For Part I see Effective Counter Attack; Consideration or Implosion?–NDD
The women and men of Boomantribune are calling for an effective counter attack. I know of no better method of developing an effective counter attack than a method that would use the principles and links discussed below the fold of this diary.
I would ask that we try to have some CONSIDERATION for each other as we post comments to this diary as well as all others on BoomanTribune.
It is imperative that we keep our focus on the task at hand;
Either we frog march’m out, or we change their point of view.
While I remain engaged in party politics locally, it seems doubtful that our near total reliance on party politics is going to be productive.
I see no guarantee that the momentum of this current administration will be derailed by focusing on political activism alone, regardless of whether we have wins or losses in ’06, or ’08.
Every day more news arrives that tends to convince me that we’re several rungs up the ladder of fascism, rather than on the first couple of rungs.
I SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF TIME.
Never, have I seen such an intense level of disgust, both on blog and off, with our existing political leaders.
So, “What in the hell else can we do?” you say.
Well, we have yet to seriously consider coordinating a Martin Luther King/Gandhi/Lech Walensa type movement.
And believe me, I’m certainly not so foolish as to imply that any particular tactic the aforementioned leaders used would necessarily be applicable to the difficulties we face today.
But from a study of the material referenced below it seems fairly obvious that the weaknesses in governmental structure, which allowed their movements to succeed, are very similar today.
And there’s no doubt Martin Luther King, Gandhi, and Lech Walensa were just as innovative in their day, as we will need to be now, under the current threat to democracy.
In fact we have advantages now that they didn’t have, such as our ability to communicate and disseminate via internet, cell phones, podcasts, etc.
The movements of Martin Luther King, Gandhi, and Lech Walensa were able to encompass a wide variety of political persuasions.
So there’s no reason why everyone, from left of Democrats, immigrants, Democrats, center Democrats, DINOs, Independents, Libertarians, and possibly even some moderate Republicans can’t participate in a plan to influencing the policies of this administration.
We have much more power at our disposal than we are allowing ourselves to believe that we have. This past week’s absolutely huge demonstrations in opposition to repressive immigration legislation have encouraged us all in that respect.
And it would seem prudent to examine how it is that the Hispanic DJs of LA have an abundance of expertise in implementing nonviolent action.
Comment by Militarytracy: After reading and digesting Effective Counter Attack; Consideration or Implosion? (Part I)
It occurs to me that this is why Crawford worked. Say what you will but before Crawford nobody spoke out public and openly questioning the Iraq war…..after Crawford we are free to question it here, there and everywhere. That is one step closer to ending it! Let’s face it too….the powers that be still do basically whatever they please right now……so why didn’t they just arrest Sheehan at Crawford as they had threatened? Sheehan had paid the ultimate price and had worked hard to digest what had happened to her and find a solution that was going to REALLY WORK. She had embodied the principles you have above and applied them to Casey being killed in an illegal war in Iraq. It wasn’t that we needed a messiah in Crawford Texas…..but she had managed to get it together and she never raised her voice one single time. The rest of the military families and soldiers were still so wounded that we stole and borrowed from her energy there………a deeper knowing within us knew that the only real solution was going to come through behaving and doing and carrying ourselves as Cindy did and that meant complete nonviolent public civil disobedience and gently speaking and being the truth that we were as human beings.
Some people say we need a third party. I wish we had a second one. Jim Hightower
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 8th, 2006 at 10:17:45 AM CST
Comment by NLinStPaul – in Effective Counter Attack; Consideration or Implosion? (Part I)
NDD, I read this this morning and have had moments all day when it came back to me. I like the fact that so many people are thinking about this. It reminds me of the kind of preparation MLK did with people to get them ready. What we’re talking about is the same kind of movement – and we need to be ready.
The part of your diary I have been thinking about today is that our so-called leaders only have the power that the people permit. I really believe this. And have had two thoughts:
1. The people we have GIVEN power to have convinced the American people that the only power we have in the political process is to vote. And now most of us are not even sure we have that. We have to challenge this!!
2. This really explains why the “powers that be” had to stop Howard Dean. He really meant it when he said “You have the power” and it threatened the hell out of them. They knew it was true – and they didn’t want us to figure that out.
Thats where my thoughts are for now. I’m really looking forward to more about this. I think we’re on to something.
[snip]
You may say I’m a dreamer. But I’m not the only one. John Lennon
by NLinStPaul on Wed Mar 8th, 2006 at 07:07:28 PM CST
Please give democracy a chance, continue below the fold;
Pillars of Support and the role of Obedience
Obedience is at “the heart of political power.” A ruler cannot rule if the people do not obey. It is this insight upon which strategies for nonviolent struggle are based.
If our purpose is to motivate the public to withdraw its consent to be ruled by dictators or other authoritarian regimes, we should first understand why people are obedient in the first place.
— Robert L Helvey On Strategic Nonviolent Conflict: Thinking About the Fundamentals.
[All text in boxes with blue background are from the above source. Robert L Helvey is a protégé of Gene Sharp]
Note: I could not find Helvey’s book at Powell’s, so use link above if you’d like to order. The link is not the pdf download but the pdf is available there.
