WAWA/WeAreWideAwake is my Public Service to America as a muckracker who has journeyed seven times to Israel Palestine since June 2005.
WAWA is dedicated to confronting media and governments that shield the whole
truth.
We who Are Wide
Awake are compelled by the "fierce urgency of Now" [Rev MLK, Jr.] to raise
awareness and promote the human dialogue about many of the crucial issues of our
day: the state of our Union and in protection of democracy, what life is like
under military occupation in Palestine, the Christian EXODUS from the Holy Land,
and spirituality-from a Theologically Liberated Christian Anarchist
POV.
"Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all...and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave...a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils." George Washington's Farewell Address - 1796
"My aim is to agitate & disturb people. I'm not selling bread, I'm selling yeast." Unamuno
"Imagine All the People Sharing All the World." John Lennon
"If enough Christians followed the gospel, they could bring any state to its knees." Father Philip Francis Berrigan
"You can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won't back down." Tom Petty
"If I can't dance, it's not my revolution." Emma Goldman
"We have yet to begin to IMAGINE the power and potential of the Internet." Charlie Rose, 2005
Only in Solidarity do "We have it in our power to begin the world again" Tom Paine
"Never doubt that a few, thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead
"You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free." John 8:32
DO SOMETHING!
Photo of George shown here and in web site banner courtesy of Debbie Hill, 2000.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that, among these, are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; and, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it. -July 4, 1776. The Declaration of Independence
February 1-2, 2009: Christianity, Anarchy, Tolstoy and Day
Anarchy is best
understood as Rebellion against UNJUST laws. The Yang/male force of
anarchy resists authority and causes disorder and is socially and politically
incorrect by the norms of the status quo for it seeks the higher ground of
justice.
The Yin/feminine force of anarchy births a new order out of the chaos and chaos
is creativity in action.- excerpted from Memoirs of a Nice Irish American ‘Girl’s’ Life in Occupied Territory
I wrote down the above before I even knew about Christian Anarchism.
“How can you kill people, when it is written in God’s commandment:‘Thou shalt not murder’?”– Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God Is Within You
Tolstoy
greatly influenced Dorothy Day and is one of many pioneers in the
global Christian liberation movement understood as Christian Anarchism.
Christian anarchists know inner freedom comes by way of doing
the teachings of Jesus for Christianity is more than a religion; it
offers a new vision of life.
Christian anarchists are critical of outer authority, be it Church or Government.
All individuals have free will and can choose whether or not to seek, knock and the door will be open as Jesus said when he spoke about how all of us can directly communicate with God.
Jesus envisioned a society based on love and tolerance, which is completely incompatible with war and all violence.
When
Jesus was mocked, whipped and nailed to a cross and remained NONVIOLENT
he was over throwing the status quo of violent retaliation and
eye-for-an-eye mentality.
Not many of his followers have been
able to drink from that cup of The Prince of Peace, which is another
name for Jesus Christ who commanded his followers to LOVE all people
and to forgive in order to be forgiven.
Tolstoy
understood that the command "Thou shalt not murder" meant that all
governments who wage war are directly affronting the Christian
principles that should guide all life, and shouldn't being pro-life
really be about honoring the sacredness of every life that already is?
In The Kingdom of God is within You, Tolstoy wrote:
“That
this social order with its pauperism, famines, prisons, gallows,
armies, and wars is necessary to society; that still greater disaster
would ensue if this organization were destroyed; all this is said only
by those who profit by this organization, while those who suffer from
it – and they are ten times as numerous – think and say quite the
contrary.”
Tolstoy understood that NONVIOLENCE was the solution
to nationalism whose very essence reeks of superiority and that is NOT
Christian.
Tolstoy also critiqued the heresy of the church of
his time,“Nowhere nor in anything, except in the assertion of the
Church, can we find that God or Christ founded anything like what
churchmen understand by the Church.”
The Kingdom of God Is Within You was banned in Russia and was first published in Germany in 1894. It is the culmination of thirty years of Tolstoy's meditating/thinking about the Christian life.
He
offered a new organization for society based on a literal
interpretation of what Jesus said and when Christianity is lived
rightly it looks a lot like anarchism.
What follows are a few excerpts [emphasis mine] from Tolstoy's THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS WITHIN YOU: CHRISTIANITY NOT AS A MYSTIC RELIGION BUT AS A NEW THEORY OF LIFE
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”– John 8:32
I
do not believe, and consider as mistaken, the Church’s doctrine, which
is usually called Christianity. Among the many points in which this
doctrine falls short of the doctrine of Christ [is] the principal one
the absence of any commandment of non-resistance to evil by force.
