These Revolutionary Times is a project of The Political Revolution. Each Sunday, we focus on a small selection of papers, articles, and essays published in various publicly available sources that reflect political change already happening or that we think ought to happen or ought not to happen in 21st Century America. Our goal is to spur people to read these pieces with an open-minded but critical focus and engage here in an interchange of ideas about the issues raised in them.
What do these 5 “Revolutionary” exercisesin democracy have in common?
...
1) The University of California, Davis sidewalk protest, Occupy Movement demonstration:
2) The resignation of advisor Elizabeth Holtzman, over the appalling DHS Border Policies:
When Elizabeth Holtzman was in Congress, she helped write the Refugee Act, which has guided the U.S.'s principles on the issue for nearly four decades.
“There was a time that the US welcomed refugees,” she wrote. “We readily accepted and absorbed more than 600,000 refugees from Cuba, 750,000 refugees from Vietnam, and more than 100,000 Jews from the Soviet Union. … The thought that the US government is afraid today of 2,000 children and their parents is both laughable and appalling.”Holtzman blasted the Trump administration’s “war on refugees and immigrants,” which the former New York City Comptroller said are “ethnically and religiously motivated” and “malign and self-destructive policies.”
“This is child kidnapping, plain and simple,” Holtzman said.
Seizing children from their parents in violation of the constitutional rights of both is bad enough (mentally harmful to the children and infinitely painful to both the parents and children), but doing so without creating proper records to enable family reunification shows utter depravity on the part of the government officials involved.
3) The exercises in Free Speech by the growing contingency of individual Freeway-bloggers:
4) The bootleg taping of Romney’s 47% Freeloaders speech:
5)Thecitizen-driven Call-effort to block the GOP’s repeal of Affordable Health Care:
July 27–28 [2017]: Senate leaders decide to vote on a scaled-down version of an ObamaCare repeal bill, aiming to merge it with the House-passed measure after passage.
While many believe it has the votes to pass, it’s unclear how McCain will vote.
Pence confers intently with McCain before the vote, and later the Arizona senator huddles with Democrats on the Senate floor. When the vote is called, McCain gives a dramatic, deciding thumbs-down. He joins GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) in killing the bill.
—
What do those 5 “Revolutionary” exercises in “self-rule” and “self-determination” have in common?
They are each examples of “non-violent” forms of “protest”, which attracted regional and even national attention. They are each examples of disrupting the gears of governance, by simply doing what your conscience tells you is, the “Right Thing” to do.
They are each examples of Civil Disobedience, which are out of the ordinary in their own right (ie “Revolutionary”), and which were effective in causing significant “change”— that might not have otherwise happened.
Each of us holds a similar capacity for “being such agents of change”— for choosing to do the right thing, when such “disruptive” opportunities arise. Being “revolutionary” merely requires, taking a visible (or verbal) stand, against the background flow of indifference and expediency.
Sometimes, many times, just choosing “get-along-ism” is not enough. Sometimes we need to be “the boulders” in the stream, impeding the way of those who would rather just go “with the flow”…
History is often handed significant “course corrections,” by such civilian boulders— standing in the way of the status-quo — disrupting the platitudes like “that’s just the way things are done”….
——
Take for example, the “civilian boulder” that was Martin Luther King, Jr. He inspired a whole movement of “citizen obstructors” (aka. “nonviolent resistance”) — that eventually led to the passage of the landmark legislation of the Civil Rights Act. All without a rock thrown in retaliation, the historic “mountains of indifference” were moved.
Take for example, the “citizen boulder” that was India’s Mahatma Gandhi. His mantra of “passive resistance” inspired a movement of the “under-classed”— that eventually led to the Independence of his home country, from the foreign “imperial” rulers, who had oppressed them from afar.
Both of these “exemplary” examples of Revolutionaries, claimed to have been personally inspired by the writings of Henry David Thoreau, in the early stages of their “resisting”. Many citizen activists have at one point or another, been inspired to action, by this 19th-century American writer — who espoused non-violence, in the form of “civil disobedience,” as one of the quickest and most effective routes to bring about Real Change.
——
As an eager young student myself in the 70’s, I too was moved by the words of Henry David Thoreau. They awakened in me at the time, a sense of “inner utility”, which previously had been dormant, in the face of the “towering authorities” that occupied my worldview. Thoreau’s words stoked within me a growing realization, that given my ‘station in life’, I did not have to remain a “leaf in the wind”— but that I could dare to blaze my own trail, I could dare to “keep pace … with a different drummer.”
