2008 Woodie Awards
Peace feeds off violence; world should take notice
Anya Vaverko
Issue date: 10/11/07 Section: Opinions
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Governments worldwide shake their heads disapprovingly at violence as a means of change, but meekly shrug their shoulders at nonviolent struggles.
Forty years ago today, the United States backed the murder of Che Guevara, a worldwide symbol of armed revolution. Governments worldwide disapproved of his violent means of achieving leftist ideals.
Today, they fight a "war on terrorism," largely on the basis that using violence to achieve change is unacceptable.
The aggressive means used by groups for bringing about revolution or nationalism in places such as Palestine, Chechnya, Northern Ireland, Peru and many more are all looked down upon as radical.
The message to the people so far: Don't use violence to change things.
Last month, millions of Burmese monks and common citizens protested peacefully in mass against a malicious military government no country would even attempt to defend. They asked for freedom and democracy - or at least a means to be able to put food on their children's plates.
For days, they held out despite extreme difficulty, and it seemed like things just might improve. But soon, their government cracked down, killing unknown numbers of demonstrators. Now, most monks are in hiding or in prison, and the city streets are quiet. So much for nonviolence. That should not come as a surprise - it didn't work for them in 1988 either.
The international community nodded approvingly at the protesters, but besides a few almost meaningless resolutions and sanctions, nothing was done. Now, even the big headlines are mostly gone. The Burmese people, who are actually likely to form a stable, functioning democracy if given the chance (unlike, say, Iraq and Afghanistan), are again gone from our consciousness after their 15 minutes of fame during 45 years of oppression. What will happen to them now?
The Tibetan people know this feeling well. They have been nonviolently working for freedom for 57 years. More than one million Tibetans have been killed since the Chinese occupation, and still the closest Tibet comes to freedom is on T-shirts and bumper stickers. So much for "Free Tibet."
Forty years ago today, the United States backed the murder of Che Guevara, a worldwide symbol of armed revolution. Governments worldwide disapproved of his violent means of achieving leftist ideals.
Today, they fight a "war on terrorism," largely on the basis that using violence to achieve change is unacceptable.
The aggressive means used by groups for bringing about revolution or nationalism in places such as Palestine, Chechnya, Northern Ireland, Peru and many more are all looked down upon as radical.
The message to the people so far: Don't use violence to change things.
Last month, millions of Burmese monks and common citizens protested peacefully in mass against a malicious military government no country would even attempt to defend. They asked for freedom and democracy - or at least a means to be able to put food on their children's plates.
For days, they held out despite extreme difficulty, and it seemed like things just might improve. But soon, their government cracked down, killing unknown numbers of demonstrators. Now, most monks are in hiding or in prison, and the city streets are quiet. So much for nonviolence. That should not come as a surprise - it didn't work for them in 1988 either.
The international community nodded approvingly at the protesters, but besides a few almost meaningless resolutions and sanctions, nothing was done. Now, even the big headlines are mostly gone. The Burmese people, who are actually likely to form a stable, functioning democracy if given the chance (unlike, say, Iraq and Afghanistan), are again gone from our consciousness after their 15 minutes of fame during 45 years of oppression. What will happen to them now?
The Tibetan people know this feeling well. They have been nonviolently working for freedom for 57 years. More than one million Tibetans have been killed since the Chinese occupation, and still the closest Tibet comes to freedom is on T-shirts and bumper stickers. So much for "Free Tibet."