The International Day of Non-Violence Seems to be a Well Kept Secret

Note—The coincidence of two events, one ancient and one so new it seems tenuous inspires a two-fer of blog posts today.  Later as sunset nears we will consider Rosh Hashanah but we will start this morning with the International Day of Non-Violence.  We will leave it to you, gentle readers to consider the ramifications.  This post is reprinted from it’s original appearance in 2016 so forgive dated references.

Did you know October 2 is the International Day of Non-Violence?  Neither did I until stumbled on the information during my daily scrounging for something—any damn thing—to write about.  My first thought was that it is such a good idea that it is no wonder it is obscure.

It’s one of those United Nations observances.  Right away that makes it deeply suspect here in good ol’ U.S.A. where a huge chunk of the population is still convinced that UN black helicopters supported by the minions of Barack Hussein Obama are poised to swoop down and rip the guns from the hands of patriots.  But other UN holidays get better press even here—International Women’s Day, International Children’s Day, the International Day of Indigenous Peoples Day—to name a few examples.

Maybe it’s because it is still pretty new and hasn’t had a chance to catch on—it was first observed in 2008 after being adopted General Assembly on June 15, 2007.  Apparently the ambassadors of several countries were asleep.  After all protest—even non-violent protest—is not popular with a wide range of dictatorships and or with oligarchies posing as democracies.  It’s law breaking and anarchy to most governments and only to be encouraged in the realms of one’s enemies.  Take the U.S. which got giddy in support of various color coded non-violent revolutions where the old Soviet Union held sway or about, at least at first the Arab Spring until it threatened to spread to our Saudi and oil rich Emirates pals, but shovels riot gear and arms to dozens of repressive regimes when those being repressed are on our own shit list.

 

Around the world non-violent protest is often met by brutal state repression.

And in an era of militarized police, free speech zones, the general criminalization of dissent, suppression of and spying on Black Lives Matter protests and organizers, the targeting of the amorphous Antifa movement, the militarization of Federal police agencies into something with more than a passing resemblance to a secret police,  alleged Free Speech Zones safely caged away from political conventions and campaign rallies, and an Il Duce impersonator in the White House it is pretty clear that there is no commitment to respecting non-violent protest at home, either.

The very origins of the UN observance are, after all, suspect.

 

                    Nobelist Shirin Ebadi's award has since been seized and stolen by the Iranian regime.

In 2003 Shirin Ebadi an Iranian lawyer, a former judge, human rights activist,  founder of Defenders of Human Rights Center in Iran, and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate met an  Indian teacher, Akshay Bakaya in Paris.  Bakaya brought her an idea that he said originated with his students—an international observance honoring non-violence as a tool for social change tied in some way to its greatest modern proponent, Mahatma Gandhi.

On January 30, 2004 while in Bombay, India for the World Social Forum, Ebadi first proposed that the date, also the anniversary of Gandhi’s assassination by Hindi extremists in 1948 be designated as an international day of non-violence.

 

                                   South African Anglican Arch Bishop and anti-Aparthied activist Desmond Tutu.

In tandem with South African Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Ebadi reiterated the proposal at the Satyagraha Conference at Delhi but changed the proposed date to October 2, Gandhi’s birthday which already was an Indian celebration known as Gandhi Jayanti.  The conference had been cosponsored by Tutu and Sonia Gandhi, President of the Indian National Congress Party.  The term satyagraha was coined and developed by Mahatma Gandhi and translates as insistence on truth or soul force. It is a philosophy and practice within the broader idea of non-violent resistance. 

With the support of the ruling Congress Party, India brought the idea to the U.N. General Assembly, which acted with unusual speed adopting the proposal on June 15 of the same year.  The resolution called on member states to commemorate October 2 in “an appropriate manner and disseminate the message of non-violence, including through education and public awareness.”

The first year celebration was marked by the issuance of a postal cachet by the United Nations Postal Administration in New York City which was used on all outgoing U.N. mail between October 2 and 31 of that year.

Since then celebrations in most countries outside of India and South Africa have been, at best, muted.

Perhaps that is because the Non-Violence promoted by the commemoration is not just a sort of vague warm fuzzy pacifism, but an active strategy for social change.  The U.N. puts it this way:

 

One key tenet of the theory of non-violence is that the power of rulers depends on the consent of the population, and non-violence therefore seeks to undermine such power through withdrawal of the consent and cooperation of the populace.

There are three main categories of non-violence action:

protest and persuasion, including marches and vigils;

non-cooperation; and

non-violent intervention, such as blockades and occupations.

Gee, that sounds like the last thing most regimes want to happen as Shirin Ebadi herself found out after her criticism of Iranian persecution of the Baha’i, other Iranian minorities, and dissidents when the Ayatollahs literally stole her Nobel Prize, French Légion d’honneur, and other international awards from her Tehran safety deposit box.  Her organization, the Center for the Defense of Human Rights  was raided and closed in 2008 and its employees were threatened and harassed.  Ebadi, her husband, and daughter were all targeted by the Revolutionary Guard and threatened with bogus charges.  She was forced into exile in London in 2009 and has lived there ever since still threatened by the regime back home.

