Dohiyi Mir

Standing Man

AP:

After weeks of sometimes violent confrontation with police, protesters in Turkey have found what could be a more potent form of resistance: standing still.

The trend was launched by performance artist Erdem Gunduz, who stood silently for hours in Istanbul's central Taksim Square on Monday night, in passive defiance of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's violent crackdown on environmental protesters at a park adjacent to Taksim. The square has been sealed off from protesters since police cleared it over the weekend, though pedestrians can still enter.

As Gunduz stood there, others gradually began to join him — and later to replicate his protest in other cities in a wave of imitation driven by social media.

Reminiscent of Tankman and Las Madres.  Wonder what we can learn from Turkey...

ntodd

* Tenth Blegiversary Fundraiser: Donate today, or we get rid of the kittens! *

The Cave

Haven't done so much retrospective as I'd intended, but here's one I thought worth revisiting:

We are influenced by shadows in our society: puppet theater our contemporary jesters foist on the somnambulant public in the form of blogs, sports, movies, TV sitcoms, Lifetime dramas, the war on CNN, the meltdown on CNBC, bobbleheads on the Sunday talk shows, crossword puzzles in the Sunday Times...religion ain't the only opiate today with all the circuses we can enjoy at the click of a remote or a mouse.  Sometimes prisoners escape our modern metaphorical cave, but what of it?

Gotta escape and do something, man.

ntodd

* Tenth Blegiversary Fundraiser: Donate today, or we get rid of the kittens! *

I'm Already Against The Next War

We claim Syria has used chemical weapons.  Even if Libya turned out okay, I am still against intervention and will continue to look for another hammer other than violence.

ntodd

* Tenth Blegiversary Fundraiser: Donate today, or we get rid of the kittens! *

At Least Smuts Made The Trains Run On Time

Gandhi's first act of civil disobedience (1893):

A first class seat was booked for me. It was usual there to pay five shillings extra, if one needed a bedding. Abdulla Sheth insisted that I should book one bedding but, out of obstinacy and pride and with a view to saving five shillings, I declined. Abdulla Sheth warned me. 'Look, now,' said he, 'this is a different country from India. Thank God, we have enough and to spare. Please do not stint yourself in anything that you may need.'

I thanked him and asked him not to be anxious. The train reached Maritzburg, the capital of Natal, at about 9 p.m. Beddings used to be provided at this station. A railway servant came and asked me if I wanted one. 'No,' said I, 'I have one with me.' He went away. But a passenger came next, and looked me up and down. He saw that I was a 'coloured' man. This disturbed him. Out he went and came in again with one or two officials. They all kept quiet, when another official came to me and said, 'Come along, you must go to the van compartment.'

'But I have a first class ticket,' said I.

'That doesn't matter,' rejoined the other. 'I tell you, you must go to the van compartment.'

'I tell you, I was permitted to travel in this compartment at Durban, and I insist on going on in it.'

'No, you won't,' said the official. 'You must leave this compartment, or else I shall have to call a police constable to push you out.'

'Yes, you may. I refuse to get out voluntarily.'

The constable came. He took me by the hand and pushed me out. My luggage was also taken out. I refused to go to the other compartment and the train steamed away. I went and sat in the waiting room, keeping my hand-bag with me, and leaving the other luggage where it was. The railway authorities had taken charge of it.

And the rest, as they say, is history...

ntodd

* Tenth Blegiversary Fundraiser: Donate today, or we get rid of the kittens! *

Tankman And Defeat

1989:

[T]he defeat of the student movement cannot fully be explained by the violence used to send it underground or into exile, for many other nonviolent movements in the twentieth century deflected repression and endured to fight another day. Erratic and divided leadership, that believed more in the power of the moment than seeing the right moment to apply power, was at least as great a problem. This overconfidence diverted student leaders from the necessary work of organization and strategy. Had they seen the value of recruiting support from other parts of society - workers in transport and communication, civil servants, and, most important, the police and the military - they might have consolidated their gains and opted to develop a broader challenge not confined to Tiananmen, a convenient venue for repression.