Other than title headings, all text in bold is “emphasis mine,” — NDD
The role of Obedience will be examined following the discussion of Pillars of Support.
Chapter Two
PILLARS OF SUPPORT
[…] Any regime will rely on some pillars of support more than others. At the same time, authoritarian regimes attempt to limit the expansion and strength of the opposition’s pillars of support.
It should not be surprising that in a strategic nonviolent conflict, the operational focus for planners is primarily about the alignment and capabilities of pillars of support.
Identification of Pillars of Support
The identification and analysis of pillars of support are fundamental when opponents of a regime begin to think about any nonviolent strategy.
Until the primary pillars of the regime are undermined, neutralized or destroyed, there is little prospect of political reform or regime change.
Those waging nonviolent struggle against an authoritarian regime, therefore, must give keen attention to key institutions and organizations.
Police
[…] The motto “To protect and serve” is descriptive of the image most police departments worldwide seek to project to the public. However, the identity of who is being protected and served is not always the public.
Instead, this most visible and omnipresent “face” of government sometimes gives priority to the task of protecting and serving a corrupt and repressive regime. […]
For an example of a great nonviolent strategy, see how Boston Joe’s group developed a rapport with the local police prior to their protest in Lansing.
The Accidental Activist: An Anti-War Diary (Part II) — Boston Joe — … From my own experience, that hostility between the police and the movement, if it ever existed in reality as some monolithic form, has largely died away. There are still open expressions of righteous outrage at symbols of authority, to be sure. But I believe that the level of understanding about non-violent change has risen. There is an understanding that the police and the military are tools of authority, but an equal understanding that they are citizens. They are a part of “the people” that will be the change.
We engaged them before these protests… And it paid dividends all week long.
Military
The use of military force to stay in power is viewed as the “trump card” by authoritarian regimes. […]
The time to develop plans to undermine the willingness of the Army to intervene against civilian protesters is well before a government’s decision to employ them is made. […]
Maintaining as much rapport as is feasible with the military (or a national guard) before and during a nonviolent action contributes to the ultimate success of a democracy movement.
I remember watching TV coverage of Ukraine’s “Orange Revolution” And I specifically remember that as Viktor Yushchenko walked through the great crowd of his supporters, his wife, Kateryna Yuschchenko would walk over to the barricades and chat amicably with the soldiers. I thought their actions on that day were a brilliant example of how to conduct a nonviolent struggle.
The actions of military units in response to orders are influenced by the attitudes, values, and professionalism of its leadership. Officers generally view themselves as patriotic, loyal, and politically conservative. Their “professionalism” sometimes leads them to blindly support political leadership. […]
The assimilation of democratic values into the military culture is a major factor in limiting the use of the military’s destructive power against the citizenry. Another factor is the perception of the military leaders that there will be an important role for them under a democratic government. […]
Civil Servants
Civil servants are often maligned, criticized, ridiculed, and undervalued. […] Yet, political leaders… cannot survive without the obedient, skilled civil servants carrying out these seemingly innocuous activities.
These are the people that translate orders into actions: they issue regulations, assess and collect taxes, prepare budgets, run schools, input information into thousands of databases, make purchases for the government, control the airways and harbors, staff embassies, maintain communication systems, and, in fact, perform all to the tasks that keeps regimes functional.
No government can operate without them.
Opposition groups who adopt strategic nonviolent conflict to seek regime change and democratic reform must understand the importance of winning the support of government employees.
But it must also be understood that the very livelihoods of government employees depend on their obedience to their government employer, and, as such, few employees can openly oppose the government until there is clear evidence that the other pillars of support for the ruler have been seriously weakened.
Nevertheless, commitment to an opposition movement by government employees, even if not openly expressed, can contribute to the advancement of the movement’s cause in ways limited only by the imagination.
Media
If a popular movement for democratic change is to be successful, it must have the means to communicate its messages to its target audiences. Authoritarian regimes know this and attempt to deny or limit such access… […]
Control of the press and other internal forms of mass communication by an oppressive government can be easily accomplished. […] There is a strong incentive for self-censorship… […]
To overcome these internal constraints, offshore productions are now rather common, whether it is a Burmese radio station broadcasting from Norway or an Iranian television station in California beaming interviews with opposition leaders to audiences in Tehran.
The possibility of mass communication originating outside a country’s border is exemplified also by the Serbian pro-democracy movement. Over 60 tons of leaflets were shipped into the country and distributed within a few days prior to the election in 2000.
As an example of how a democracy movement can communicate with its target audience see the Project for the OLD American Century which has pdf downloads that can be used to print leaflets.
Almost everybody has access to computer and a printer, so why aren’t we making more use of this technology to spread our version of the news via leaflets.
Business Community
Even under the most centralized, socialistic authoritarian regimes, business communities play important roles in the economy. They provide to the people goods and services that the government does not supply.
[…] …international firms may have no particular interest in whether or not a government is democratic or tyrannical. What matters to them is profit.