 

It is a sad tale echoed by the experiences of many others around the world.

Maybe today is a good day to dust off this neglected celebration….in the streets.  Seems to me we now have plenty of reasons to do it….

 

This is the International Day of Non-Violence, I Think it’s a Secret

The International Day of Non-Violence honors Gandhi's legacy. 

Did you know October 2 is the International Day of Non-Violence?  Neither did I until stumbled on the information during my daily scrounging for something—any damn thing—to write about.  My first thought was that it is such a good idea that it is no wonder it is obscure. 

It’s one of those United Nations observances.  Right away that makes it deeply suspect here in good ol’ U.S.A. where a huge chunk of the population is still convinced that UN black helicopters supported by the minions Barack Hussein Obama are poised to swoop down and rip the guns from the hands of patriots.  But other UN holidays get better press even here—International Women’s Day, International Children’s Day, the International Day of Indigenous Peoples—to name a few examples.

Maybe it’s because it is still pretty new and hasn’t had a chance to catch on—it was first observed in 2008 after being adopted General Assembly on June 15, 2007.  Apparently the ambassadors of several countries were asleep.  After all protest—even non-violent protest—is not popular with a wide range of dictatorships and or with oligarchies posing as democracies.  It’s law breaking and anarchy to most governments and only to be encouraged in the realms of one’s enemies.  Take the U.S. which got giddy in support of various color coded non-violent revolutions where the old Soviet Union held sway or about, at least at first the Arab Spring until it threatened to spread to our Saudi and oil rich Emirates pals, but shovels riot gear and arms to dozens of repressive regimes when those being repressed are on our own shit list.

 

Around the world non-violent protest is often met by brutal state repression.

And in an era of militarized police, free speech zones, the general criminalization of dissent, suppression of and spying on Black Lives Matter protests and organizers, the targeting of the amorphous Antifa movement, the militarization of Federal police agencies into something with more than a passing resemblance to a secret police,  alleged Free Speech Zones safely caged away from political conventions and campaign rallies, and an Il Duce impersonator in the White House it is pretty clear that there is no commitment to respecting non-violent protest at home, either.

The very origins of the UN observance are, after all, suspect.

In 2003 Shirin Ebadi an Iranian lawyer, a former judge, human rights activist,  founder of Defenders of Human Rights Center in Iran, and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate met an  Indian teacher, Akshay Bakaya in Paris.  Bakaya brought her an idea that he said originated with his students—an international observance honoring non-violence as a tool for social change tied in some way to its greatest modern proponent, Mahatma Gandhi.

 

Nobelist Shirin Ebadi's. award has since been seized and stolen by the Iranian regime..

On January 30, 2004 while in Bombay, India for the World Social Forum, Ebadi first proposed that the date, also the anniversary of Gandhi’s assassination by Hindi extremists in 1948 be designated as an international day of non-violence. 

In tandem with South African Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Ebadi reiterated the proposal at the Satyagraha Conference at Delhi but changed the proposed date to October 2, Gandhi’s birthday which already was an Indian celebration known as Gandhi Jayanti.  The conference had been cosponsored by Tutu and Sonia Gandhi, President of the Indian National Congress Party.  The term satyagraha was coined and developed by Mahatma Gandhi and translates as insistence on truth or soul force. It is a philosophy and practice within the broader idea of non-violent resistance. 

 

                            Bishop Desmond Tutu.

With the support of the ruling Congress Party, India brought the idea to the U.N. General Assembly, which acted with unusual speed adopting the proposal on June 15 of the same year.  The resolution called on member states to commemorate October 2 in “an appropriate manner and disseminate the message of non-violence, including through education and public awareness.”

The first year celebration was marked by the issuance of a postal cachet by the United Nations Postal Administration in New York City which was used on all outgoing U.N. mail between October 2 and 31 of that year. 

Since then celebrations in most countries outside of India and South Africa have been, at best, muted.

Perhaps that is because the Non-Violence promoted by the commemoration is not just a sort of vague warm fuzzy pacifism, but an active strategy for social change.  The U.N. puts it this way:

One key tenet of the theory of non-violence is that the power of rulers depends on the consent of the population, and non-violence therefore seeks to undermine such power through withdrawal of the consent and cooperation of the populace.

There are three main categories of non-violence action:

protest and persuasion, including marches and vigils;

non-cooperation; and

non-violent intervention, such as blockades and occupations.

In the U.S, student-led gun violence protests, Extinction Rebellion, the Moral Monday movement, and Black Lives Matter among others have been inspired by the principles of  Gandhian satyagraha

Gee, that sounds like the last thing most regimes want to happen as Shirin Ebadi herself found out after her criticism of Iranian persecution of the Baha’i, other Iranian minorities, and dissidents when the Ayatollahs literally stole her Nobel Prize, French Légion d’honneur, and other international awards from her Tehran safety deposit box.  Her organization, the Center for the Defense of Human Rights  was raided and closed in 2008 and its employees threatened and harassed.  Ebadi, her husband, and daughter were all targeted by the Revolutionary Guard and threatened with bogus charges.  She was forced into exile in London in 2009 and has lived there ever since still threatened by the regime back home.

