On 14-Nov-2008, at 09:57, Jared Earle wrote:
> On 14 Nov 2008, at 16:33, Charles Bennett wrote:
>> I have no plans for rebellion. Armed or otherwise. (Obviously,
>> armed
>> would be the choice though. Ask the Jews how unarmed worked out for
>> them..)
>
> Ask Ghandi. It's a closer analogy.
The drawback to Gandhi is that his methods only work against a
government that can be shamed, either internally (press) or externally
(international sanctions). Surely you aren't naive enough to think
that Gandhi's methods would have worked against the Nazi's in the
1930's? Or even against, say Bush/Cheney.
The Nazis would have simply killed him, and Bush would have shipped
him off to Gitmo and the press would never have covered his protests
as anything other than 'terrorist activity'.
For peaceful non-violent change to work, you need to have an
institution that is fundamentally moral you are trying to change. The
Brits were asshats in India in many ways, but they were not willing to
simply execute Gandhi in violation of all their own laws and moralities.
--
I said pretend you've got no money, she just laughed and said, 'Eh
you're so funny.' I said, 'Yeah? Well I can't see anyone else
smiling in here.'
_______________________________________________
OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected]
http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters
List hosted at http://cat5.org/