The
perversion of Christ’s teaching by the teaching of the Church is more
clearly apparent in this than in any other point of difference...I knew
what had been said on the subject by the fathers of the Church –
Origen, Tertullian, and others – I knew too of the existence of some
so-called sects of Mennonites, Herrnhuters, and Quakers, who do not
allow a Christian the use of weapons, and do not enter military
service...
...There are many reasons why Christ’s
teaching is not understood...But the principal reason, which is the
source of all the other mistaken ideas about it, is the notion that
Christianity is a doctrine that can be accepted or rejected without any
change of life...Christ’s teaching is not only a doctrine that gives
rules that a man must follow, it unfolds a new meaning in life, and
defines a whole world of human activity quite different from all that
has preceded it and appropriate to the period on which man is entering.
The
life of humanity changes and advances, like the life of the individual,
by stages, and every stage has a theory of life appropriate to it,
which is inevitably absorbed by men. Those who do not absorb it
consciously, absorb it unconsciously. It is the same with the changes
in the beliefs of peoples and of all humanity as it is with the changes
of belief of individuals. If the father of a family continues to be
guided in his conduct by his childish conceptions of life, life becomes
so difficult for him that he involuntarily seeks another philosophy and
readily absorbs that which is appropriate to his age. That is just what
is happening now to humanity at this time of transition through which
we are passing...
“It is unreasonable,” says the socialized man,
“to sacrifice my welfare and that of my family and my country in order
to fulfill some higher law, which requires me to renounce my most
natural and virtuous feelings of love of self, of family, of kindred,
and of country; and above all, it is unsafe to part with the security
of life afforded by the organization of government.”
But the
time is coming when, on one hand, the vague consciousness in his soul
of the higher law, of love to God and his neighbor, and, on the other
hand, the suffering, resulting from the contradictions of life, will
force the man to reject the social theory and to assimilate the new one
prepared ready for him, which solves all the contradictions and removes
all his sufferings – the Christian theory of life.
And this time has now come.
...We
think today that the requirements of the Christian doctrine – of
universal brotherhood, suppression of national distinctions, abolition
of private property, and the strange injunction of non-resistance to
evil by force – demand what is impossible.
...The time will
come – it is already coming – when the Christian principles of equality
and fraternity, community of property, non-resistance of evil by force,
will appear just as natural and simple as the principles of family or
social life seem to us now.
Humanity can no more go backward in
its development than the individual man. Men have outlived the social,
family, and state conceptions of life. Now they must go forward and
assimilate the next and higher conception of life, which is what is now
taking place.
This change is brought about in two ways: consciously through spiritual causes, and unconsciously through material causes.
...Humanity
has outgrown its social stage and has entered upon a new period. It
recognizes the doctrine that ought to be made the basis of life in this
new period. But through inertia it continues to keep up the old forms
of life. From this inconsistency between the new conception of life
and practical life follows a whole succession of contradictions and
sufferings that embitter our life and necessitate its alteration.
One
need only compare the practice of life with the theory of it, to be
dismayed at the glaring antagonism between our conditions of life and
our conscience.
Our whole life is in flat contradiction with all
we know, and with all we regard as necessary and right. This
contradiction runs through everything, in economic life, in political
life, and in international life...we do the very opposite of all that
our conscience and our common sense require of us.
We are guided
in economical, political, and international questions by the principles
that were appropriate to men of three or five thousand years ago,
though they are directly opposed to our conscience and the conditions
of life in which we are placed today.
...Men of ancient and
medieval times believed, firmly believed, that men are not equal, that
the only true men are Persians, or Greeks, or Romans, or Franks. But
we cannot believe that now. And people who sacrifice themselves for
the principles of aristocracy and of patriotism today don’t believe and
can’t believe what they assert...we know and cannot escape knowing the
fundamental truth of the Christian doctrine, that we are all sons of
one Father, wherever we may live and whatever language we may speak; we
are all brothers and are subject to the same law of love implanted by
our common Father in our hearts.
Whatever the opinions and
degree of education of a man of today, whatever his shade of
liberalism, whatever his school of philosophy, or of science, or of
economics, however ignorant or superstitious he may be, every man of
the present day knows that all men have an equal right to life and the
good things of life, and that one set of people are no better nor worse
than another, that all are equal.
Everyone knows this, beyond
doubt; everyone feels it in his whole being. Yet at the same time
everyone sees all round him the division of men...
