up against a walland shoot me. And I know it. And they know it. and they'll admit it.

"I think we have the experience under our belts now to drop this **'**'*'r'** about violence.Enough people have gone through it now to know what it means, enough to know what itdoes to them. I mearr--something like the Panthers. There you've got a history that all of usin some sense have fived next to or through. We can see it. They've fallen apart, they'vedisintegrated, they've shot themselves." The object of repression, Harris contends, is not reallyto destroy a movement or an idea. "The state understands that it's really not powerfrrl enoughto destroy something like that. But the real object of repression is to transform the terms thatthe object they're tr,ving to repress thinks in. The first step is to get you thir,king the same waythey are, to transform you from one kind of organism into another kind of organisnq untilyou're a duplication of the state.

"Ana at the point that you're a duplication of the state, you've gotta play on their grounds.And they know they can whip you. There's a reason they got all that nerve gas and all them****** jets and planes and guns and ***+. 'Cause they can win at it. America can win at thatanyplace. They could win at it in Vietnam if they were allowed to. They could blast that***:t******{'* offthe face of the earth. Pure and simple. If we decide to take the state onwith guns, we'll lose. All we'll succeed in doing is reaping a great deal of destruction. Andmaybe getting some feelings of revenge out of it. But I'm not interested in revenge. I'minterested in real-political change."

Direction number two: electoral politics. The Princeton experiment, the young, scrubbedcollege kids going door to door to plead the case for sanity, to get a "good man" elected, tomake it all "right" agair\ youth commiued to social change by "working within the system."

"They've fallen for another fantasy," Harris says, "the fantasy that good men make gdifference. Or that there is such a thing as a 'good man' separate from the process of historythat he's involved in. And that's a lie. They fall for the lie that it's really going to make adifference if Pete McCloskey is President or Gene McCarthy is President and Richard Nixonisn't. It won't make a difference. If you go to the beach and see someone surfing, yourresponse is not to say, 'Wow, look at that cat push that wave around!' He's not pushing thewave around. The politicians are riding on top of the wave. They're gonna ride it whateverdirection it goes. ***.********************x*******r

David Harris: First Views from the Outside

That's the nature ofthe politiciaq" he continued. *And the nature of the political machine isthat it's designed to destroy people. All the good politicians and all the bad politicians want tocontrol us for genuinely good reasons. I mean, Gene McCarthy or Al Lowenstein or PeteMcCloskey are saying, 'I want to control you so we can stop the war.' And I say, 'Wow,gassy, let's stop the war-but get !ou1 ****1******* hands offme. And don't ever put yourhands o me. I'd rather have Richard Nixon's hands on me, 'cause he knows less about me.The liberals may know how to hurt me. Richard Nixon has got to guess.

"Those Man

4David Harris: Firct Views from the Outside

"All the time that I was in the joint, I saw those three kinds of directions really heighten.And I don't feel part of any of the three. I feel like the task is to take old patterns of socialbehavior and to change those patterns of social behavior. And I don't think that's done byhurting people. I don't think it's done by scaring people. I think it's done by really curin;about those people's lives."

Two military jets flew over. "Just my parole officer,,, he said."One of the things that happened on the streets while I was gone-it became a carnival.

The only way I can interpret Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffinan is as a carnival. Now they maybe beautiful dudes for all I know-I haven't seen Rubin since 1964 and Hoftnan I,ve neverseen or known-but their politics are carnival politics, they're politics of things you do on theradio and on television, that people watch like a new comedy act. They'.r rJ things that getdown next to people.

"There are things people want. And they've goua decide how bad they want .em. Ifwewant 'em bad enouglq we can get them. I mean, I know I w.ant 'ena bad enough. I knowabout myself. I'm a revolutionary. I'm ready to die for thenr, you know. I'm1 fanatic.,, Helooked at Joan- "I mean, you can ask her-I go 24 hours u *xi*x* day. I,ll be talking on andon and on and find out she's fallen asleep.,,

she corrected him. "r have not fallen asleep on you yet-I warn you.,,*Right, I'm kidding. She doesn't.,,

'But believe me," Joan said, 'That first 48 hours was a non-stop trip. I firally had to givehim a half-hour warning. He never once slowed down.,,

"She is the best listener I've run into," Oa ia said. 'Anyway wherever J am-I,m sure if Icould chronicle my sleep, I'm doing it then, too.,,

"I chronicle your sleep," she confi.rmed, "and you're dorng it then too.,, She turned to hereguests- "He sat up the first night and said, 'Prison!'-lay back down again. And he nevereven woke up...." She paused and stared across the yard at Gretchen, th.ir G..*an Shepherd."I said, 'You're out!' And went back to sleep.,,

David Harris: Firct Views from the Outside

Would he do it agan? "Yeah. Starting over, I'd do it, and I'm sitting right here knowingthat I'm probably gonna spend a good portion of my life in joints. Becarise oftf," thing I,minto. I'm sure what I want, I'm sure how bad I want it. I want it more than I want anythingelse. And f'm not sure that there are a lot of people who are gonna make that same decision.But you don't gotta make that decision-you don't gotta be me to be involved in it. But youdo have to decide that you really want it.,,

Garrity, John. 'David Harris: First Views from the Outside" Rolling Stone Magazine.issue number 80. April 15, 1971. pages 6, g.