The challenge for a democratic movement is to convince these companies that change is coming and that it may, in the future, be important for them to be perceived as having been at least neutral in the actions that they have taken.
Youth
A primary concern of authoritarian regimes is to prevent young people from becoming politicized unless that politicization is in support and controlled by the government.
As long as students and other youth are not permitted to become an organized challenge to the stability of the government, opposition groups are deprived of the traditional vanguard for accelerated political change. […]
Some people have tried to explain why young people are often willing to accept the risks of being in the front lines of revolutionary movements by suggesting that young people have “nothing to lose”. […]
Most importantly, however, it is not what might be lost, but rather what might be gained by living in a free and just society that provides impetus for youth involvement.
Young people do not generally rationalize their bondage under tyranny. Nor do they generally accept, as given, the impossibility of change.
Young people have an instinct, yet undiminished by experience, to know truth from falsehood and right from wrong without numerous gradations of a continuum. It is this intellectual clarity that motivates them.
As an example of the anti-Vietnam war movement leaders activities on university campuses, I recall three Chicago Eight/Seven members made appearances in ND in 1970.
Abbie Hoffman appeared at NDSU. And David Dellinger and Rennie Davis plus Phil Ochs showed up at UND for an anti-war, anti-ABM event (scroll down) was planned to coincide with Armed Forces Day, 16 May 1970.
My point is not to dwell on nostalgia here, but to question which if any anti-war leaders are carrying the message to the nation’s campuses.
A word of caution is necessary whenever consideration is given to enlisting students and other young people into a democratic movement. […] A “code of conduct” is important for everyone participating in a movement, but it is especially important for youth organizations, and imperative that the code of conduct be accompanied by training and strong leadership to reduce instances of damaging conduct.
Here’s another example of a very smart thinking on the part of group members who were involved in nonviolent action. See Boston Joe’s account of their reaction to vandalism (not necessarily by a young person) during the protest.
The Accidental Activist: An Anti-War Diary (Part II) — Boston Joe — …We quickly decided that we were going to attempt to clean off the graffiti. And before one of our group attempted it, I insisted that we report the incident to Rogers’ people inside. The act was right in front of the surveillance camera. And I did not[want]one of our group getting charged with a crime for attempting to clean the sign….
Workers
[…] It can be difficult to organize workers, but, once organization is under way, unity can spread quickly. Recall that the democracy movement in Poland was catapulted to victory after the electricians began a strike at the shipyard at Gdansk.
One sector of the workforce of particular interest to planners of strategic nonviolent struggle is transportation and related industries. Any disruption of the movement of goods, people, and services can have immediate economic and political costs to the regime.
At the same time, strategic planners need to consider possible unintended consequences if food and other essential commodities are denied to the public.
Religious Organizations
Historically, organized religion has played important roles in political struggles against tyranny–mostly on the side seeking change, but sometimes not.
Often religious organizations have networks, both spiritual and financial, throughout the societies in which they operate, from the wealthy elites down to the grassroots of society.
Too, because religious leaders are usually well educated in the ways of society as well as in religion, they are generally respected by both their followers and others who know of their works, and they can often influence the attitudes and behavior of other far beyond moral and religious teachings. They can also bring a spiritual aspect to an opposition movement and even become the most articulate speakers for the opposition itself.
On the other hand, they can become just as influential and just as articulate for the much narrower special interests of a tyrannical regime. Accordingly, movement leaders must be attuned to the task of encouraging the support of religious leaders or undermining the pernicious influence that they might have.
In light of the discussion above, let’s remember that not all people who are members of religious organizations are right wing fundamentalists. Those of us who are members of religious organizations should be talking with both our fellow members and religious leaders.
While I see no problem with shunning fundamentalist members, I think we do unnecessary damage to our democracy movement by exhibiting obnoxious behavior towards family, friends, and neighbors who take their religion seriously.
We cannot succeed without convincing some of them to come over to our side, (if they’re not there already.)
Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs)
Any group or organization that can function outside direct control and supervision of the government is a potential asset to a democracy movement.
International NGOs can raise funds, communicate directly with many publics, obtain needed expertise from abroad, and provide insights obtained from experiences of other democratic movements. […]
An important value of NGOs in a nonviolent conflict is that they provide services to the public and thus demonstrate that people need not be totally dependent upon government. NGO activities can weaken the coercive, but subtle, bond that authoritarian regimes require for public obedience. […]
Democratic movements need to be reminded, however, that NGOs have their own agendas. It is important to understand what those agendas might be and to insure that compatibility exists with the goals and objectives of the democratic movement.
Other sources of support are professional organizations, political parties, foreign businesses, and foreign governments. Not to be overlooked are small groups within a community, established for specific interests such as sewing circles, hunting and fishing clubs, book clubs, language study groups, motorcycle clubs, hiking and walking clubs, bird watching clubs, coin collecting clubs, garden clubs, and sports clubs.
Strategic nonviolent struggle requires both the control over sources of power and the active participation of the population. Organizations contain the sources of power and provide the structures for collective actions.
Next; Obedience of the citizens is critical to the survival of any regime.
