non-violence is used in these causes because the people who chose to use it simply realized the futility of violence. the main denominator in the the methods that they use to resist is to refrain from picking arms to hurt the other. however they also differ somewhat. Gandhi practices self-sacrifice to move his enemies, directing suffering onto his body to prove his sincerity and will. He writes, ‘Real suffering bravely born melts even a heart of stone. Such is the potency of suffering. (79) Aside from fasting as a form of self-sacrifice, Gandhi and his followers also act in civil disobedience by refusing to follow unjust laws, boycotting British products and refusing to provide manpower. Similarly, Thich Nhat Hanh described the Buddhist non-violent peace movement in vietnam with self-sacrificing acts of hunger strikes and self-emmolation so that people 'were jarred into awareness, and compassion were born in them' (Nhat hanh, 41)
"During the announcement, Nobel Committee Chairman Egil Aarvik admitted to reporters that nonviolence had not been successful in achieving independencefor Tibet over the past three decades. But he believed there were no other honorable solutions. "Of course you may say it's a bit too unrealistic, " he said of nonviolence. "but if you look at the world today, what is the solution to conflict? Will violence or military power be the solution? No... the pat of peace is realistic..." (Dalai Lama and Chan, 46)
i don't really agree with self sacrifice or hurting the self and think that unless the situation is dire, self sacrifice as a tactic may not work. in today's transnational, globalized, capitalized world..
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Saturday, January 3, 2009
chapter 5
because i have such a hard time trying to get myself together to write something. i'm going to try writing it here.
this is the last chapter. it is suppose to be easy, a write up of what i want my readers to take away with them from this paper.
here goes---- how should i start?
System trapped! - carrying the lady in your mind
In the previous two chapters i have reviewed different case studies of non-confrontational resistance in Singapore. As we know, The purpose of this paper is to understand how non-confrontational resistance works. By now the reader would have known that the heroes in my hypothesis do not resist for political reasons. Thus one of my main points of concern is that non-confrontational resistance in dictative environments are not necessarily developed for political progression or revoluntionary purposes.
These case studies remind us that resistances are not always planned for social movements. and are not always conceived to release people from their reppression and change ways of living in societies. The non confrontational resistance here demonstrates an example that abandonds the ideal of reforming or overthrowing the oppressor. it is not glorifying instead it uses tricks to express itself.
In chapter three, artists turn their attention towards problems faced by the everyday person instead of duelling with the state. They subject themselves to censorship and allowed their works to be adjusted and changed, their intentions were not directed at political dissent. However this forced them to use creative ways in manipulating censorship and shape their messages to a more palatable state. In chapter four, bloggers use humour as a tactic to transmit messages, but here again they were not targetting the athorities. I suggested that they were trying to regain their autonomy from the government with the canivalesque laughter of their humour.
Thus the authoritative rule of the government causes people to take caution in performing resistance from fear of being prosecuted. This result in people taking two courses of action, the first is to address problems in an 'outwardly' manner and focus on the societal problems in the lives of everyday people as we have seen that artists have done. The second is to address problems in an 'inwardly' manner and focus on the problems concerning the needs and feelings of the self (in this case people subconsciously felt a need for independence. they attempt to prove their independence to the government) as we have seen that the bloggers have done. Things in regard to the state and politics are deemed too sensitive and dangerous for discussion and are unfortunately avoided even though they have a huge part to play in people's reasons for resisting. this attitude towards resistance and social change is a result of people's ways of knowing from having lived in an environment that is effected not only by the government's authoritative rule, but also other factors in globalization, culture, history etc..
Therefore i suggest that we should attempt to understand causes for resistance by investigating the background and interelated forces of ... - discourse?? foucault
However even if creating such resistance may avoid being penalized by the state, to ignore the role of the state when addressing social issues avoids looking at part of what causes the root of the problem. In a way, people can never get out of the system that they are subverting.
(must use a case study in somewhere to examplify what i m trying to prove.
what can i prove with the case study 4 mil frowns?
- the non confrontational resistance
- the non political expect
- trapped within system
must also somehow put all these in perspective of singapore.
and talk about its capitalist, materialist, fast and a lack of quality lifestyle. how some people are worried about this and that's why they resist.
this is the last chapter. it is suppose to be easy, a write up of what i want my readers to take away with them from this paper.
here goes---- how should i start?
System trapped! - carrying the lady in your mind
In the previous two chapters i have reviewed different case studies of non-confrontational resistance in Singapore. As we know, The purpose of this paper is to understand how non-confrontational resistance works. By now the reader would have known that the heroes in my hypothesis do not resist for political reasons. Thus one of my main points of concern is that non-confrontational resistance in dictative environments are not necessarily developed for political progression or revoluntionary purposes.
These case studies remind us that resistances are not always planned for social movements. and are not always conceived to release people from their reppression and change ways of living in societies. The non confrontational resistance here demonstrates an example that abandonds the ideal of reforming or overthrowing the oppressor. it is not glorifying instead it uses tricks to express itself.
In chapter three, artists turn their attention towards problems faced by the everyday person instead of duelling with the state. They subject themselves to censorship and allowed their works to be adjusted and changed, their intentions were not directed at political dissent. However this forced them to use creative ways in manipulating censorship and shape their messages to a more palatable state. In chapter four, bloggers use humour as a tactic to transmit messages, but here again they were not targetting the athorities. I suggested that they were trying to regain their autonomy from the government with the canivalesque laughter of their humour.
Thus the authoritative rule of the government causes people to take caution in performing resistance from fear of being prosecuted. This result in people taking two courses of action, the first is to address problems in an 'outwardly' manner and focus on the societal problems in the lives of everyday people as we have seen that artists have done. The second is to address problems in an 'inwardly' manner and focus on the problems concerning the needs and feelings of the self (in this case people subconsciously felt a need for independence. they attempt to prove their independence to the government) as we have seen that the bloggers have done. Things in regard to the state and politics are deemed too sensitive and dangerous for discussion and are unfortunately avoided even though they have a huge part to play in people's reasons for resisting. this attitude towards resistance and social change is a result of people's ways of knowing from having lived in an environment that is effected not only by the government's authoritative rule, but also other factors in globalization, culture, history etc..
Therefore i suggest that we should attempt to understand causes for resistance by investigating the background and interelated forces of ... - discourse?? foucault
However even if creating such resistance may avoid being penalized by the state, to ignore the role of the state when addressing social issues avoids looking at part of what causes the root of the problem. In a way, people can never get out of the system that they are subverting.
(must use a case study in somewhere to examplify what i m trying to prove.
what can i prove with the case study 4 mil frowns?
- the non confrontational resistance
- the non political expect
- trapped within system
must also somehow put all these in perspective of singapore.
and talk about its capitalist, materialist, fast and a lack of quality lifestyle. how some people are worried about this and that's why they resist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