It is a sad tale echoed by the experiences of many others around the world.

Maybe today is a good day to dust off this neglected celebration….in the streets.  Seems to me we now have plenty of reasons to do it…. 

Gandhi in Natal—His First Act of Civil Disobedience

A museum diorama of Gandhit being thrown of a train in Natal in 1893 for refusing to give up a first class seat that he had paid for.. His first act of civil disobedience.

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi had just arrived in Natal, a British colony in southern Africa.  He was at the time a 33 year old upper caste Hindu lawyer educated in England. 

Despite excellent credentials, his attempts to start a practice in his native India had failed because he was too shy to address the court.  After being reduced to drafting legal documents for the poor for tiny fees, he had been offered a contract to serve a Muslim owned business in Africa.

At the time many Indians were enticed to the British colonies to serve as laborers—native Blacks were often regarded as “unsuitable” for hard labor.  Most of the laborers were Hindu.  A largely Muslim elite established themselves in business, often brokering the importation of low caste Hindus and other trade.

Conditions in his new home were startlingly different than he had known either in England or in an India from which he had become somewhat cultural estranged from.  Not the least of the differences was the rigid racial barriers he encountered.

On June 7, 1893 Gandhi was thrown off a train at Pietermaritzburg after refusing to move from the first class accommodations that he had paid for.  After lodging a protest, he was allowed to travel in first class the next day.  However after transferring to a stagecoach, he was beaten by the driver and once again thrown off.  In later years he would look back on these incidents and consider his refusal to be displaced in each case represented his first, instinctive acts of civil disobedience.

They would not be his last.  He was soon in trouble for defying a judge in court who ordered him to remove his turban.

Gandhi as a young lawyer in Natal, 1885

 Gandhi remained in South Africa for another 19 years, until 1914.  His experiences there as he rose to leadership of the Indian community and began his campaigns of civil disobedience and passive resistance were the crucible in which his whole philosophy came to maturity.  It is also where he came to grips with his Indian identity.  Importantly, he came to consider being an Indian as something that transcended the rigid divisions between Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs, although he personally came to fully embrace the Hinduism to which he had once been indifferent.

In 1894, just a year after arriving and his first humiliating experiences, Gandhi founded the Natal Indian Congress to unite all natives of the sub-continent. Within a few years it was a powerful political and social organization willing and able to confront injustice whether at the hands of exploitative employers or colonial authorities.

By 1897 his efforts were so resented by Whites that he was attacked by a mob in Durbin and had to be saved by the efforts of the wife of the local Police chief.  Despite his experience, he refused to press charges against the identified leaders of the attack, establishing his principle of never relying on the courts for redress of a personal injury.

Gandhi (middle row center) with the volunteers of the 2nd Indian Stretcher Bearer Corps during the Zulu uprising, in 1906 in South Africa.

Early in 1906 colonial authorities in Natal declared war on local Zulus in rebellion over being taxed.  Gandhi had not yet become totally estranged from British rule.  He felt that if Indians served the British during the conflict in non-combatant roles, it would soften the hearts of authorities to the plight of his community.  Gandhi organized and commanded a corps of Indian stretcher bearers for the Ambulance Service.  He was only in active service for two months and it is somewhat unnerving to see his photograph in a military uniform with a jaunty broad-brimmed hat pinned up on one side.  The experience did teach him that armed resistance to the overwhelming power of the British was futile.  And he quickly realized that neither he nor his people were recognized or rewarded for their service.

Gandhi (center) with his secretary, Sonia Schlesin, and his colleague Mr. Polak, both white Jews, in front of his Law Office, Johannesburg, South Africa, 1905.

His influence was spreading beyond Natal.  Later in 1906 he helped organize Indians of the Transvaal, a former Boer republic which had only recently and with great brutality been brought under British rule.  Attempting to ease tensions with its bitter former foes, the British colonial administration introduced a measure calling for the registration of all Indians, a measure supported by the Boers.  Gandhi organized a mass protest meeting in Johannesburg, where he outlined his strategy based on his evolving philosophy of Satyagraha, the “devotion to truth.”  He asked his followers to defy the law and accept the resulting punishment.

Indian laborers organized by Gandhi and the South African Indian Congress on peaceful but defiant march in 1913.

 That set off a seven year struggle marked by brutal repression of the Indian community including beatings, shootings, and mass arrests.  Gandhi himself was jailed on numerous occasions.  But despite the repression the demonstrations remained resolutely non-violent.  As Gandhi expected, the image of repeated brutality toward peaceful and unarmed Indians eventually raised enough public outrage that Jan Christian Smuts, the powerful ex-Boer general who had become Prime Minister of the new Union of South Africa, was forced to negotiate with his old opponent and reach a compromise favorable to the Indians.  The result was the Indian Relief Act of 1914. Gandhi had shown that his policy of non-violent resistance could produce dramatic results.

Later that year Gandhi returned to India, where he would soon apply what he had learned to the long struggle for Indian Independence.