Chapter Three
OBEDIENCE
Obedience is at “the heart of political power.” A ruler cannot rule if the people do not obey. It is this insight upon which strategies for nonviolent struggle are based.
If our purpose is to motivate the public to withdraw its consent to be ruled by dictators or other authoritarian regimes, we should first understand why people are obedient in the first place.
Habit
The reason most people obey is the habit of obedience. We are accustomed to obeying those in authority.
[…]Those of us who are addicted to tobacco know what a habit is like. We don’t know how many cigarettes we smoke, can’t recall when we smoked them, and don’t quit smoking when the price has risen to absurd levels.
To break this or any habit, including obedience to authority, we must make a deliberate decision to quit, constantly reminding ourselves of that decision, and reiterating why it is important to break the habit.
Fear of Sanctions
Fear of punishment for disobedience is another reason why people obey. When we violate the law, the power of the state can be brought against us. […]The purpose of sanctions is to punish the offender and/or deter others from disobeying the same or a similar law.
A tyrant depends more upon fear of sanctions to insure obedience than do rulers who have the willing support of the public.
I don’t see any point in linking to a particular diary on the sanctions issue, as there seems to have been a never ending string of diaries and newspaper articles on this subject.
Self-interest
We should not condemn everyone who supports an unpopular government out of self-interest. Each person has his own reasons for doing so. Many believe there is no alternative. Our challenge is [to] demonstrate that it may be in their self-interest to disobey.
Moral Obligation
A sense of moral obligation to obey is common in every society. […] Sometimes we may even feel that the common good is best served by obeying a hated ruler because we don’t believe an alternative would make life any better.
Joseph Stalin was clearly a tyrant. Yet, millions of people obeyed him because obedience was considered to be in the common interest of society. […] We see peer pressure as a reflection of this moral obligation to obey.
Keep this in mind–peer pressure works both ways and can be a useful tool in changing patterns of behavior.
Superhuman Factors
Sometimes rulers are given a superman image or a god-like character. When a ruler is perceived as being all-powerful or is perceived as being the personification of a religion, it is almost inconceivable to think about disobeying that ruler. […]
This deification of the leaders has had a long history. For centuries, people accepted the concept of “god-kings” and the “divine right of kings.”
Another variant of this divine rule approach is the 20th century fusion of religion and the state in Iran. To counter this factor of obedience, we need to speak the truth–man is not all-powerful nor is the ruler an agent of God.
Here’s one by sybil , Did God Tell Bush To Go To War?
And of course, we’re all well aware of the fundamentalists desire to facilitate a “20th century fusion of religion and the state.”
Psychological Identification with the Rulers
Some people view their rulers as an extension of their own family. In somewhat the same way supporters of a soccer team experience joy when their team wins or sorrow when the team loses, a ruler becomes an extension of the individual.
This is especially true if people and the ruler come through a difficult experience together […] If this familial extension is a factor in a person’s obedience, a convincing case must be made that such an identification with the ruler is no longer justified.
Nine-eleven… need I say more?
Zone of Indifference
Some people may profess an indifference to most, if not all, laws that can even remotely be expected to impinge upon their daily lives.
They obey simply because not to do so seems more trouble than it is worth. For most, that may be a reasonable assumption regarding most laws.
Problems can arise, however, when laws restricting basic rights and freedom intrude into this comfort zone of indifference.
It is the task of the democratic opposition to alert the public that indifference to this intrusion is no longer appropriate since it contributes to the enslavement of society as individual freedoms are eroded by increasingly subtle restrictions that are imposed upon the public.
Absence of Self-Confidence
For a variety of reasons, some people lack confidence in themselves, their judgment or even their ability to make themselves capable of resistance or disobedience. […]
Perhaps some people think that their rulers are more qualified than they are to make decisions. Importantly for a resistance movement, they may feel they cannot successfully defy the government or participate in their own liberation.
Restoring the public’s confidence in its ability to pass judgment on the actions of the rulers and then to act on those judgments is critical to the success of nonviolent struggle. Sometimes, what we think of as “indifference” may well be an absence of self-confidence.
Summary
We have just examined several reasons why people obey their rulers. They [these reasons] provide a rebuttal to the argument that it is “natural” to be obedient.
Human beings are not genetically pre-disposed to be submissive. Obedience is primarily a combination of habits, fear and interests–and habits and interests can be changed and fear can be overcome.
And I repeat once again for emphasis:
Obedience is at “the heart of political power.” A ruler cannot rule if the people do not obey. It is this insight upon which strategies for nonviolent struggle are based.
If our purpose is to motivate the public to withdraw its consent to be ruled by dictators or other authoritarian regimes, we should first understand why people are obedient in the first place.
I sincerely believe the methods of nonviolent struggle are our only real hope of changing government policies and ultimately changing the leadership of our government to one that truly represents “we the people”, and not only “we the people” of our country but “we the people” globally.
I hope we will invest our time wisely in pursuit of a true democracy for our country. We can not wait until another Martin Luther King, a Gandhi, or Lech Walensa appears on the scene. It is up to us!!!
