A facade of peace was obliterated on September 11 when the U.S. experienced terrorism at an unfathomable level. So now we are engaged in the war on terrorism and the U.S. military machine is rapidly shifting into gear for an all-out assault on the twin towers of evil, Osama bin Laden and the odious Taliban regime of Afghanistan.
It’s hard not to want to wipe them out — their diabolical behavior exhibits much of the callousness and racism exhibited by other historical despots such as Hitler and Stalin. This is particularly true as America braces for the new assault of the month, having already endured the 9/11 tragedy and many anthrax attacks. Yet as I contemplate these assaults as well as our attacks in Afghanistan, I wonder how many new terrorists will be inspired to kill Americans in retribution. I also think about violence and the resulting atmosphere of fear that pervades America on an emotional, financial, and physical level.
I am heartened that our attacks have been measured and designed to minimize loss of civilian life. It is a far different approach than we took in Vietnam. The fact that we are providing food to Afghan refugees to help prevent starvation is another sign that our approach to war is somehow becoming more humane — at least on the surface. Only time will tell whether this method will destroy the evil and end terrorism — or launch World War III.
Prior to the attacks I was actively researching the historical roots of non-violence and civil disobedience. As part of my exploration I chose to participate in an action of civil disobedience against a company that was engaging in practices that I found morally reprehensible. Both the research and the action have substantially changed my world view. Each has helped me validate evidence that non-violent forms of conflict resolution remain the best hope for an everlasting peace and a transition to a sustainable and just society. In today’s environment it may be the most important lesson we can learn.
The Roots of Non-Violence
More than three thousand years ago, the first widely recorded act of civil disobedience occurred when Hebrew midwives stood up to the order of the Egyptian pharaoh and refused to kill babies born to Hebrew mothers. Since that time the principles of non-violence have been repeatedly advocated as a way to achieve positive social change. The Greek playwright Aristophanes, in his classic play Lysistrata, invented a witty plot by which the women of Athens and Sparta ended war between the rival citystates by seducing their men with provocative actions and then denying them sex until a treaty was signed.
Historical figures such as Buddha, Jesus Christ, St. Francis of Assisi, Mohandas Gandhi, and Martin Luther King have also encouraged various forms of civil disobedience to achieve their goals of peace and justice.
The concept of “civil disobedience” was first popularized in the U.S. through Henry David Thoreau’s seminal essay by the same name. The piece states that moral law is a higher form of law than those enacted by states or nations and makes a compelling case that humans have a duty to disobey and oppose unjust laws. First published in 1849 as "Resistance to Civil Government," the essay had little impact in Thoreau’s time, but it later became an inspiration for many others, including Russian author Leo Tolstoy, for whom non-violence and justice become predominant themes.
In his later years, Tolstoy had regular communications with Mohandas Gandhi, who was then living in South Africa and studying many of the historical references to non-violence including Jain, Hindu, and Buddhist teachings, plus Christ’s Sermon on the Mount. Gandhi was particularly inspired by Tolstoy’s book, The Kingdom of God is Within You, which presented a passionate argument against violence.
In South Africa, Gandhi was a lawyer and a leader in a campaign for racial equality for people of Asian descent. During this time Gandhi developed the concept of satyagraha to describe resistance to injustice. The literal meaning of satyagraha is "firmly holding the truth," and it replaced the phrase "passive resistance" which had previously been used by the movement. Gandhi preferred satyagraha because it implored taking action to achieve justice and offered a clear alternative to what he considered the inaction of pacifism.
The rationale for this system of non-violent protest was clear. It stemmed from Gandhi’s moral belief that violence was wrong and his strategic belief that violence was ineffective. For Gandhi understood a simple human truth — that violence brought on more violence and caused deeper hatred to occur. This was exemplified by his famous words, "An eye for an eye long enough and we will all go blind."
Upon his return to India, Gandhi took on British colonialism in a quest for his country’s independence. To force change, Gandhi consistently employed non-violent direct action throughout the 1920s and 1930s. The most significant effort in this period was the Salt March of 1930, in which Gandhi called upon Indians to refuse to buy salt that was heavily taxed by the British. The effort culminated with a 200-mile march to the sea, where people engaged in civil disobedience by making salt. Over time millions of Indians made salt and 60,000 were arrested for breaking the law. The overwhelming response and subsequent media coverage made Gandhi an international leader and began to shift global attitudes about colonialism.
