Blog Archives

Grekiska öbor kan nomineras till Nobels fredspris

bigOriginal

En grupp akademiker vill nominera invånarna i den grekiska övärlden till Nobels fredspris. Anledningen är deras insats i flyktingkrisen, skriver The Guardian.

Förra året gjorde 900.000 migranter den riskfyllda resan över Medelhavet. Majoriteten av dem togs emot av invånarna i den grekiska övärlden som hjälpte till att rädda dem ur havets vågor.

Nu förbereder en grupp akademiker vid universiteten i Oxford, Princeton, Harvard, Cornell och Köpenhamn en nominering av invånarna på Lesbos, Kos, Chíos, Samos, Rhodos och Leros till Nobels fredspris.

Gruppen anser att det bör uppmärksammas att invånarna – trots Greklands svåra ekonomiska problem – svarar på flyktingkrisen med ”empati och självuppoffring”. Öbor har öppnat sina hem och tagit hand om sjuka och skadade. I vissa fall har fiskare slutat jobba för att koncentrera sig på att rädda migranter.

Foto:
Flyktingar tas emot på Lesbos. Foto: AP

”På avlägsna grekiska öar har mormödrar sjungit vettskrämda små barn till sömns, medan lärare, pensionärer och studenter i månader har erbjudit mat, skydd, kläder och tröst till flyktingar som har riskerat livet för att fly krig och terror”, skriver kampanjgruppen Avaaz som vid skrivande stund har fått in nästan 290.000 underskrifter på sin hemsida.

Nomineringen ska vara inne senast den 1 februari.

Marit Sundberg, DN

 

källa

“Det är inte jag som konsumerar för mycket” låter det från norr som från en gammal vinylplatta som hakat upp sig

Grekernas ovilja att betala skatt, deras alltför tidiga pensioner, deras lathet och deras förmåga att festa upp vartenda nickel som landet tjänat, är fortfarande medel-svenskens vanligaste förklaringar till krisen. Man tycker att “de måste betala tillbaks det de lånat”, utan att man ansträngt sig för att ta reda på hur stor del av Greklands skuld som är privat och hur stor del av den som de facto är offentlig. Man vet egentligen inte ens hur den grekiska skulden har uppstått, men man anser sig ju vara “duktighetens” främsta representant, så man måste uttala sig enligt den skenbilden, oavsett om man själv sitter på ett ekonomiskt isflak. När man talar med folk “på stan” om Grekland, så känns det numera endast tragikomiskt att fortfarande höra de propaganda-proppade förklara orsakerna som om de minsann satt inne med alla fakta. Som en raspig, gammal vinylplatta som hakat upp sig. Oviljan att på allvar lyssna på andra förklaringar till Euro-krisen, avlöjar samtidigt och pinsamt nog en oerhörd skrämd, skenhelig och hårt hållen stackare till medborgare, som tror att om man bara blundar tillräckligt hårt och slickar husses fötter kontinuerligt, så kommer husse att skydda en från “det onda”.

_________________________________________________________________

av Kosmas Loumakis

Det-är-inte-jag-som-konsumerar-för-mycket

Ni som inbillar er att Sverige står stadigt  utanför denna kris för att ni tror på Rheinfeldt och hans koppel av media-gollums, lobbyister och pseudo-experter. Vad tror ni händer när medeklassen i Sverige inte kommer att kunna betala tillbaka sina lån p.g.a massarbetslöshet? Eller när ingen har råd att beställa de svenska produkterna och tjänsterna? Eller när svenska miljardärer kommer att plocka ut miljarder ur Sverige för att “rädda sina förmögenheter”?… När den svenska bubblan spricker,… skall vi greker och resten av Europa då börja gaffla om att svenskarna osedvanligt oftare än andra är måndags-sjukskrivna, att de stannar hemma på grund av sjukt barn mycket oftare än vad som behövs, att man har osedvanligt många sjukpensionärer per capita p.g.a självförvållat drogmissbruk och en oerhört utbredd alkoholism och att man lägger alla sina pengar på spel, horor och småbarn i Thailand och därför inte kan betala tillbaka sina lån? En godtyckligt sammansatt kompott alltså, där frön av några sanningar blandas ihop väl med skrönor, skvaller och fördomar. Naturligtvis kommer inte människor med en gnutta anständighet i kroppen att använda sig av dessa vulgära argument, men de som vill ta tillfället i akt för att spy på svenskens skenhelighet och bror duktig-komplex kommer nog att göra det. De inskräkta föredrar med andra ord att göra en höna av en fjäder och undvika att se de verkliga orsakerna, bara för att den officiella förklaringen passar ens inskränkta människosyn och ens fördomar bättre.

