Photo: flickr.com/photos/vrampersad
MSPs, meetings, memos… These meaningless ways of engaging with the institutions which govern our everyday existence cannot possibly foster any type of change in the fundamental structure of our society.
The brainwash begins when we enter formal education. Not only are we conditioned to accept a highly regimented schedule as the best way to organize the day, preparing us like rats for the ‘adult’ world of a full time job, but that polite hand-raising and quiet agreement with policy is enough to affect change.
Antiquated styles of protest, such as marches, hand-held signs, and gatherings, are now powerless to effect real change because they have become such a predictable part of the status quo.
Those yearning for change, who cannot accept this bruised-apple version of the world, who will not wait the many years for legislation to be approved, seek more immediate solutions through direct action.
Direct action involves activities like sabotage, strikes, workplace occupation, sit-ins, street demonstrations, spray painting, and squatting. Contrast this with indirect action, such as electing representatives to spew half-truths and inconsistencies.
Direct action can become violent and thus a form of civil disobedience, but many famous incidents of direct action have been non-violent in nature.
Mahatma Gandhi pioneered the philosophy of Satyagraha, “resistance to evil through active, non-violent resistance”. His methods of non-cooperation, peaceful resistances and fasting brought attention to India and its strife, both externally and internally. Would the same result have been produced by petitions and pamphlets?
As Martin Luther King Jr. said: “Non-violent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.”
There are times when the message non-violence conveys softly cannot be heard, or is deliberately ignored by those meant to be listening. Sometimes brute force must be countered with brute force, their machines disabled and production ceased, if only for a while.
But to invoke Bill Clinton, it depends on what your definition of violence is. The Animal Liberation Front, a leaderless resistance who commits direct action on behalf of animals, claims to be a non-violent movement.
Classified as a domestic terrorist threat by the United States Department of Homeland Security in 1995, activists speaking on the behalf of the ALF declare that no one has even been harmed. Despite numerous arsons, sabotage of laboratory testing facilities and removing animals from fur farms or laboratories, their philosophy is that violence can only take place against living forms, not lifeless property.
Through out history, the change and upheaval jostling progress ever forward have always been ignited by civil disobedience, disregard for established mores and perhaps a few running battles between civilians and police.
People discover the benefits of acting directly to achieve their goals instead of politely waiting for politicians and businessmen to consider their requests.
If voting changed anything, it would be illegal.
Published in Veritas December 2008 Issue 100
Be the change you want to see in the world
14 01 2009Photo: flickr.com/photos/vrampersad
MSPs, meetings, memos… These meaningless ways of engaging with the institutions which govern our everyday existence cannot possibly foster any type of change in the fundamental structure of our society.
The brainwash begins when we enter formal education. Not only are we conditioned to accept a highly regimented schedule as the best way to organize the day, preparing us like rats for the ‘adult’ world of a full time job, but that polite hand-raising and quiet agreement with policy is enough to affect change.
Antiquated styles of protest, such as marches, hand-held signs, and gatherings, are now powerless to effect real change because they have become such a predictable part of the status quo.
Those yearning for change, who cannot accept this bruised-apple version of the world, who will not wait the many years for legislation to be approved, seek more immediate solutions through direct action.
Direct action involves activities like sabotage, strikes, workplace occupation, sit-ins, street demonstrations, spray painting, and squatting. Contrast this with indirect action, such as electing representatives to spew half-truths and inconsistencies.
Direct action can become violent and thus a form of civil disobedience, but many famous incidents of direct action have been non-violent in nature.
Mahatma Gandhi pioneered the philosophy of Satyagraha, “resistance to evil through active, non-violent resistance”. His methods of non-cooperation, peaceful resistances and fasting brought attention to India and its strife, both externally and internally. Would the same result have been produced by petitions and pamphlets?
As Martin Luther King Jr. said: “Non-violent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.”
There are times when the message non-violence conveys softly cannot be heard, or is deliberately ignored by those meant to be listening. Sometimes brute force must be countered with brute force, their machines disabled and production ceased, if only for a while.
But to invoke Bill Clinton, it depends on what your definition of violence is. The Animal Liberation Front, a leaderless resistance who commits direct action on behalf of animals, claims to be a non-violent movement.
Classified as a domestic terrorist threat by the United States Department of Homeland Security in 1995, activists speaking on the behalf of the ALF declare that no one has even been harmed. Despite numerous arsons, sabotage of laboratory testing facilities and removing animals from fur farms or laboratories, their philosophy is that violence can only take place against living forms, not lifeless property.
Through out history, the change and upheaval jostling progress ever forward have always been ignited by civil disobedience, disregard for established mores and perhaps a few running battles between civilians and police.
People discover the benefits of acting directly to achieve their goals instead of politely waiting for politicians and businessmen to consider their requests.
If voting changed anything, it would be illegal.
Published in Veritas December 2008 Issue 100