Failing to appreciate or plan for the possibility of repression was an error in itself, but it also freed the students to indulge in whatever provocative action seemed enticing. Inflammatory gestures such as erecting, opposite Mao's Mausoleum, a "Goddess of Democracy," a replica of America's Statue of Liberty, doubtless antagonized the regime while not changing any facts on the ground. In short, while the students were familiar with the most obvious forms of nonviolent action - occupying public spaces, hunger strikes and playing to the international media - their decisions in using these sanctions did not reflect "any significant degree of strategic thinking..."

The failure of strategy at the moment of crisis kept echoing throughout its aftermath. The government's use of repression taught the wrong lesson to many about how rights and democracy should be pursued. In 1999 one former protestor called himself "a victim of June 4," since he was fired and prevented from getting another job; he had decided that "the only path for China was. . .cautious, progressive liberalization." Even the flammable Wu'er Kaixi, who fled China and later had to pump gas and wait on tables in California, succumbed to lower expectations. Explaining why he hoped that Beijing would not be forced to acknowledge its Tiananmen savagery, he said that doing so might only set back gradual reforms. And he wanted to return home. "I think if everything goes okay, I'll be able to go home in five years. If something happens, if there are demonstrations and another crackdown, it will take longer."

But that view genuflected to the regime's version of history: that the use of nonviolent action risks violent upheaval, that popular action to seek human rights and democracy is the enemy of unspecified gradual change. Gandhi in India thought otherwise; if he had not, his followers would never have learned how to undermine the basis of British domination. At exactly the moment when the revolutionary potential of nonviolent power seems hopeless, there are always a determined few who will not be persuaded by repression to give up - and in the long run it takes only a few to reignite the motives and means of change.

As Gandhi said: “Heroes are made in the hour of defeat. Success is, therefore, well described as a series of glorious defeats."  One must keep fighting, with good tactics and strategy...

ntodd

* Tenth Blegiversary Fundraiser: Donate today, or we get rid of the kittens! *

Speaking Of Gandhi And Kokesh

Couple quick links:

• Yeah, about those differences of opinion (and stunts).
• Since I love historical fiction and all its flaws, here's a nice analysis of Gandhi.

FWIW.

ntodd

Explaining Fasting To My Toddler

I explained this morning to Sam that I was fasting for the next few days.  When he realized I wouldn't be eating he replied, "but you CAN eat!"  I agreed, and noted that I had the freedom to decide not to as well.  I told him I was doing it because there were some other people who had no freedom that I wanted to help, and it's one way to show solidarity with those who can only exercise power like this (something a toddler who often refuses to eat actually understands quite well).

I spared him this history from Gene Sharp's The Politics of Nonviolent Action:

Fasting was on several occasions...practiced by American colonists...[In response] to the action of some Bostonians in dumping tea belonging to the East India Company into Boston harbor, the British government had decided to close the port of Boston on June 1, 1774, and published the Boston Port Act to that end.

This news reached Virginia while the House of Burgesses was in session.  Thomas Jefferson later wrote that the lead in the House was no longer being left to the older members.  A small group of younger members which included Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, Jefferson himself, and four or five others, met to consider what to do.  They were determined to take a bold, unequivocal stand in support of Massachusetts.  As Jefferson described it, they gathered to

consult on the proper measures in the council chamber...We were under the conviction of the necessity of arousing our people from the lethargy into which they had fallen as to passing events; and thought that the appointment of a day of general fasting and prayer would be most likely to call up & alarm their attention.  No example of such a solemnity had existed since the days of our distresses in the war [against the French] of [17]55, since which a new generation had grown up...

After [the Governor dissolved the House to prevent it from taking other "hostile" actions], the members of the House met elsewhere and agreed to call for a meeting of an American Congress of Deputies for all colonies; and they returned to their own districts to arouse the clergymen and people to patriotic feelings...

Later Jefferson himself wrote: "The people met generally, with anxiety & alarm in their countenances, and the effect of the day thro' the whole colony was like a shock of electricity, arousing every man & placing him erect & solidly on his centre."