I expect that Part III of this series of diaries will cover Mechanisms and Methods of Nonviolent Struggle.
Stay “tuned” to BoomanTribune, and don’t forget to do your homework, the survival of our republic’s democracy depends on it.
Sure hope everyone isn’t totally swamped with reading material for the day.
Feel free to use my email in sig line at any time.
Thanks!
NDD, this is a fantastic follow-up, thank you so much for your research on this. When I attended the immigration rally last Friday, I was taken aback by the amount of warmth and community expressed by total strangers. As new people would arrive, they would have their heads down, timid, but within minutes they would be handed a paper with the chants and perhaps a sign and invited to stand with a few others. Before you knew it, they were clapping and shouting peace slogans along with the rest of us.
The people are starting to re-recognize their power just by simply speaking out against injustice.
Nothing makes me happier these days than hearing stories from you guys who are directly involved in these events — Crawford; Washington, DC; Lansing, Michigan, Seattle, Tucson… ( I wish I was a little closer.)
Before it’s all said and done, all you guys are going to know exactly what it was like for those of us who experienced it last time around, ’69-’73.
Five hundred thousand people in the streets of LA is not something to be discounted, and then add in all the other protests around the country.
Our democracy movement may ride the roller coaster, but I really do believe it will not be stopped now.
Reading through this and your previous, I understand that you are trying to develop the organizational tactics and structure to push back against the “machine”. So far, fairly solid overview and some specifics as written by some of the most effective movement leaders in recent history. All of whom were advocating for specific legal redress of grievance(s).
Guess I’m just dense, but I still don’t see the specific, positive remedies; the “manifesto” or “proclamation” that embodies the principles of the movement you’re trying to organize. Maybe the processes have to work in parallel? Valid.
But absent basic agreement on principles there will be no “movement”.
I am in full agreement with your last point, the following;
I do believe you are absolutely correct according to what knowledge/wisdom I have accumulated thus far on the topic of nonviolent conflict.
And as far as;
I’d say you are not dense at all, but instead perceptive in realizing the necessity of, what those more experienced than I in this field, have called, VISION.
At this point I see my diary on VISION showing up in Part IV. But I would have no problem what-so-ever if someone, or any number of people, for that matter were to diary and discuss VISION.
So;
Yeah why not! Probably the sooner that process is started the better!
Yes, Gene Sharp, and the Albert Einstein Institute have for over 50 years researched and analyzed aspects of nonviolent conflict. (See right link on sig line.)
I would define my goals on these nonviolent struggle diaries as an attempt to increase the awareness of my fellow bootribbers as to the information that is available on the topic.
At this point, and with this limited audience, BT, ( ET, not yet posted there) I’m not likely to be a major player –;
I expect that process to be an absolutely huge task of which I’m am likely to play a relatively minor role.
I thank you for comment and your willingness to invest your time on the issue of nonviolent conflict.
First of all: great series of diaries.
With regard to vision or manifesto or whatever one wants to call it. I agree that it is critical. It will be extremely difficult to come up with a mission statement and a set of stratectic priorities that engage a large enough people to reach critical mass. Once agreed upon, it is also going to take extreme discipline to adhere to the agreed upon priorities and stay on message.
On another note, may I recommend the movie the “Yes Men” to anyone who has not seen it. It depicts creative, non-violent, ballsy actions employed against the WTO. Do rent the DVD. It is both inspiring and hysterically funny.
Thanks, Kahli. And thanks also for the headup on the movie Yes Men. I had not heard of that one before. It sound like a good one.
During the Vietnam War, the anti-war movement managed to “…engage a large enough people to reach critical mass…” and our participation ended.
And with respect to that movement, I’m not recalling that we ended up with any sort of precise “…mission statement and a set of stratectic priorities…”
I think that many of our objectives can be accomplished while we are on the trail, as we work to “…come up with a mission statement and a set of stratectic priorities.”
Well, I think one reason critical mass was reached in Viet Nam was the fact that there was a draft. (And no I am not advocating for one.)
I also don’t think we stop working until all the i’s are dotted. I DO think if we are going to get people involved that are not normally inclined to challenge authority/ status quo, we are going to have a simple straightforward message. I remember dragging one such person to a peace rally. He said he will never return, since half the speakers were orating about everything BUT peace. Now the things most were promoting were very worthy causes, but it made us look unfocused and disrespectful of people who had come to make a statement about peace, but weren’t yet ready to get on board for the entire list of leftist, socialist and anarchist causes that were being presented.
Also during Vietnam, the goal was pretty clear — get the heck out. The current situation is different. The thugs in office have presented us with so many problems to solve. All I’m advocating for is the use of well-thought-out strategy. And the reason I’m advocating such a strategy is to improve efficiency and better our chances of success.
I freely admit that I’m far more comfortable with structure than many liberals. But it is going to take more than us self-described liberals to make any significant changes in our country.
Anyway, I think your diaries are great and I can’t wait for the next installment.
While agendas are vital, I believe that the Vision of this movement must first and foremost be to reactivate Democracy. Sounds trite, yes? But it really is the basis of all the rest.