...The
more delicate a man’s conscience is, the more painful this
contradiction is to him. A man of sensitive conscience must suffer if
he lives such a life. The only means by which he can escape from this
suffering is by blunting his conscience, but even if some men succeed
in dulling their conscience they cannot dull their fears.
The
men of the higher dominating classes, whose consciences are naturally
not sensitive or have become blunted, if they don’t suffer through
conscience, suffer from fear and hatred. They are bound to suffer...
A
man must suffer when his whole life is defined beforehand for him by
laws, which he must obey under threat of punishment, though he does not
believe in their wisdom or justice, and often clearly perceives their
injustice, cruelty, and artificiality...
Count Komarovsky, the professor of international law, writes in his learned treatise:
“We
live in a time that is full of inconsistencies. The press of all
countries is continually expressing the universal desire for peace, and
the general sense of its necessity for all nations. Representatives of
governments, private persons, and official organs say the same thing;
it is repeated in parliamentary debates, diplomatic correspondence, and
even in state treaties. At the same time governments are increasing
the strength of their armies every year, levying fresh taxes, raising
loans, and leaving as a bequest to future generations the duty of
repairing the blunders of the senseless policy of the present. What a
striking contrast between words and deeds! Of course governments will
plead in justification of these measures that all their expenditure and
armament are exclusively for purposes of defense. But it remains a
mystery to every disinterested man from where they can expect attacks
if all the great powers are single-hearted in their policy, in pursuing
nothing but self-defense. In reality it looks as if each of the great
powers were every instant anticipating an attack on the part of the
others. And this results in a general feeling of insecurity and
superhuman efforts on the part of each government to increase their
forces beyond those of the other powers. Such a competition of itself
increases the danger of war. Nations cannot endure the constant
increase of armies for long, and sooner or later they will prefer
war...it is a mistaken idea that such a crisis might deliver us from
the political and economical troubles that are crushing us. The
experience of the wars of latter years teaches us that every war has
only intensified national hatreds, made military burdens more crushing
and insupportable, and rendered the political and economical position
of Europe more grievous and insoluble.”
...The
antagonism between life and the conscience may be removed in two ways:
by a change of life or by a change of conscience...
...in
the words of the Gospel, “They have loved darkness better than light
because their deeds were evil.” This principle shows itself in men not
trying to recognize the truth, but to persuade themselves that the life
they are leading, which is what they like and are used to, is a life
perfectly consistent with truth.
Slavery was opposed to all the
moral principles advocated by Plato and Aristotle, yet neither of them
saw that, because to renounce slavery would have meant the break up of
the life they were living. We see the same thing in our modern world.
The
division of men into two castes and the use of force in government and
war are opposed to every moral principle professed by our modern
society. Yet the cultivated and advanced men of the day seem not to
see it.
The majority, if not all, of the cultivated men of our
day try unconsciously to maintain the old social conception of life,
which justifies their position, and to hide from themselves and others
its insufficiency, and above all the necessity of adopting the
Christian conception of life, which will mean the break up of the whole
existing social order. They struggle to keep up the organization based
on the social conception of life, but do not believe in it themselves,
because it is extinct and it is impossible to believe in it.
All
modern literature – philosophical, political, and artistic – is
striking in this respect. What wealth of idea, of form, of color, what
erudition, what art, but what a lack of serious matter, what dread of
any exactitude of thought or expression! Subtleties, allegories,
humorous fancies, the widest generalizations, but nothing simple and
clear, nothing going straight to the point, that is, to the problem of
life.
But that is not all; besides these graceful frivolities,
our literature is full of simple nastiness and brutality, of arguments
that would lead men back in the most refined way to primeval barbarism,
to the principles not only of the pagan, but even of the animal life,
which we have left behind us five thousand years ago.
And it could not be otherwise.
In
their dread of the Christian conception of life that will destroy the
social order, which some cling to only from habit, others also from
interest, men must be thrown back upon the pagan conception of life and
the principles based on it.
Nowadays we see advocated not only
patriotism and aristocratic principles just as they were advocated two
thousand years ago, but even the coarsest Epicureanism and Animalism,
only with this difference, that the men who then professed those views
believed in them, while nowadays even the advocates of such views do
not believe in them, for they have no meaning for the present day.
No one can stand still when the earth is shaking under his feet.
If we do not go forward we must go back.
And
strange and terrible to say, the cultivated men of our day, the leaders
of thought, are in reality with their subtle reasoning drawing society
back, not to paganism even, but to a state of primitive barbarism.
This
tendency on the part of the leading thinkers of the day is nowhere more
apparent than in their attitude to the phenomenon in which all the
insufficiency of the social conception of life is presented in the most
concentrated form – in their attitude, that is, to war...