It turns out that Life IS a series of choices. We impact Life, and Life impacts us, according to the individual choices we each make daily. We do not have to be rudder-less flotsam in the political currents, but rather we can sail directly into the head-long breeze.
If.we.so.choose.
Thoreau advocated, living a Life of such choices. To not go with the flow. To speak out against systems of injustice and evil. … Whenever and wherever we may find them.
Thoreau chose to not pay his taxes as a result of his political conscience telling him that the government-endorsed policies on slavery, and the border war —were just plain Wrong.
Thoreau and Civil Disobedience
—
Now where I personally ‘part ways’ with Thoreau, is in his edicts to not participate in ‘the evil Government’ (of his time) — or else you are part of the problem:
• How does it become a man to behave towards the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it.
In philosophical counterpoint to that contemporary view, I would argue: It is plausible that the pursuit of Public Service can be, and often is, a noble calling. One worthy of vigorous effort.
As a government worker myself (in a Natural Resources division), I have several rationales that have kept me on this chosen, and often frugal “life path,” over the wearisome years ... (you know, following that ‘different drummer’ and all that). Those maxims include:
a) Government is only as good and effective as the People in Government are (good and effective).
b) Government will only change for the better, when enough good people step up, and make it so.
c) That Speaking Truth to Power, hasno better stage in which to be heard, than in the recurring administrative and project planning meetings, which basically ARE the gears of Government.
Someone has to keep the ‘Big Wheels’ honest. Someone has challenge their efforts to sweep the interests of the ‘weak and defenseless’ under the rug (which usually comes to the forefront, when Republicans regain control the agenda-setting levers, as in the era we are currently “enduring”).
I do wholeheartedly agree however, with Thoreau’s calls for: independent thought, denouncing the evil that Governments commit in our names, and living a life of Resistance against wheels of an ‘unjust Government machine’ (ie. vocally resisting government’s unjust and/or immoral policies).
A passively compliant citizenry— is a ‘cowed’ and ‘buffaloed’ citizenry. And we all know what happens to cows, at the end of the season.
A passively resistant citizenry— is a whole other matter. They are a force to be reckoned with.
——
For those who’d rather be the charging buffalo, than the aggrieved tourists under its hooves — I give you the scientific studies of Chenoweth and Stephan. They have meticulously measured which forms of protest have been most effective over the years, in bringing about lasting change. Hopefully their studious work, will spark the latent potential languishing within so many Trump-fatigued individuals — most of whom are looking for a glimmer of hope, in these dire times:
The Proven Superiority Of Nonviolent Resistance
by Alex Knapp, Forbes Staff — July 24, 2014
Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan have written an excellent article in Foreign Affairs that is well worth reading. In it, they undertake a systematic study of resistance movements to authoritarian governments in the 20th century in an attempt to determine which methods are more successful in both succeeding and in transitioning to peaceful democracies afterwards.
To study these methods, the authors examined 323 different movements from 1900 to 2006, involving both violent and nonviolent movements that involved more than 1,000 participants for the purpose of "self-determination, the removal of an incumbent leader, or the expulsion of a foreign military occupation."
Their conclusion was that nonviolent movements were twice as likely to succeed as violent movements, and that nonviolent movements often significantly increased the chances of a more peaceful and democratic government emerging in the aftermath.
[...]
"There are many causes that I am prepared to die for, but no causes that I am prepared to kill for."
— Mahatma Gandhi
Here is a graph of their findings, in terms of their varying effectiveness of citizen movements:
Why Civil Resistance Works
by Erica Chenoweth, -- International Relations, Political Violence, and Civil Resistance
Though it defies consensus, between 1900 and 2006, campaigns of nonviolent resistance were more than twice as effective as their violent counterparts. Attracting impressive support from citizens that helps separate regimes from their main sources of power, these campaigns have produced remarkable results, even in the contexts of Iran, the Palestinian Territories, the Philippines, and Burma.
Combining statistical analysis with case studies of these specific countries and territories, Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan detail the factors enabling such campaigns to succeed— and, at times, causing them to fail. They find that nonviolent resistance presents fewer obstacles to moral and physical involvement, information and education, and participator commitment. Higher levels of participation then contribute to enhanced resilience, a greater probability of tactical innovation, increased opportunity for civic disruption (and therefore less incentive for the regime to maintain the status quo), and shifts in loyalty among opponents’ erstwhile supporters, including members of the military establishment. They find successful nonviolent resistance movements usher in more durable and internally peaceful democracies, which are less likely to regress into civil war.
[...]
Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan. Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict(New York, NY: Columbia University Press, August 2011).