All the agenda items over which we will squabble if we start trying to develop an itemized political agenda have at their root the current inability, or unwillingness, of the people to take their rightful place at the policy-making table.
Without changing that dynamic, without changing the fundamental aspects of our current political system and igniting a wave of citizen engagement in setting policy, no long term changes are likely on most of the issues that matter.
I think this first fundamental step described in this and the prior NDD dairy is at the very heart of any progress of any progressive issue, notwithstanding the good faith disagreements we may have about the detailed positions on those issues or on any current election strategy.
Regime serenity prayer. It’s funny how I can be upset about things but if I read your links and your thoughts pertaining to this I become calm and confident…..something it feels like I haven’t felt for ages.
You always speak and write from the heart. And I have appreciated that since the “ancient” dKos days.
There’s a concept lying within your post. For me it seems like a seed that’s germinated, waiting to spring though the soil to reach for the sunlight.
I have a feeling it will show up in Part III.
NDD – I add my thanks for your time and effort into putting this second diary together. Not only do I appreciate the information, but also the way you have organized and highlighted it.
In doing my “homework” I found myself wondering some things.
You note: Well, we have yet to seriously consider coordinating a Martin Luther King/Gandhi/Lech Walensa type movement.
And believe me, I’m certainly not so foolish as to imply that any particular tactic the aforementioned leaders used would necessarily be applicable to the difficulties we face today.
But from a study of the material referenced below it seems fairly obvious that the weaknesses in governmental structure, which allowed their movements to succeed, are very similar today.
In particular I am wondering about this part, as I am not sure I agree: it seems fairly obvious that the weaknesses in governmental structure, which allowed their movements to succeed, are very similar today.
The power of corporations has grown exponentially. The current administration exemplifies a blending of corporations and government. The “revolving” door between working in the government and working in a corporation seems to have stopped revolving and is wide open.
Corporations are such strange creatures – an “entity” but not a person. And so many are involved in major corporations, either directly employed or through pension funds and investments. It gets weird.
Just the other day I came across the following at ET which seems pertinent:
The efforts to “privatize” have been directed toward three of the “Pillars of Support” – police, military, and civil servants. The “Media” has become corporate-owned and operated. The “Business Community,” that is not corporate-owned is struggling to survive. The number of organized “Workers” has been dwindling.
I am wondering how the corporate element affects the analysis of the “structure of government” in determining weaknesses. In turn, might that not affect the methods and mechanisms?
You raise important question in bringing up the element of corporate control. And I thank you for tonight’s “assignment” of my end of the “homework.”
Although at the moment I’m tangled up in real life, I should have time later this evening for a more well-thought-out reply than I’m able to do now.
and hope for better brain power in the morning.
Specifically on this …it seems fairly obvious that the weaknesses in governmental structure, which allowed their movements to succeed, are very similar today…–NDD.
What I remember of my thoughts while coming up with that sentence is a concept from Helvey/Sharp that, The more hierarchical the government structure the more dependent on people’s obedience,(for at least one element) hence the perception of an Achilles heel.
I would need to delve more extensively into the text quoted in the diary or others of Gene Sharp’s to enlighten myself and others further on that. Which I hope to do soon. So if more on that does not show up here in time, then look for it in Part III.
I’ve been remiss lately in visiting ET, but I think highly of whataboutbob and Jerome a Paris. With regards to Transferring wealth away from public interests and employees I think that is obviously true.
And what continues to rile me to no end is the degree to which every last issue I’ve ever cared about in my whole life has been and is continuing to be damaged by this administration.
I have been heard to say that Bush II has done more damage than Bush I, Reagan, and Nixon combined. Then I started multiplying that by 10, and then by 100.
Once I include possibilities related to global heating then there is no upper limit to likely damage. Right?
So who’s in control? There’s no doubt in my mind the corporations are in control. Out of the corporate lobby dollar the Rs get 6, the Ds get 4, very roughly speaking, which does much to explain current D behavior.
So let’s say the corporate grip on the current government here and no doubt world wide is 10, 100, whatever times worse than, say 1970.
Well, what then. I’d say you raise a valid question on the issue. And what remains to be seen is whether the various texts’ concepts involving the implementation phase of nonviolent struggle can be innovatively and creatively adapted to present circumstances.
I simply choose at this time and at this place to hope that this is possible. I see no other option(s).
And then consider if indeed someone came to me with said innovative idea would I be willing to continue the discourse in this particular forum…
At this point what optimism I have derides both from the concepts of nonviolent struggle found in the texts, and just generally a “gut” feeling from perusing a variety of information sources; for just one example, the financial area; Jerome a Paris, Sterling Newberry, and Paul Krugman for starters.
I just think that much of the basic structure of our whole system is more fragile than we are led to believe.
Time for rest. I appreciate your interest and your feedback on this issue.
Did you have an opportunity to read Gangs of America yet?
NDD – thanks again. I have not yet read Hance’s book, but I am going to get a copy today.