Men
look at the subject from different points of view, but all alike talk
of war as though it were something absolutely independent of the will
of those who take part in it.
...Christianity is
Not a System of Rules, but a New Conception of Life, and therefore it
was Not Obligatory and was Not Accepted in its True Significance by
All, but only by a Few...
It is often said that if
Christianity is a truth, it ought to have been accepted by everyone at
the very moment when it appeared, and ought to have transformed men’s
lives for the better. But this is like saying that if the seed were
ripe it ought at once to bring forth stalk, flower, and fruit.
The Christian religion is not a legal system that, being imposed by violence, may transform men’s lives.
Christianity is a new and higher conception of life.
A new conception of life cannot be imposed on men; it can only be freely assimilated.
And it can only be freely assimilated in two ways: one spiritual and internal, the other experimental and external.
Some
people – a minority – by a kind of prophetic instinct divine the truth
of the doctrine, surrender themselves to it, and adopt it.
Others
– the majority – only through a long course of mistakes, experiments,
and suffering are brought to recognize the truth of the doctrine and
the necessity of adopting it.
...One sometimes wonders what
necessitated the corruption of Christianity, which is now the greatest
obstacle to its acceptance in its true significance.
If
Christianity had been presented to men in its true, uncorrupted form,
it would not have been accepted by the majority, who would have been as
untouched by it as the nations of Asia are now. The peoples who
accepted it in its corrupt form were subjected to its slow but certain
influence, and by a long course of errors and experiments and their
resultant sufferings have now been brought to the necessity of
assimilating it in its true significance.
The corruption of
Christianity and its acceptance in its corrupt form by the majority of
men was as necessary as it is that the seed should remain hidden for a
certain time in the earth in order to germinate.
Christianity is
at once a doctrine of truth and a prophecy. Eighteen centuries ago
Christianity revealed to men the truth in which they ought to live, and
at the same time foretold what human life would become if men would not
live by it but continued to live by their previous principles, and what
it would become if they accepted the Christian doctrine and carried it
out in their lives.
Laying down in the Sermon on the Mount the
principles by which to guide men’s lives, Christ said, “Whoever hears
these sayings of mine, and put them into practice, I will liken him to
a wise man, who built his house upon a rock; and the rain descended,
and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and
it did not fall, for it was founded upon a rock. And everyone that
hears these sayings, and does not put them into practice, shall be
likened to a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand; and the
rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon
that house; and it fell, and great was its fall.” (Matt. 7:24-27)
...Not
having followed Christ’s teaching generally and its application to
social life in non-resistance to evil, men have been brought in spite
of themselves to the inevitable destruction foretold by Christ for
those who do not fulfill his teaching.
People often think the
question of non-resistance to evil by force is a theoretical one, which
can be neglected. Yet this question is presented by life itself to all
men, and calls for some answer from every thinking man. Ever since
Christianity has been outwardly professed, this question is for men in
their social life like the question that presents itself to a traveler
when the road on which he has been journeying divides into two
branches. He must go on and he cannot say, “I will not think about it,
but will go on just as I did before.” There was one road, now there
are two, and he must make his choice.
In the same way since
Christ’s teaching has been known by men they cannot say, “I will live
as before and will not decide the question of resistance or
non-resistance to evil by force.” At every new struggle that arises
one must inevitably decide: Am I, or am I not, to resist by force what
I regard as evil.
The question of resistance or non-resistance
to evil arose when the first conflict between men took place, since
every conflict is nothing else than resistance by force to what each of
the combatants regards as evil. But before Christ, men did not see
that resistance by force to what each regards as evil, simply because
one thinks evil what the other thinks good, is only one of the methods
of settling the dispute, and that there is another method, that of not
resisting evil by force at all.
Before Christ’s teaching, it
seemed to men that the one only means of settling a dispute was by
resistance to evil by force. And they acted accordingly, each of the
combatants trying to convince himself and others that what each
respectively regards as evil, is actually, absolutely evil.
And
to do this from the earliest time men have devised definitions of evil
and tried to make them binding on everyone. And such definitions of
evil sometimes took the form of laws, supposed to have been received by
supernatural means, sometimes of the commands of rulers or assemblies
to whom infallibility was attributed. Men resorted to violence against
others, and convinced themselves and others that they were directing
their violence against evil recognized as such by all.
This
means was employed from the earliest times, especially by those who had
gained possession of authority, and for a long while its irrationality
was not detected.