After World War II, the British yielded India its independence, an act which sealed Gandhi’s iconoclastic role as an inspiration for social activists in the second half of the twentieth century.
In 1999 Time magazine named Gandhi runner up to Albert Einstein as "Person of the Century," declaring: "He stamped his ideas on history, igniting three of the century’s great revolutions — against colonialism, racism, violence. His concept of non-violent resistance liberated one nation and sped the end of colonial empires around the world."
Say You Want a Revolution
The deeper I look into the history of non-violence and civil disobedience, the more I have come to respect their power. The techniques have played a key role in many of the most important social gains over the past hundred years. In the early twentieth century, the labor movement used strikes which were mostly non-violent to achieve strong gains in worker rights, benefits, and compensation. Simultaneously, the U.S. women’s suffrage movement used non-violent means to pass a constitutional amendment guaranteeing a woman’s right to vote. And Gandhi’s non-violent initiatives inspired a generation of anti-war, civil rights, environmental, gay, and women’s rights activists, who converged to transform the American political and social landscape.
For many, the era began in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white passenger and move to the back of the bus. Her subsequent arrest inspired a boycott of the bus system led by local minister, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Over the next decade, King became the undisputed leader of the American civil rights movement, which employed non-violent and endlessly creative protests. Wade-ins integrated "white only" beaches, freedom rides desegregated bus terminals, and sit-ins gave blacks equal rights at restaurants. Events such as King’s March on Washington and his "I Have a Dream Speech," plus hundreds of other national and local protests helped civil rights leaders develop a national network of participants. Massive media coverage of the movement and astute political lobbying by King and other leaders eventually led to huge gains, including passage of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act plus major federal commitments in the "War on Poverty" to help underprivileged people.
The big victories in civil rights inspired other successful social movements in the U.S. Martin Luther King was one of the first national leaders to speak out against the war in Vietnam, and the anti-war movement used many non-violent methods to build public opposition to the war. Through such means as draft card burning, sit-ins, and gigantic protests, Americans who opposed the Vietnam War managed to educate the public and pressure the government to end it.
Beginning in this period and continuing past it, millions of people became aware of the human race’s war on nature and the needless destruction it was causing. Environmentalists applied creative, non-violent methods to raise awareness and achieve results. Sierra Club head David Brower and ad man Jerry Mander successfully opposed a proposed dam in the Grand Canyon by running a full-page ad in the New York Times that asked, "Should We Also Flood the Sistine Chapel so Tourists Can Better View the Ceiling?" This effort launched the advocacy advertising movement, which is still a powerful force in social change. Such tactics and success motivated Greenpeace to use theatrical non-violent campaigns to save the whales and win other important environmental victories. It was hard not to root for the activists in the fast boats putting themselves between harpoons and the intended targets.
Other efforts also made impressive progress in the period after Vietnam. The women’s rights movement made sexual equality an international issue. Saul Alinsky took political advocacy to a new level with shareholder actions, strikes, community organizing, and faith-based initiatives to achieve gains for workers and community groups.
In the 1980s, in the U.S. and Canada alone more than 37,000 people were arrested as part of the anti-nuclear movement, which helped stopped the construction of new generations of weapons and power plants. And protesters galvanized international attention on U.S. support for the Contras and the repressive policies of many Central American governments. In addition, the gay rights movement achieved tremendous progress towards acceptance of homosexuality and the treatment of AIDS.
On the international front, the Solidarity movement in Poland used strikes and other peaceful methods to take control of the government from the communists. The fall of the Berlin wall in Germany then inspired peaceful activists in Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, and other Eastern European states to achieve independence from Soviet-dominated governments.
The racist apartheid policy of South Africa was overthrown through economic sanctions and socially responsible investing, which inflicted an enormous strain on the South African economy. The white electorate selected a reformer, F.W. de Klerk as president, and de Klerk initiated a process that gave blacks the right to vote, which led, at last, to black majority rule.
It would take volumes to chronicle all the successes of civil disobedience. And of course many non-violent movements are still in process, including the huge antiglobalization movement. Many experts believe that this movement has planted the seeds for a transition to sustainable, more locally based economies.