OUESTIONS

1' Who is David Harris? Explain how hisbackground might have influenced his philosophies.Note his Goliath (1970). who is Joan Baez? Note heiautobiography Daybreak (i966).

2. Which twenty months was David Harris in prison? Why? Research and describe thesocio-political situation in the USA while he was in prison.

3. Explain Harris' evaluation of "random violence." What might the Dollard-Doob hypothesissay about his evaluation. Explain why you agree or disagree with Harris' evaluation.

4' Explain the "John Wayne Fantasy." Explain why you ug."" or disagree with Harris, theory5. Query: almost every American male lives in and believes in the "John Wayne Fantasy.,,6' Gve evidence to support Harris' theory that'T.{obody has made any poliiical successes

through the use of violence." Give evidence to refute it.7. Explain Harris' theory ofthe USA's paranoid fear of ..armed Marxists.,, Give evidence to

support his theory. Gve evidence to refute it.8. Research and describe the "Red Scares,, of 1919_1920.

Who were Sacco and Vanzetti?Who was A. Mitchell palmer?

9. Research and describe "Mccarthyism." who was Millard E. Tydings?10- Research and explain who Alger Hiss and Whittaker Chambers *.i". What is the

McCarran Internal Security Bill (1950x the smith Alien Registration Act (1g40xDennis et al. vs. U.S. (1951)?

11. What might Barry Goldwater say about "armed Marxists"? What might Ronald Reagansay? George H.w. Bush? George w. Bush? pat Robertson? Jerrylalwell?

12' Query: the object of repression is not to destroy a movement or idea, but to transformthe thinkine of the people until the.y become a "duplication of the state.,,

compare this idea with Dr. Smith's theory of power in Randy Holland,sThe Fire this Time (1994)

6David Harris: X'irst Views from the Outside

QUESTIONS (cont.)

13' Research and describe the origins, pu{poses, tactics and effects ofthe following groups.A. Black PanthersB. Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)C. WeathermenD. Venceremos OrgnizationE. Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA)F. ZapatistasG. Red GuardH. PLO, AI Fata}, , Hezbollalr, Hamas, Al eaeda, kgun, Stern GangI. Bloods, Crips, Mexican Mafia, MS_l_?

What might David Harris say about each of these groups? Explain whether or not youConsider each ofthem to be an.,armed Marxist,, S.oup

14- ouery: any attempted revolution in the usA will be destroyed.15' Explain why Harris thinks electoral politics is a fantasy Explain why you agree or disagree

with his theory.16' Explain Harris' theory that good men do not make a difference. E4plain why you agree ordisagree with this lheorl What might Robert F. Kennedy say aboui this? Thoreau?John Stuart lvfill? Gandhi? Daniel Berrigan? Pete McCloskey? Gene McCarthy? RichardNixon? George McGovern? Ronald Reagan? George w. Bush? Bernard in TomRobbins' still Li& with woodpecker? Huey p. Newton? Bobby seale? Erdridge

cleaver? Pierre Proudhon? Mikhail Bak-unin? pope John )ofltr?17. Explain why you agree or disagree with the theory that American armed Marxists andliberals believe in manipulating people for the people,s own good.18- ouery: it makes a difference, no matter how small, who is minipulating you.19. Explain Harris' theory of "Space cadetism." Define hedonism. nxphil"why you agree

or disagree with Harris' evaluation of the Space Cadet. What rrigd a..yuppie,, say aboutthis? What might a Vegan say?20' Define revolutionary. Define fanatic. Is Harris a revolutionary? a fanatic? Explain.21. Describe and evaluate the publication Rolling Stone.22' Describe Harris' alternatives to the present socio-political relationship of people togovernment, and violent revolution. Make a preliminary judgment ar to *t ett er or notyou agree with Harris.-

takagaki

David Earris, Coming OutIt',s been a Iong time since we've talked. To get over that time, I think we ought to talkabout some words we have in common. words ttrat au of us use to a"r".iu" our extension intothe world. words rike "peace," ..riberatio4,, .Justice,lLd ..fr."dom.,, itut ro"uurrrary iscentral to our existence and our rives are obviousry barren without it.Those words, like all words, gain their meaning from the situation they are used in. Noneof us exist outside of history- rtis in situations trrlt ou rirres are fleshed out, and it is insituations that our words take on meaning. r*" **i to understand peace and liberation andjustice and freedonq we must see the situition *",r" ir.--That situation is America.