But the longer men lived in the world and the
more complex their relations became, the more evident it was that to
resist by force what each regarded as evil was irrational, that
conflict was in no way lessened thereby, and that no human definitions
can succeed in making what some regard as evil be accepted as such by
others.
Already at the time Christianity arose, it was evident
to a great number of people in the Roman Empire where it arose, that
what was regarded as evil by Nero and Caligula could not be regarded as
evil by others. Even at that time men had begun to understand that
human laws, though given out for divine laws, were compiled by men, and
cannot be infallible, whatever the external majesty with which they are
invested, and that erring men are not rendered infallible by assembling
together and calling themselves a senate or any other name. Even at
that time this was felt and understood by many.
And
it was then that Christ preached his doctrine, which consisted not only
of the prohibition of resistance to evil by force, but gave a new
conception of life and a means of putting an end to conflict between
all men, not by making it the duty of one section only of
mankind to submit without conflict to what is prescribed to them by
certain authorities, but by making it
the duty of all – and consequently of those in authority – not to
resort to force against anyone in any circumstances.
This doctrine was accepted at the time by only a very small number of disciples.
The
majority of men, especially all who were in power, even after the
nominal acceptance of Christianity, continued to maintain for
themselves the principle of resistance by force to what they regarded
as evil. So it was under the Roman and Byzantine emperors, and so it
continued to be afterwards.
The insufficiency of the principle
of the authoritative definition of evil and resistance to it by force,
evident as it was in the early ages of Christianity, becomes still more
obvious through the division of the Roman Empire into many states of
equal authority, through their hostilities and the internal conflicts
that broke out within them.
But men were not ready to accept the
solution given by Christ, and the old definitions of evil, which ought
to be resisted, continued to be laid down by means of making laws
binding on all and enforced by forcible means.
The authority
who decided what ought to be regarded as evil and resisted by force was
at one time the Pope, at another an emperor or king, an elective
assembly or a whole nation. But both within and without the state
there were always men to be found who did not accept as binding on
themselves the laws given out as the decrees of a god, or made by men
invested with a sacred character, or the institutions supposed to
represent the will of the nation; and there were men who thought good
what the existing authorities regarded as bad, and who struggled
against the authorities with the same violence as was employed against
them.
The men invested with religious authority regarded as evil
what the men and institutions invested with temporal authority regarded
as good and vice versa, and the struggle grew more and more intense.
And the longer men used violence as the means of settling their
disputes, the more obvious it became that it was an unsuitable means,
since there could be no external authority able to define evil
recognized by all...
...It has come to men in power ceasing to
attempt to prove that what they regard as evil is evil, and simply
declaring that they regard as evil what they don’t like, while their
subjects no longer obey them because they accept the definition of evil
laid down by them, but simply obey because they cannot help
themselves. It was not because it was a good thing, necessary and
beneficial to men, and the contrary course would have been an evil, but
simply because it was the will of those in power...
...Governments
and the ruling classes no longer take their stand on right or even on
the semblance of justice, but on a skillful organization carried to
such a point of perfection by the aid of science that everyone is
caught in the circle of violence and has no chance of escaping from
it. This circle is made up now of four methods of working upon men,
joined together like the links of a chain ring.
The first and
oldest method is intimidation. This consists in representing the
existing state organization – whatever it may be, a free republic or
the most savage despotism – as something sacred and immutable, and
therefore following any efforts to alter it with the most cruel
punishments. This method is in use now – as it has been from olden
times – wherever there is a government: in Russia against the
so-called Nihilists, in America against Anarchists, in France against
Imperialists, Legitimists, Communards, and Anarchists.
Railways,
telegraphs, telephones, photographs, and the great perfection of the
means of getting rid of men for years, without killing them, by
solitary confinement, where, hidden from the world, they perish and are
forgotten, and the many other modern inventions employed by government,
give such power that when once authority has come into certain hands,
the police, open and secret, the administration and prosecutors,
jailers and executioners of all kinds, do their work so zealously that
there is no chance of overturning the government, however cruel and
senseless it may be.
The second method is corruption. It
consists in plundering the industrious working people of their wealth
by means of taxes and distributing it in satisfying the greed of
officials, who are bound in return to support and keep up the
oppression of the people. These bought officials, from the highest
government ministers to the poorest copying clerks, make up an unbroken
network of men bound together by the same interest – that of living at
the expense of the people. They become the richer the more
submissively they carry out the will of the government; and at all
times and places, sticking at nothing, in all departments support by
word and deed the violence of government, on which their own prosperity
also rests.