Fasting is not a very direct form of intervention that will immediately bring desired results, obviously.  Yet one must remember that humans are creatures with a complex psychology, so even symbolic actions can provide a great deal of moral force.  

We put pressure upon opponents, who sometimes view themselves as highly moral and doing the right thing.  It's particularly important when trying to reach out to those in power that passive efforts like calling and writing, while valuable, gain a bit more force if they are backed up with action that shows your own skin in the game.  If somebody living a relatively comfortable life decides to sacrifice, even just a day or two or few of normal necessities like eating, it carries more weight than a mere registration of opinion.  It can also be a down payment of sorts on future, escalated actions.

Fasts can also have impact on allies.  Fasting shows solidarity with each other (and of course with the hunger strikers in this case, though I doubt they get news about it), and can even convince some people who agree with our position to become more actively engaged.  Again, if somebody makes a deliberate choice to forego food, it makes more of an impression than mere exhortation to do something.  It can encourage people to consider making a little extra effort to change things, even if it doesn't involve fasting.

I hope Sam and Sadie learn as they grow up that they can give up things, even necessary things, if they find a cause worth fighting for.  Because there will always be a struggle for justice.

And so...can you join over 1300 people trying to hold Obama's feet to the fire on Gitmo?  Even if he's making some encouraging noises, speeches are not action.  It is a useful exercise to continue reminding him and the American people that we are all morally responsible for some reprehensible policies--even if they began under Bush and Congress is dragging its feet--and we have the power to change them.

ntodd

Medea, Of Course, Is My Hero

Funny to see Democrats upset at my friend, that "young lady", getting in Obama's grill about Gitmo and drones.  Guess such "stunts" were only fun when Bush was in office...

ntodd

Another Fast For Slow Justice

A few days ago I committed to my first fast in a couple years:

I pledge to join the global hunger strike and actions for justice for Guantanamo prisoners by fasting for at least 24 hours.

I acknowledge that I will never know what it is like to hunger strike under conditions as inhumane as those within Guantanamo, but hereby join the global hunger strike in hopes that it, among a variety of other efforts, will provide an impetus for policy change.

I call on President Obama to release the 86 prisoners who have been cleared for release, formally charge and try the remaining prisoners in fair and open proceedings, and close the shameful prison in Guantanamo -- as he promised to do when he ran for office.

Usual caveats about effectiveness, expectations, the need for escalating, strategic action, etc.

Anyway, I'm going to enjoy our regular meal with Papa tomorrow night, then not break my fast until Monday morning.  Not a long one, but I need to show solidarity with the victims of our immoral policies down in Cuba as well as my Pink sisters and brothers, plus it's always something that breaks up the mundane routines of a comfortable life and realigns perspective.

For those of you who remember my old 198 Sundays feature at Pax, which highlighted a different Method of nonviolent action each week, this would be an example of the "lowest" level of the tactic: the fast of moral pressure.  Compare and contrast to the hunger strikes going on to our south, and Gandhi's satyagrahic form.

ntodd

Actually, Mr Kokesh, That's Not Entirely Accurate

ThinkProgress:

Kokesh answered the Washington Post through a series of text messages:

Suppose the D.C. police, as they have promised, block the marchers from crossing into Washington? How should they respond?

“With Satyagraha,” Kokesh, 31, texted The Washington Post. That is a term used by Mahatma Gandhi to describe his strategy of nonviolent resistance to British rule in India. [...]

Did his response of “satyagraha” mean violence is unacceptable?

“Only if absolutely necessary in defense of life or limb,” he wrote.

'tis true that Gandhi did not absolutely rule out violence as a tool, but in a very limited context:

I have...not hesitated to say that it is better to be violent if there is violence in our breasts than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. Violence is any day preferable to impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent.

In contrast:

Satyagraha is a weapon of the strong; it admits of no violence under any circumstance whatever; and it ever insists upon truth.

If you wish to wrap yourself in the trappings of Gandhian satyagraha, I recommend understanding it a little better... 

ntodd