I read Jared Diamond’s Guns Germs and Steel and thought about his analysis of how we organize ourselves for survival. From small bands, then tribes, then chiefdoms, then nation/states. It struck me that we have transitioned again, this time into corporate/nations.
I keep thinking the strategies to counter this corporate government must be adapted to have any effect. But I don’t know what that might look like.
I look forward to the next installment. š
I’m trying to resist dispair.
Each time we march, protest – we see the media whore ignoring us. It isn’t meaningless, as I believe more and more people wake up with each march. EAch time we have to worry about being arrested, photographed, hit, harrassed… it makes you realize it’ more than ever important to voice our dissent.
Sadly though I don’t think it will exact change. Or cause change soon enough. This coungry has a lust craving for violence. It thrives on pain and misery. It stops for blood and war.
I’ve sat with others and looked at the Capitol and I know… what it will take. I know what will make the media wake the fuck up. I know it will take innocent lives of protestors.
I know that I can raise a Stop Torture sign above my head for thousands of miles and it wont be seen unless I’m holding it while a cop blows my face off. Then and only then will it be seen… and maybe then and only then will other mothers, women, sisters, daughters and MEN… will pick up a sign and charge that Smut House.
For fuck sakes, people… there are HOODED GUNMEN in DC!!!! Why? Why are we tolerating this gag order.
I don’t want any bloodshed, I hope that non-violence will help stop this bloodshed and this regime. I hope that calm reason and steadfastedness will create change. I want Peace to make a difference. I don’t want anymore deaths.
But each night I come home late, tired and there’s no dinner yet… I ask myself… did I make a difference.
In many ways I have. But that rat bastard isn’t up for war crimes and untill he and the others are… I’m going to keep marching and living each day with the hope that Peace will enact change.
Cause I don’t want to die because I was carrying a sign.
The people on the sidewalk… they try to ignore you just as if you were a homeless person. They walk right by.
will be difficult under our current and future circumstances.
You have valid concerns, Damnit Janet, which I will try to address somewhat generically here, (and hopefully more specifically via email later.)
We will all have our individual perspectives on what pressures or risks we may be willing to allow for ourselves as individuals and what to allow for our families.
A democracy movement has many areas in which people can participate without being on the streets, and without being subject to harassment.
I have no recommendations for others as I think each individual will have to determine what is best for them, and their families.
However, having had some experience with all this on the last go ’round I rank my priorities as; 1. mental and physical health. 2. look after family and friends 3. make some sort of living 4. participate in democracy. Others are welcome to add their perspectives.
This whole thing is not likely to be over soon. IMO we will need to pace ourselves, our energy levels, and achieve a balance between our priorities. No one should ever feel guilty at having to take a break now and then, or quit completely, to deal with personal issues.
Regardless of the depth of our involvement in all this we are still human beings, with the usual needs, (or probably more in these times.)
Arlo Guthrie played here last Saturday. I’m sorry to have missed him. But his appearance reminded me that in the past we had a whole bunch of music and a whoe bunch of musicians to sustain us, lift our spirits. Some of that is coming back, but we will need more, much,much more.
I’d say, contact everyone you know who does music. We need their help and we need it soon. The music was one of the things that sustained us in time past time of turbulence. It is part of what will sustain me now.
And then there’s the element of community. Some of us have a large real-life physical community. Some of us have a mostly virtual community. And some of us have both.
I think it’s going to be increasingly important, (for both mental and physical survival,) to be a part of a community, one, or the other, or both of those mentioned above.
Try to find a community that will support you in times of duress. We have no way of knowing what the future will bring us. We have websites well known to us who specialize in health and spiritual renewal. I plan to spend more time with them in the future also.
Prior to Katrina no one could “think Katrina.” A strong and wise community will think ahead as to the local or regional possibilities. Anyone can safely be a part of that effort.
ooops starting to approach diary length.
“I wish you well Damnit Janet in following the path with heart.” — NDD.
((((DJ)))) I am so sorry you are experiencing despair, yet I don’t know how NOT to have such moments. š
Though Ghandi, MLK, and Walensa chose nonviolent means to protest and initiate change, it didn’t mean there was no violence. Ghandi and MLK died violently. I wonder if they knew people would be hurt and accepted that as a consequence.
I also wonder whether Ghandi and MLK were very good spouses or parents. Did they ever have to say, “I can’t make it to today’s protest, my kid has a school event and I need to be there?” (I don’t know much about Walensa at all.)
I happened to watch the latest Harry Potter movie recently. This line took my breath away:
Soon, we must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy.
-Albus Dumbledore
I sometimes understand and accept there are no “happy endings,” only “happy moments.” š
I will add that not only do you make a difference to all who walk past you, even those who look away, but also to us who read your words here. Thank you.
How often have I heard that we can’t have a movement until we agree on principles? And how often has that seeming obligation for agreement sapped the energy of people from doing what needed to be done?
In reality, successful movements like the civil rights movement, the Vietnam-era anti-war movement, Solidarity, even Gandhi’s movement for Indian independence had only a narrow agreement on principles. Which is why victory in their struggle eventually fragmented the movement.