När det var slagsmål på min grundskolas skolgård, tyckte jag alltid  mest illa om alla dem som stod runt omkring och ropade “slå, slå, slå”, och detta oavsett om jag var inblandad eller ej. Inte anade jag då att just detta kollektiva karaktärsdrag också skulle ackompanjera medelsvenskens omvärldsuppfattning när väl de moraliska fundamenten smulats ner till en död, själlös silokonmassa, som endast är till för syns skull.

Ett folk som i stort sett sällar sig till dem som agiterar för ett allt hårdare, centralstyrt EU, som trampar på konstitutioner, demokratiska institutioner och civila och mänskliga rättigheter, bör åtminstone  vara försiktigt med att vifta med fingret emot andra folk, så fort bankster-eliten med den europeiska medians hjälp behagar utse syndabockar. När EU gör försökskaninen till syndabock och samtidigt försöker lagstifta in i EU just de åtgärder som gjorde Grekland till försökskanin, måste man orka vakna upp ur dvalan. Om inte medborgarna i dessa tider, klarar av att aktivt och kraftigt, opponera sig emot och motsätta sig den egna regeringens bidrag till nedmonteringen av demokratin och rättvisan i EU, kan de snart också mycket lätt övertygas om att det är dags att lägga bort demokratin och rättvisan överhuvudtaget. Sken-demokratin man i Sverige presenterar som demokrati, med de svenska myndigheterna i rollen som “hjälpare”, “stjälpare” och “bödel”, är den sortens demokrati som i praktiken visat sig fungera enligt “Pavlovs hund-modell”, d.v.s. inlärning av önskat beteendemönster genom social-psykologisk och ekonomisk bestraffning och belöning. I denna “demokratiska”modell gör de svenska myndigheterna ett jättejobb för att forma den svenska, medborgaren så att han/hon passar in i det folkstyre som den politiska och ekonomiska eliten vill ha. Att man grovt missat självaste huvudförutsättningen för demokrati, nämligen att medborgarens intressen och behov bör beaktas i första hand och inte de statliga administrationernas, byråkratins fortlevnad till varje pris. Demokrati kan endast byggas på fria och självständiga medborgare med ett utvecklat kritiskt tänkande och lagarna som styr en demokrati måste röstas igenom av medborgarna… Jag upprepar: DEMOKRATI KAN ENDAST BYGGAS PÅ FRIA OCH SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA MEDBORGARE MED ETT UTVECKLAT KRITISKT TÄNKANDE OCH LAGARNA SOM STYR EN DEMOKRATI MÅSTE RÖSTAS IGENOM AV MEDBORGARNA. Iklädd den svenska “demokratiska tvångströjan” inbillas svensken av sin Media att hans samhälle, “oavsett om det inte är perfekt”, så är det i alla fall bland de mest demokratiska. Därför anser han att han har rätten att morra på alla som husse pekar på.

Uppgifter år 2013 för: Samtliga myndighetsgrupper

Antal myndigheter: 366
Antal nya: 3
Antal nedlagda: 3
Senast startade myndighet: UNIVERSITETS-OCH HÖGSKOLERÅDET 2013-01-01
Senast nedlagda myndighet: VERKET FÖR HÖGSKOLESERVICE 2013-01-01

Drygt 235 000 personer är statligt anställda i Sverige. Det innebär att den statliga sektorn motsvarar ungefär 7% av arbetsmarknaden. Myndigheternas verksamhet ser sinsemellan olika ut, men uppdraget i skrift och i tal är gemensamt: att arbeta i medborgarnas tjänst. Detta har byråkraterna och lagstiftarna i Sverige tolkat på sitt sätt: I praktiken anpassar man medborgaren efter myndigheten och i skrift och tal påstår man att man anpassar myndigheten efter medborgaren. I Sverige är det mycket tydligt att mydigheterna tror att medborgaren är till för dem och inte de för medborgaren. Myndigheterna så som de är utformade idag underlättar i själva verket mycket sällan medborgarens liv, utan oftast väljer byråkraterna vägar som underlättar den egna byråkratin, men som alltför ofta avsevärt försvårar medborgarens spontana uttryck av innovation, enterepenörsanda, frihet, kreativitet och skapandekraft och gör hans/hennes liv överdrivet bevakat och onödigt svårt.

Att en överdrivet inflytelserik statlig administration som lägger sig i medborgarnas liv, med tiden utvecklar tyranni istället för demokrati, fattade man redan i Rom, när aristokratin och den militära makten gjort den Athenska demokratin rigid, stel och livlös för att passa deras syften. I Sverige 2000 år senare väljer man att göda denna form av byråkratisk demokrati och inte den Athenska formen som tydligt uttrycker att “den statliga byråkratin har endast  sitt existensberättigande, då den i sanning tjänar medborgarens intressen och behov, annars kan den lätt bli tyranners viktigaste redskap till makt”. Se bara hur EU’s administrationer idag spikar igen kistlocket på den Europeiska demokratins och rättvisans likkista. Så gjorde sig också Hitler av med minsta demokratiska yttring i 30-talets Tyskland!