Here’s an NPR interview with the authors, that gets into the inter-personal dynamics at work in non-violent, civil resistance movements:
Why Civil Resistance Movements Succeed
npr.org — Aug 21, 2014
Steve Inskeep talks to Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan about why non-violent resistance campaigns work better than armed rebellion. Their article on the subject is in Foreign Affairs magazine.
[...]
INSKEEP: You described how a nonviolent uprising has broader participation— more people, sheer numbers of people. You also write about the types of people who get involved.
STEPHAN: Right, so I mean, nonviolent movements tend to attract the participation of men and women, rich, poor, blue-collar, white collar workers, religious figures— mainly because there are so many different tactics available to groups that engage in civil resistance. In general, the barriers to participation are lower. So we often see you know, women being on the front lines of movements. In Tunisia, the people power movement that ousted Ben Ali — the trade unions played a critical role in launching labor strikes, and then they played a very important role in the peace building that followed. And I think that's an important point to make — that transitions that are driven by active nonviolent means tend to result in societies that are both more democratic and that are less likely to result in civil war after the fact. So they're more peaceful societies as well.
INSKEEP: OK, so Maria Stephan why does an armed rebellion not put that same kind of pressure on an authoritarian government?
STEPHAN: Right, so when you use armed means and violence, it's very hard to co-opt or prompt loyalty shifts within those pillars of support, whether it's security forces or others. And it sort of encourages an even more massive crackdown on the opposition.
I would extend that closing logic, to personal attacks on your opposition too. Attack their worldviews, attack their policies, attack even their political rhetoric —but do not attackthe person(s) opposing you, with vile insults of a personal nature. Not if you ever expect to prompt within them a “loyalty shift”, one that pries open a worldview-window to other more progressive ways of thinking. As the authors note,attacking them only serves to harden their resolve. It will strengthen their “unquestioningly” support towards evermore questionable acts of their cherishedcurrently ‘stuck-with’“Authoritarian leader(s)”. Their extensive study has demonstrated this.
…
If “vilification” must happen, target the opposition’s leaders, not its supporters. Vilify their Leadership’s “bad” actions that result from their “bad” policies. Demand they live up to the commonly-threaded value system, of our diverse citizenry — from whom their assumed (and presumed) power derives.
For example: “Destroying families” as a form of punishment, for committing the simple heroic act of seeking freedom and a better life, is certainly beyond the pale, for most freedom-loving Americans. Surely on this, most will agree: if not for our common immigrant roots, there’s goes our nation. Without this open-door pathway, there goes your family tree.
To be Thoreauvian about it, we should ask our opposition to join us, in making our forthright demands that our leaders live up to America’s ever-evolving and ever-encompassing values, that they live up to their promises to bring about opportunity and liberty for all. So that we can each strive to reach our “true potential” in Life.
Remind them, we share a common heritage, one which demands that we each seek to protect our “undeniable” American rights of: “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Remind them that no “leader” should be allowed to deny us these unique rights. Even ‘the least among us’ have the right to “human dignity”— as in the case the brave and weary asylum seekers, in search of refuge … in search of Liberty … in search of the promise of America.
We musteach be granted the freedom to “keep pace with” our own individual drummers, the Liberty to live up to our own individual potentials — so long as those exploratory “dance-steps”do not infringe upon, the rights and pursuits of others… our simultaneous co-travelers on Life’s brief journey.
It is a “Revolutionary Act”to demand such Rights. Even to the point of Civil Disobedience, if and when our modern-day tyrants would ‘repeal them’ away, despite our demands … despite our Constitutional guarantees.
———
So in summary:
Be the Change you want to see. The world will be a better place, for it.
Speak Truth to Power, with unflinching resolve. Force that arc of the moral Universe to bend towards Justice, and Truth, and ultimately “good governance”— with every defiant decision, we still have the time available to make.
Own your own Life, and your own actions — and Humanity will be the better, for it.
———
• “There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.”
• “For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once well done is done forever.”
• “A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority.”
-- Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience
• "I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good."
-- Martin Luther King Jr.• "Mass civil disobedience is like an earthquake, a sort of general upheaval on the political plane."
-- Mahatma Gandhi• "All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable."
-- Henry David Thoreau• "Civil disobedience has an honorable history, and when the urgency and moral clarity cross a certain threshold, then I think that civil disobedience is quite understandable, and it has a role to play."
-- Al Gore• "You must never be fearful about what you are doing when it is right."
-- Rosa Parks
As always, thanks for reading.
———
Here’s a parting anthem for old-time’s sake, which may still has some salience today, in these modern-day Revolutionary Times—speaking of following ‘different drummers’.
...
Wooden Ships— Crosby Stills Nash and Young
Peace. Out …Resist.