The third method is what I can only describe as
hypnotizing the people. This consists in checking the moral
development of men, and by various suggestions keeping them back in the
ideal of life, outgrown by mankind at large, on which the power of
government rests. This hypnotizing process is organized at the present
in the most complex manner, and starting from their earliest childhood,
continues to act on men until the day of their death. It begins in
their earliest years in the compulsory schools, created for this
purpose, in which the children have instilled into them the ideas of
life of their ancestors, which are in direct antagonism with the
conscience of the modern world. In countries where there is a state
religion, they teach the children the senseless blasphemies of the
Church catechisms, together with the duty of obedience to their
superiors. In republican states they teach them the savage
superstition of patriotism and the same pretended obedience to the
governing authorities.
The process is kept up during later years by the encouragement of religious and patriotic superstitions.
The
religious superstition is encouraged by establishing, with money taken
from the people, temples, processions, memorials, and festivals, which,
aided by painting, architecture, music, and incense, intoxicate the
people, and above all by the support of the clergy, whose duty consists
in brutalizing the people and keeping them in a permanent state of
stupefaction by their teaching, the solemnity of their services, their
sermons, and their interference in private life – at births, deaths,
and marriages. The patriotic superstition is encouraged by the
creation, with money taken from the people, of national fetes,
spectacles, monuments, and festivals to dispose men to attach
importance to their own nation, and to the aggrandizement of the state
and its rulers, and to feel antagonism and even hatred for other
nations.
With these objects under despotic governments there
is direct prohibition against printing and disseminating books to
enlighten the people, and everyone who might rouse the people from
their lethargy is exiled or imprisoned.
Moreover, under every
government without exception everything is kept back that might
emancipate and everything encouraged that tends to corrupt the people,
such as literary works tending to keep them in the barbarism of
religious and patriotic superstition, all kinds of sensual amusements,
spectacles, circuses, theaters, and even the physical means of inducing
stupefaction, as tobacco and alcohol, which form the principal source
of revenue of states. Even prostitution is encouraged, and not only
recognized, but also even organized by the government in the majority
of states. So much for the third method.
The fourth method
consists in selecting from all the men who have been stupefied and
enslaved by the three former methods a certain number, exposing them to
special and intensified means of stupefaction and brutalization, and so
making them into a passive instrument for carrying out all the
cruelties and brutalities needed by the government. This result is
attained by taking them at the youthful age, when men have not had time
to form clear and definite principles of morals, and removing them from
all natural and human conditions of life, home, family, kindred, and
useful labor. They are shut up together in barracks, dressed in
special clothes, and worked upon by cries, drums, music, and shining
objects to go through certain daily actions invented for this purpose,
and by this means are brought into an hypnotic condition in which they
cease to be men and become mere senseless machines, submissive to the
hypnotizer. These physically vigorous young men (in these days of
universal conscription, all young men), hypnotized, armed with
murderous weapons, always obedient to the governing authorities and
ready for any act of violence at their command, constitute the fourth
and principal method of enslaving men.
By this method the circle of violence is completed.
Intimidation,
corruption, and hypnotizing bring people into a condition in which they
are willing to be soldiers; the soldiers give the power of punishing
and plundering them (and purchasing officials with the spoils), and
hypnotizing them and converting them in time into these same soldiers
again.
The circle is complete, and there is no chance of breaking through it by force...
...There
remains now only one sphere of human life not encroached upon by
government authority – that is the domestic, economic sphere, the
sphere of private life and labor. And even this is now – thanks to the
efforts of communists and socialists – being gradually encroached upon
by government, so that labor and recreation, dwellings, dress, and food
will gradually, if the hopes of the reformers are successful, be
prescribed and regulated by government.
The slow progress
of...the Christian nations again to the necessity of deciding the
question they have evaded – the question of the acceptance or
non-acceptance of Christ’s teaching, and the question following upon it
in social life of resistance or non-resistance to evil by force.
But
there is this difference, that whereas formerly men could accept or
refuse to accept the solution given by Christ, now that solution cannot
be avoided, since it alone can save men from the slavery in which they
are caught like a net.
But it is not only the misery of the
position that makes this inevitable...the truth of the Christian
religion has been growing more and more evident.
Not in vain
have the best men of Christian humanity, who apprehended the truth by
spiritual intuition, for eighteen centuries testified to it in spite of
every menace, every privation, and every suffering. By their martyrdom
they passed on the truth to the masses, and impressed it on their
hearts.
Christianity has penetrated into the consciousness of
humanity, not only negatively by the demonstration of the impossibility
of continuing in the pagan life, but also through its simplification,
its increased clearness and freedom from the superstitions intermingled
with it, and its diffusion through all classes of the population.