We don’t need a manifesto. We have the US Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, FDRs Four Freedoms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions. We can start with the agreement that seeing these principles operate in reality is our manifesto of what we minimally require of our government and our society.
Movements are temporary, outside of institutions, and when victory is accomplished, despite persistent efforts to institutionalize the revolution, the revolution moves on.
Leaders are created by movements, not vice-versa. Gandhi did not create the Indian independence movement that he sought to serve; it created him. Martin Luther King did not create the civil rights movement; it had been institutionalized at least as early as 1909; the civil rights movement created Martin Luther King. What movements create in leaders are symbolic representations of the principles of the movement. Martin Luther King was a symbol of fearlessness, accountability for justice, impatience, radical (getting to the root of issues) non-violence. And the leaders of the Vietnam-era anti-war movement were a diverse lot that symbolized the agendas of the various sub-movements brought together in the huge Mobilizations of the 1970s.
A movement is just that–movement, action, moving solutions forward. It has its own chaotic form, shaped by events and agendas and all the efforts of institutions to suppress it or use it for their own ends. It happens when enough people have had enough and decide to do something about it. It happens when fear dies; “freedom ain’t nothing but nothing left to lose.”
That we are having this discussion speaks that the movement already exists and that we need to have discussions about form, methods, strategies, long-term vision (long term being two years or so in current social terms).
In fact, what we are discussing are the rudimentary institutional forms – coordination, cultivating an understanding of nonviolence among police where we act, ensuring the peacefulness of our actions from the manipulations of agents provocateurs, framing the actions through the media, building turnout, training, and facing our worst fears. Knowing full well that those institutional forms will only have life for the duration of the immediate struggle. Those leaders will have currency only in the context of the immediate movement — Lech Walesa struggled as President of Poland.
We must neither be seduced into believing that the 2006 and 2008 elections will solve everything nor that trying to eke out enough of a Democratic victory to get subpoena power will be futile. The 2006 and 2008 election is only one element of a strategy. Thank God (fill in the ultimate thankee of your choice) that NorthDakotaDemocrat has written these diaries.
I see nothing I can add to that except for a “Your Welcome!” to your “thank you.”
Having made a quick visit to your website, and seeing your interests there, I was wondering if you are familiar with Ted Nace’s Gangs of America; The Rise of Corporate Power and the Disabling of Democracy.
I found Gangs of America to be a very readable history and analysis of corporate control of our government and I highly recommend it.
On the Gangs of America website site linked above, there are links below the book cover on the left side of the page.
Using those links, one may read several chapters online, download the whole book free, or purchase it at your local indy bookstore.
BTW, did you catch this?
Really think that Medicare D(isaster) should be included in any type of action.
NDD – I think what you are writing about is very important, so I keep returning to it.
Thinking about the “Obedience” aspect, I have some thoughts.
The “Habit” of obedience is, imo, much deeper than the word habit implies. We have experienced a whole cultural process. We have been taught the cultural myths through family, school, and media stories.
We absorb the “moral” lessons and “fear sanctions.” We absorb the “Moral Obligation” and come to value the “rule of law.” We are taught and absorb “America the Exceptional.”
The “Zone of Indifference” made me think of how much there is to be concerned about. You wrote about some of these. It might not even be we are “indifferent” as much as overwhelmed – outrage after outrage. Where do we direct our energies?
The “absence of self-confidence” component of “obedience,” I think, ties back to the “habit” and our cultural process. We personalize our problems and difficulties. For example, the myth tells us anyone can be “successful” in the US. If you are not “successful,” well then, there must be something wrong with you.
Though “Human beings are not genetically pre-disposed to be submissive., we do have a very strong need to belong.
A very simple action to take if one doesn’t want to support this government and to express displeasure is to send in a blank tax form with a letter explaining that taxes are being with held until … whatever one objects to is corrected.
But that is a solo action. Very scary too. Great confidence would be required.
Interesting things to think about – thanks š
Due to your level of interest I’d highly recommend that you order the book or download from the online link. There is a link to the pdf file at the site of the link in the diary. The whole thing is some 189 pages but I think you when you print off a pdf you can do as many pages at a time as you want, like 0-12, or 170-180.
Gene Sharp’s three book series on nonviolent action are very good also, Power and Struggle, The Methods of Nonviolent Action, The Dynamics of Nonviolent Action. They can be ordered from Powells through the link here at BT, or most any bookstore.
It’s hard to know what to include when trying to condense the gist of someone’s work to diary form. There’s much that I had to leave out to avoid making the diaries overly long, and still they get plenty long.
Attention spans are short these days relative to past times, mine included. And getting shorter. The longer diaries I have to print to hard copy to process them. I just don’t have patience to read them off the screen.
I think you’d really appreciate this woman’s stand. She has already adopted the strategy you mentioned above.
Kathy Kelly was here in ND this winter. She’s a very impressive speaker, and very open to one on one conversation. I hope you have a chance to meet her sometime.
I’ll continue to check back here to the dairy, but it gets sporadic after a while. So feel free to use my email add in my sig line if you find something you think might be a useful addition to the discussion.