ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

Reflecting on Peace:

Is the reason that reactionary violence should not be met with revolutionary violence that:

a) It doesn't work? Cycles of violence perpetuate themselves. Revolutionary leaders who use violence may win battles, but lose the war.

But: If this is the case, explain Cuba? Explain Yugoslavia, a number of the former east block countries, Russia and the Ukraine, etc., where violent revolution allowed fundamental social change to happen. (Notably, sizeable majorities of people in these countries today, according to polls, are wishing for a return to the society they had under their former post-revolutionary regimes (though polls also seem to say they would like the policies without the party).)

What about China, Vietnam, France, the United States, and the numerous other countries whose entire societies are based on successful, violent revolution?

b) Violence debases the movement and all who participate in it. A just, peaceful society requires abhorrence of, and refusal to engage in, violence. Achievement of a just, humane society requires individuals to make the choice that no cause, and no outcome, is worth the perpetration of violence.

But if so, will we ever achieve a more just, peaceful society? What do we do about the violent elements in our society? Can we really just wish them away? Make them disappear and restrain themselves by our good example? Don't we have to somehow restrain the forces of reaction if we are to achieve human progress? Can that really be done without violence? Has it ever been done without violence?

What about genocide? Ethnic cleansing? If the forces of reaction are engaging in mass extermination, is the answer to sit back and be exterminated?

c) [Your alternative here.]

Those who do not lift their hand against murderers are murderers themselves.

I suggest watching the classic Japanese move Seven Samurai