Dr. King certainly showed that African-Americans can implement nonviolent revolutionary change. The 1960s showed that.Of course its possible Ghandi proved it. What isn't possible is for AAs to implement that kind of policy and stay with it in the same way that the Indians did.
Maybe because the system that Ghandi opposed was less obstinate or because the temperament of the people attempting it differ or both.
What I wonder is whether a nonviolent movement cutting across racial barriers is possible in the USA.
Yessir. You are already a part of it, right here, right now. Don't loose your focus or allow yourself to be sidetracked with gadgetry or fluff. Strengthen your spirit, stick to your guns. The door has already been opened for us, all we need do is walk through.That is a question with which Dr. King struggled during his entire life as a Movement leader.
But is REVOLUTION possible withut spilling rivers of blood? Or are revolutions ALWAYS bloody, as Malcolm X seesm to imply in his famous "Message to the Grassroots" speech?...
But can it be accomplished by NONVIOLENT means?
Interestingly enough, popular insurgency has spread in lands like Egypt and Tunisia where there's not even the PRETENSE of a free press, and no constitutional gurantees. New technologies seem to offer means of communicating, uniting and resisting repressive power which exceed anything previous movements have had available.Wisconsin... daily I hope to see this thing grow, Yanks standing up in the same old tradition, and it was a NON-VIOLENT tradition even before Gandhi and King, if you consider for example the labor movement.
Faced with superior force, you have only RIGHT on your side. Justice... In the West with a free press rolling, power sometimes has to respect the will of the people energetically expressed.
In WS they have the energy! It's great to see it.
Let's see more! Let's assume that our govt isn't going to send mercenaries and artillery after us for demanding that the USA's promises of freedom be fulfilled...
I imagine that even a Hitler or a Stalin would have a harder time suppressing all the technologies that are available to oppositional movements today. And even if they succeeded their success might have been more short lived.
While reading THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., I noted King's uncertain speculations as to whether nonviolent revolutions are possible in a TOTALITARIAN police state. He's not sure, though he thinks it might be. With current technologies in an era in which autocratic Leninist methods, UNDISGUISED fascism, and apparently Islamist fundamentalism and terrorism are increasingly discredited, history may be proving Dr. King right.
Even police states are not immune to nonviolent resistance. At least MANY are not, though the situation in Libya seems to suggest a troubling exception (like Rumania in 1989)
You stated here good reasons why we need a Revolution, hopefully a NONVIOLENT revolution. When predators are bailed out but the people upon whom they prey are abandoned, and when people become mere numbers or commodities, we need a RADICAL TRANSFORMATION to restore humanity to the world, to establish respect for the dignity of the human personality.Good morning Dr. Savant,
It's quite interesting to hear about "thing-orientated" society.
It's seems we got conceived by things when we were busy consuming things.
I saw a documentary that stated how almost every bank/investment firms were practicing predatory lending practices and we people just became numbers. The sad thing is they got bailed out but people didn't. Seems like there is good food for scavengers who flip even the foreclosure properties. Some are still filling the belly and becoming fat.
The revolution is needed but I don't see it's easy. I always question if govt could have helped REAL people ?
What was the name of the person who led the move toward partition? I can't see what he and his followers gained from it. Is it true that he threatened to start a civil war in India of Indian leaders opposed the partition?It's interesting that you mention Abdul Ghaffar Khan. He was an freedom fighter(Indian independence) and believed in non-violence. He believed in Hindu-Muslim unity and was against India's paritition. For this he was called a traitor by Muslims(Pakistanis) and after partition, he spend most of his life being prosecuted by Pakistani governement. He spend many years in prison and even DIED while he was in house arrest. This is the way Pakistan repay for a non-violent freedom fighter who spend most of his life for the country and to uplift his community(pashtuns). Even today, you can see the similar kind of intolerance in pakistan and everyday you can hear people killing each other for religion.
Indian govt honored him with the highest award that can be given to any citizen, he was first non-citizen to receive Bharat Ratna.
Anyway Muslims in India are mostly non-violent and have culture similar to the areas where they live. They aren't involved in any terrorism but most terrorism in India is mostly carried by pakistanis. Anyway, I feel there is disgusting language used on internet on al Muslims and I'm sure it will be difficult to be Muslim at this age.
At any rate, I'm glad that the people in Muslim countries fighting tyranny today seems to have rejected Islamic fundamentalism aand terror in favor of nonviolence. Too bad their governments aren't exactly sold on the idea of nonviolence.
Last night I heard reported that in Bahrain some Muslims first had a prayer meeting, and then left their mosque for a NONVIOLENT protest---a nonviolent protest answered by repressive violence of Saudi troops. I should like to see a wave of democratic revolution sweep through Saudi Arabia.
Perhaps the Muslim peoples are simply learning that violence and terrorism is a dead end, and that one is more likely to accomplish freedom by nonviolence resistance than by spilling rivers of human blood.
I commend them...and LOATHE their rulers.