It's a very complex society.

Yet those complexities have their roots in some simpre beginnings.

we are in the middle of a society that totals men's lives in doflars and cents. It,s a capitalistsociety where the work of the many has always bee, .rsJ for the profit of a few. In thatprocess all of our lives have been siripped of any honesror real work. Instead we have paychecks' billboards, and 97 brands orrna"ru.m a"oao.*t. we are bougil ;J sold every dayand have next to nothing to show for it. We are in a society of slaves and slaveholders.It is also a society of manipulation and control. America is a coercive and centralized statewhose power hinges on enforced obedience. In all its forms-it consistently denies the peoplethe right to control those situations they encompass. Instead our lives are manipulated for thepurposes of the State, and we are Ieft in impoten"y una lroiution. It is a society where ordersare given and orders are followed.

we live in an empire that has attempted to efiend its contror over as many various peoplesas it can' The American empire, like ail empires, cannot be separated from the barbaric andbrutal force with which it is Luilt- You can call that force any number of names. you can callit war' you can call it dlurv spending or you can call it defense. call it *il;l. you will butits name can't change its facl. ano itJfac. i. "rr."r

urt.rr.w The empire we live in cannot beseparated from the stacked bodies and burnt children all over the world. It isa society ofvictims and executioners, executioners and victims-and the roles are interchangeable.

2David Harris, Coming Out

It's a tool, brothers and sisters, that's what it is. It's a tool designed to do certain things. Itcan make a few men rich. It can string the rest ofus up like paper dolls. And it can breedblood and pain and misery over all our lives. But it can't give,r, p"u"", it can't give us justiceor liberation or freedom. So let's not ask it to. Let's do it ourselves instead. Let's not ask thePentagon and the politicians for peace, let's make it ourselves.

I signed my peace treaty in 1966. I put my draft cards in an envelope and I wrote a littlenote to my draft board. It said:

"Dear sirs: no longer consider me part ofyour organization.,,

That's my peace treaty. I'm no man's butcher and won,t ever be.

Let's not ask Bank of America to share the wealth. Because Bank of America isn't thewealth. The people are. They produce it and it is by right theirs. Bank of America is the fat.And it got there by using the people. Let's share the wealth ourselves by not being usedan)rmore.

And let's not ask the government for our lives baclq because they are ours in the first place.And we don't need permission to take them back.

Then we've turned our peace and liberation and justice and freedom into a reality. Thosewords grow ilms and legs and feet and walk out on the streets of this country where they havenot been in a long time.

To do all those things, we have to add a new word to our vocabularies. And that word,s asimple word. I thought about it a lot in twenty months. The word is..struggle.,,

We struggle because our lives-those lives composed of peace and liberation and justiceand freedom-are in open conflict with all the apparatus of the organized State around us.And in order to be real, we must struggle. And it is a struggle, have no doubts.

Because we aren't talking about changrng a window-dressing or putting a new mask on anold face.

We are talking about going to the roots of a society and growing new ones. Nothing lesswill do.

That is no small job. The State we are up against is one big ***r.x**{

David Harris' Coming Out

Because we're playrng for our own futures. And you can't play for anything bigger.

Ifwe look at the world and the social forces that hold swaythere today, I don,t think anyofus as reasonable men mn expect mankind to survive the next twenty-five years.

I mean there are lots of ends you can write to the script. We could blow ourselves up. LosAngeles could expand to include aII of us and we could rt otr to death. Or perhaps theultimate model is that society goes stark raving mad and there is nothing left walking thestreets except an unrecognizable band ofpsychotics.

All those are possibilities and I'm not gonna pretend to know which ofthose possibilities isreached first. But we don't need to know that anyway. What we need to know is that thesocial order we live in has our own deaths ingrAnea in it.

And we struggle for a new order because it is impossible for us to exist without it. Not justbecause there are ideas we like, but because we want a future.

Now a struggle of those dimensions and with those stakes is another word. It,s a word thata lotta people use. And I'm gonna use it in a way that'most oithose people don,t. The wordis "revolution." That'1what our plunge to the roots of American societyis about. It is arevolutionary change that we're looking for.

Now when I say "revolution" I don't mean hurting people. I'm trying to make a revolutionagainst the organized process of hurting people and none orus wru find himself in a new worldby mimickhg that which already exists. I think there's been a confusion. There are lots offolks that think violence and revolution are the same thing. As far as I can see, they aren,t. Infact, I think they're contradictions. If anything, it is violeice and the State thai aresynonymous. And both have to be overcome with our revolution.

when r say "revolution' I also have two other things on my mind.

The first is a feeling: If it's a revolutiorq it's a revolution for everybody or it isn,t arevolution at all. Revolutions aren't made for people who wear their haiithe same way or Iikethe same music. Revolutions are made because alLmen have a right to live and pursue theirlives.

I,ve just come from a penit