A Personal Experience with Civil Disobedience
I recently had the opportunity to examine civil disobedience up close and personal during an action in Chicago led by the Rainforest Action Network (RAN). They staged a protest at the regional Boise Cascade office in the Chicago suburbs to draw national attention to the company’s practices. Boise is one of the world’s largest clearcutters of old-growth forests, much coming from endangered forests in South America, Southeast Asia, and Canada. RAN is a leading international advocate for rainforest protection and has targeted Boise’s practices for reform.
According to RAN president and founder, Randy Hayes, Boise has been using unsavory tactics to stifle RAN’s free speech and even threaten their existence. "In recent months, Boise Cascade has stooped to a smear campaign against Rainforest Action Network, harassing donors and holding special congressional forums in attempts to frame the organization as a terrorist group," he claims. "Now in conjunction with other anti-environmental forces, they are striking at the heart of American democracy, attacking the 501 c-3 non-profit status of organizations that participate in non-violent civil disobedience."
RAN produced some pretty strong evidence of Boise’s activities, including letters from Boise to funders that accuse RAN of being outside of the law as well as complaints Boise filed with the IRS. Despite such inflammatory evidence, the action was far more civil than disobedient. RAN worked extensively with the local police prior to the event, both informing them of peaceful intentions and also soliciting feedback as to preferred ways to break the law. After a press conference and speeches by some of the participants, two groups of protesters willingly trespassed on Boise Cascade’s property and were promptly arrested.
I was one of those arrested in the second group. For me, the experience of getting handcuffed and locked in a paddywagon was more exciting than fear-inducing. In part, the exhilaration stemmed from my belief that getting arrested was the right thing. I firmly believe that logging old growth forests is an anachronistic practice which has been proven to be wrong — and that those who continue to do it are morally irresponsible. Boise has compounded this wrong with its efforts to harass and silence RAN. Standing alongside my colleagues and getting arrested thus became an act of camaraderie with ancient trees everywhere — not to mention the spirits of Gandhi, King, and Christ, and their lessons in compassionate non-violence.
Folks pretty much agreed that the media missed the most important elements of our arrest — the focus was primarily on Bonnie Raitt getting arrested. (Believe it or not the TV show Entertainment Tonight probably did the best job of reporting.) Yet due to the coverage, tens of millions of people found out that Boise Cascade cuts down old growth forests; whether they saw it on television, heard it on the radio, or read it in the newspapers. And some of those people included big Boise Cascade customers like Lowe’s Home Improvement Centers, Kinko’s, and Home Depot. The ultimate impact of the civil disobedience will be felt when companies like these cancel contracts with Boise to avoid bad publicity.
RAN is currently in discussions with dozens of Boise’s customers, many of whom could lose significant sales if subjected to a consumer boycott. Kinko’s may be the most vulnerable. Many of their branches target college students for customers and employees. If Kinko’s is shown to be using paper from a company that cuts down ancient trees, the long term damage to their brand, customer base, and employee morale could be devastating.
I will keep tracking RAN’s progress, hoping that somehow Boise Cascade will suddenly get it and cease cutting down the last of the age-old trees. If they do, I will gladly tell the world and congratulate them for their honorable change. And if they don’t, maybe I will choose to get arrested again, in the hope that next time will be the tipping point that takes them on a new path.
Going Forward, Actively
Soon after the events of September 11, a member of Congress called environmentalists who take part in civil disobedience eco-terrorists — a label that could cause irreparable harm to an individual or organization. As I write this, there is serious concern among a broad coalition of public interest groups that the response to terrorism may include changes in laws that will threaten civil liberties that are integral to the American way of life. It is imperative that citizens ask their senators and congressmen to preserve our constitutional rights and free speech — then go out and exercise those rights through non-violent activism.
As I contemplate a life with more activism, I take inspiration from Julia Butterfly Hill, who joined me in getting arrested for the first time as a result of engaging in civil disobedience. For those who don’t know her story, Julia gained international fame for living in a majestic redwood tree for two years to save it from being turned into patio furniture. In a recent conversation she summed up the true meaning of civil disobedience for me as an American, saying "Most of the greatest changes in this country’s history, from emancipation of slaves to women’s rights, have all happened when civil people took direct action and broke unjust laws." Thoreau couldn’t have said it any better.
Resources
Rainforest Action Network
In Defense of Freedom, a bi-partisan coalition fighting to retain civil liberties