On May 9, 2:00 pm, ta <padl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 9, 11:24 am, "*Anarcissie*" <anarcis...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 8, 9:34 pm, ta <padl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On May 8, 7:24 pm, "*Anarcissie*" <anarcis...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >>>>> ....
> > > > > > > > > So what to do? NO THING at all.
>
> > > > > > > > According to you, then, the African-Americans of the South
> > > > > > > > in the 1950s and 1960s should have accepted racism,
> > > > > > > > segregation, and lynching and done nothing about them,
> > > > > > > > except think good thoughts. Their Civil Rights movement,
> > > > > > > > which actually did secure equal legal and political rights
> > > > > > > > for them by making a lot of real trouble, was a waste of
> > > > > > > > time.
>
> > > > > > > > Is that what you want to say?
>
> > > > > > > Speaking only for myself . . . no, the AAs of the South
should not
> > > > > > > have accepted racism. But that is a good example of viral
change -- it
> > > > > > > all started with a change in consciousness, and that spread
outward,
> > > > > > > causing the "out there" to change for the better.
>
> > > > > > > The civil rights movement was about individuals refusing to
sit at the
> > > > > > > back of the bus etc., and the political system was forced to
react to
> > > > > > > the change sparked by those individuals. Politics is never
the cause
> > > > > > > of the change -- politics is always reactionary; a lagging
indicator
> > > > > > > of change engendered by individuals.
>
> > > > > > Politics is the theory and practice of determining whose
> > > > > > will shall prevail (in a community). In the pre-Civil Rights
> > > > > > South, some people desired to keep things as they were
> > > > > > ("Accept what is", as Sean put it) and others desired to
> > > > > > change the existing arrangments. The struggle between
> > > > > > these two groups was a political struggle.
>
> > > > > > Now, if you believe in accepting what is, and then say
> > > > > > that the Civil Rights activists were right to resist racism
> > > > > > as they did, by making a lot of very public trouble about
> > > > > > it, then you've plainly contradicted yourself. Perhaps
> > > > > > you can resolve this contradiction?
>
> > > > > > In any case, it is plain that the Civil Rights movement
> > > > > > did achieve many of its aims, which contradicts other
> > > > > > claims made here (or apparently made -- the writing
> > > > > > is somewhat vague).
>
> > > > > Sean can speak for himself, but here are my thoughts . . .
taking
> > > > > action (such as civil disobedience) is the natural result of a
change
> > > > > in consciousness (inward focus). I personally never said that
one
> > > > > never takes action -- I said that trying to control other
people's
> > > > > lives (politics) to solve problems that are rooted inwardly is a
> > > > > mistake. Is resisting unequal treatment trying to control other
> > > > > people? I don't think so.
>
> > > > It's certainly an attempt to affect their behavior.
>
> > > Civil disobedience, in its purest sense, is an act of self-assertion
> > > -- not as an attempt to control other people, but as an attempt to
> > > assert one's positive self-image. That other people's behaviour
> > > changes is an effect of the inner work that resulted in that self-
> > > esteem.
>
> > So you don't agree at all with Sean's "do nothing". Not
> > only do you think activism can be a good thing, but you
> > have very specific ideas about how it should be carried
> > out -- "Become the world you want to see," as Gandhi,
> > a person who got involved in all kinds of material,
> > worldly, public actions, supposedly put it. A good idea
> > but not too specific -- and thus we get back to the
> > question I asked so long ago, "What are we (you, I,
> > etc.) going to do about it?"
>
> I can only repeat what I have already said above:
>
> "You want me to tell you what to do? If I do that, then I become your
> "authority", and I assure you I have no interest in that (nor am I
> qualified to offer such advice, since I am a work in progress myself).
> Besides, any behaviour that resulted from your actions would then not
> be authentic, and would therefore be ultimately unsatisfying.
>
> The answer to the question "what is to be done" can only be answered
> by you as a result of your inner work, and since your results may be
> different from mine, it's not my place to say."
I wasn't asking to be told what to do. I have been
asking if you had any specific ideas about dealing with
the specific situation we find ourselves in. To repeat
my example, people are stealing my money and using
it to kill other people; I consider this to be a significant
problem. It is true I can sit in my house and think nice
thoughts, but I have my doubts about the effectiveness
of that strategy.
If you have no ideas, you could always answer "No."
|