...centuries
of Christianity have not passed without an effect even on those who
accepted it only externally...in the depths of their souls they believe
(they can only live through this belief) that the only salvation from
this position is to be found in fulfilling the Christian doctrine in
its true significance.
As to the time and manner of
salvation, opinions are divided according to the intellectual
development and the prejudices of each society. But every man of the
modern world recognizes that our salvation lies in fulfilling the law
of Christ.
Some believers in the supernatural character of
Christianity hold that salvation will come when all men are brought to
believe in Christ, whose second coming is at hand. Other believers in
supernatural Christianity hold that salvation will come through the
Church, which will draw all men into its fold, train them in the
Christian virtues, and transform their life.
A third
section, who do not admit the divinity of Christ, hold that the
salvation of mankind will be brought about by slow and gradual
progress, through which the pagan principles of our existence will be
replaced by the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity – that
is, by Christian principles.
A fourth section, who believe in
the social revolution, hold that salvation will come when through a
violent revolution men are forced into community of property, abolition
of government, and collective instead of individual industry – that is
to say, the realization of one side of the Christian doctrine.
In
one way or another...our salvation is only to be found in the
application of the Christian doctrine, or parts of it, in its true
significance to our daily life.
Christianity cannot, as its
Founder said, be realized by the majority of men all at once; it must
grow like a huge tree from a tiny seed. And so it has grown, and now
has reached its full development, not yet in actual life, but in the conscience of men of today.
Now
not only the minority, who have always comprehended Christianity by
spiritual intuition, but also all the vast majority who seem so far
from it in their social existence, recognize its true significance...
...The
position of our Christian humanity, if you look at it from the outside
with all its cruelty and degradation of men, is terrible indeed. But
if one looks at it within, in its inner consciousness, the spectacle it
presents is absolutely different.
All the evil of our life seems
to exist only because it has been so for so long; those who do the evil
have not had time yet to learn how to act otherwise, though they do not
want to act as they do.
All the evil seems to exist through some cause independent of the conscience of men.
Strange and contradictory as it seems, all men of the present day hate the very social order they are themselves supporting.
I
think it is Max Müller who describes the amazement of an Indian convert
to Christianity, who after absorbing the essence of the Christian
doctrine came to Europe and saw the actual life of Christians. He
could not recover from his astonishment at the complete contrast
between the reality and what he had expected to find among Christian
nations.
If we feel no astonishment at the contrast between
our convictions and our conduct, that is because the influences,
tending to obscure the contrast, produce an effect upon us too. We
need only look at our life from the point of view of that Indian, who
understood Christianity in its true significance, without any
compromises or concessions, we need but look at the savage brutalities
of which our life is full, to be appalled at the contradictions in the
midst of which we live often without observing them.
We need
only recall the preparations for war, the machine guns, the silver-gilt
bullets, the torpedoes, and – the Red Cross; the solitary prison cells,
the experiments of execution by electricity – and the care of the
hygienic welfare of prisoners; the philanthropy of the rich, and their
life, which produces the poor they are benefiting.
And these
inconsistencies are not, as it might seem, because men pretend to be
Christians while they are really pagans, but because of something
lacking in men, or some kind of force hindering them from being what
they already feel themselves to be in their consciousness, and what they genuinely wish to be...
...We
are so accustomed to the inconsistency that we do not see all the
hideous folly and immorality of men voluntarily choosing the profession
of butchery as though it were an honorable career, of poor wretches
submitting to conscription, or in countries where compulsory service
has not been introduced, of people voluntarily abandoning a life of
industry to recruit soldiers and train them as murderers.
We
know that all of these men are either Christians, or profess humane and
liberal principles, and they know that they thus become partly
responsible...for the most insane, aimless, and brutal murders. And
yet they all do it....
...The position of the Christian
peoples in our days has remained just as cruel as it was in the times
of paganism. In many respects, especially in the oppression of the
masses, it has become even more cruel than it was in the days of
paganism...
...Humanity is
passing through seemingly unnecessary, fruitless agonies. It is
passing through something like the throes of birth. Everything is
ready for the new life, but still the new life does not come.
There
seems no way out of the position. And there would be none, except that
a man (and thereby all men) is gifted with the power of forming a
different, higher theory of life, which at once frees him from all the
bonds by which he seems indissolubly fettered.
And such a theory is the Christian view of life...
