Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!linus!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The use of nonviolence.
Message-ID: <1073@mmintl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-Jan-86 14:25:47 EST
Article-I.D.: mmintl.1073
Posted: Thu Jan 23 14:25:47 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 10:35:46 EST
References: <566@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT
Lines: 23

In article <566@decwrl.DEC.COM> mahoney@bach.DEC writes:
>   I agree in the use of civil disobedience.  Two of my heroes happen to be
>Martin Luther King and Gandhi but I have a serious question that I do not know
>the answer. How do you fight a government that does not mind killing people?
>
>The British for the most part were civilised and were not going to wipe
>out the population or even try to.  The allowed constraints on themselves
>and thus had "weaknesses" that could be used against them.  The same in the US
>with the civil rights movement the violence got bad and some people did die
>but the government did not openly condone it.  The courts also did their
>best to stop such violence.  

I would like to emphasize this point.  I think the success of King and Gandhi
says very positive things about modern American and British society.  Civil
disobedience in Russia today is in most cases quite useless -- unless you are
already famous, the government quietly locks you up and no one ever hears of
it.  What value there is in the tactic is only because of foreign pressure.

Civil disobedience is preferable to violence if it works, but it only works
against fundamentally decent opponents.

Frank Adams                           ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
Multimate International    52 Oakland Ave North    E. Hartford, CT 06108