...Let
a man but realize that the aim of his life is the fulfillment of God’s
law, and that law will replace all other laws for him, and he will give
it his sole allegiance, so that by that very allegiance every human law
will lose all binding and controlling power in his eyes.
The
Christian is independent of every human authority by the fact that he
regards the divine law of love, implanted in the soul of every man, and
brought before his consciousness by Christ, as the sole guide of his
life and other men’s also.
The Christian may be subjected to
external violence, he may be deprived of bodily freedom, he may be in
bondage to his passions (he who commits sin is the slave of sin), but
he cannot be in bondage in the sense of being forced by any danger or
by any threat of external harm to perform an act that is against his
conscience.
He cannot be compelled to do this, because the
deprivations and sufferings that form such a powerful weapon against
men of the state conception of life have not the least power to compel
him.
Deprivations and sufferings take from them the happiness
for which they live; but far from disturbing the happiness of the
Christian, which consists in the consciousness of fulfilling the will
of God, they may even intensify it, when they are inflicted on him for
fulfilling his will.
And therefore the Christian, who is subject
only to the inner divine law, not only cannot carry out the enactments
of the external law, when they are not in agreement with the divine law
of love that he acknowledges (as is usually the case with state
obligations), he cannot even recognize the duty of obedience to anyone
or anything whatever, he cannot recognize the duty of what is called
allegiance.
For a Christian the oath of allegiance to any
government whatever – the very act that is regarded as the foundation
of the existence of a state – is a direct renunciation of
Christianity. For the man who promises unconditional obedience in the
future to laws, made or to be made, by that very promise is in the most
positive manner renouncing Christianity, which means obeying in every
circumstance of life only the divine law of love he recognizes within
him...
...For a Christian to promise obedience to men, or
the laws of men, is just as though a workman bound to one employer
should also promise to carry out every order that might be given him by
outsiders. One cannot serve two masters.
The
Christian is independent of human authority, because he acknowledges
God’s authority alone. His law, revealed by Christ, he recognizes in
himself, and voluntarily obeys it.
And
this independence is gained, not by means of strife, not by the
destruction of existing forms of life, but only by a change in the
interpretation of life.
This
independence results first from the Christian recognizing the law of
love, revealed to him by his teacher, as perfectly sufficient for all
human relations, and therefore he regards every use of force as
unnecessary and unlawful; and secondly, from the fact that those
deprivations and sufferings, or threats of deprivations and sufferings
(which reduce the man of the social conception of life to the necessity
of obeying) to the Christian from his different conception of life,
present themselves merely as the inevitable conditions of existence.
And these conditions, without striving against them by force, he
patiently endures, like sickness, hunger, and every other hardship, but
they cannot serve him as a guide for his actions. The
only guide for the Christian’s actions is to be found in the divine
principle living within him, which cannot be checked or governed by
anything.
The Christian acts
according to the words of the prophecy applied to his teacher: “He
shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the
streets. A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he
not quench, until he sends forth judgment to victory.” (Matt. 12:19,20)
The Christian will not dispute with anyone, nor attack anyone, nor use violence against anyone.
On the contrary, he will bear violence without opposing it.
But by this very attitude to violence, he will not only himself be free, but will free the whole world from all external power.
“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
"HOPE has two children.The first is ANGER at the way things are. The second is COURAGE to DO SOMETHING about it."-St. Augustine
"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral. Why? Because anger looks to the good of justice. And if you can live amid injustice without anger, you are immoral as well as unjust." - Aquinas
Everyone has the right to freedom of
opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions
without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and
ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
" In the final analysis, it is between you and God. It was never between you and them anyway."-Mother Teresa
“You cannot talk like sane men around a peace table while the atomic bomb itself is ticking beneath it. Do not treat the atomic bomb as a weapon of offense; do not treat it as an instrument of the police. Treat the bomb for what it is: the visible insanity of a civilization that has ceased...to obey the laws of life.”- Lewis Mumford, 1946
The age of warrior kings and of warrior presidents has passed. The nuclear age calls for a different kind of leadership....a leadership of intellect, judgment, tolerance and rationality, a leadership committed to human values, to world peace, and to the improvement of the human condition. The attributes upon which we must draw are the human attributes of compassion and common sense, of intellect and creative imagination, and of empathy and understanding between cultures." - William Fulbright
“Any nation that year after year continues to raise the Defense budget while cutting social programs to the neediest is a nation approaching spiritual death.” - Rev. MLK
Establishment of Israel
"On the day of the termination of the British mandate and on the strength of the United Nations General Assembly declare The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations." - May 14, 1948. The Declaration of the Establishment of Israel
Blog 
technocrati