Medborgarna i dagens Europa känner inte längre till demokratins fundamentala stöttespelare och därmed kan vilka förtryckarregimer som helst presentera sig som demokratiska och folken TROR PÅ DET.

Trams-TV, dumbom-nöjen, reality-såpor, TV-serier och skvallerpress har i Grekland så som i Sverige höjt de moraliska krymplingarnas livsstilar till skyarna och man gestaltar dem som de lyckade, de framgångsrika. Kråkkörs-redaktionerna har verkligen lyckats med konststycket att omvandla nollorna till riktiga nummer. Jag skulle kunna guida er runt Stockholms innekrogar och lyxhotell och visa er vart dessa moraliska slashasar slösar bort era pengar “med hink och spade” om ni vill. De kommer att påstå att de tjänat pengarna, men numera vet vi att de “stulit” dem genom omoraliska affärs-kontrakt, oetiska tolkningar av desamma och lagförvrängningar som bryter emot konstitutioner och internationella lagar.  Jag kan också visa er vart i Grekland, tusentals svenskar som inte betalar en Euro i skatt till den grekiska staten, har sina “rörelser”, bara så att vi kan släppa villfarelsen att nordbor är ärligare än sydlänningar.

Jag lider inte av någon Jante-lag, så jag kan säga att den adekvata sociala inblicken och möjligheten till en relevant bedömning, ifrån båda länderna, har jag bättre än de allra flesta, på grund av min erfarenhet, min karaktär, min utbildning och min ca 40-åriga inblick i båda ländernas samhällsliv. I mitt yrke, såväl i Sverige som i andra länder, har ett av mina starkaste trumfkort varit att jag till skillnad från de flesa inom mitt gebit lyckats skaffa mig tillträde och förtroende i miljöer, där de flesta andra skulle behöva personskydd. Jag har under åren förskaffat mig de nödvändiga “nycklar” som krävs för att kunna få den nödvändiga inblicken i ett samhälles ALLA skikt, innan jag gör en bedömning av dess psyko-sociala tillstånd. Det svenska samhället har stora problem så länge man väljer att sopa de illaluktande sidorna av samhällskaraktären under mattan genom att peka finger emot andra folk.

Den konsumtionsattacken man utsatte alla grekiska hushåll för under hela 80- och 90-talet går inte att beskriva i ord och knappast att jämföra med den svenska konsumtionspropagandan som enkelt och smidigt endast öppnade fönstret emot marknadsföringens intrång i hushållen via reklam-TV. Alla jag känner i Athen och i övriga Grekland däremot vittnar om att uttöver reklam-TV så tog man emot i snitt 2-3 samtal om dagen från olika banker som ville “kasta” på medelgreken förmånliga lån. Denna hårda drive gjordes förstås eftersom de grekiska hushållen innan 80-talet var de som var minst skuldsatta i västvärlden. Man ville av tradition i Grekland inte äga något på avbetalning fram till slutet av 70-talet. Varje reklampelare och telefonkiosk var tapetserad med “förmånliga låne-erbjudanden” och den importerade överkonsumtionens lifestyle våldförde sig hejdlöst på medelgreken och hans barn. Jag upplevde överkonsumtionens intåg också i det svenska samhället och det var oerhört mycket mjukare och “anständigare” än i Grekland. Svensken skulle ju inte köpt den hårda formen av marknadsföring för han/hon hade inte “saknat det nödvändiga” på länge, så som de folk som just genomlidit svält, förtryck och förföljelse gjort. Svensken hade redan ett bekvämt liv med ett socialt skyddsnät som fungerade, så han suktade inte något avsevärt efter en “bättre tillvaro”. Svensken var mer immun emot de allra vulgäraste påhoppen av den skenande materialismen, så man introducera den nödvändiga lifestylen mjukare än i Grekland. Oavsett form av implementering så blev dock resultatet för medelklassen detsamma både i sydeuropa och i nordeuropa.

Programmet, Lyxfällan, visar ganska klart och tydligt att medel-svensken inte har ett skit att säga till grekerna, för han/hon lever i samma huvudlösa, ny-liberala status-bubbla, som ju varken är skapad av greker eller svenskar. Överkonsumtionens livsstil är varken svensk eller grekisk (båda dessa folk var snarare kända för sin måttfullhet enda fram tills 80-talet), utan den är väl marknadsförd av värderingar, som det stora landet i väst, smittat ner hela planeten med. DÄR KAN MAN SNACKA OM ATT LEVA ÖVER SINA TILLGÅNGAR!!! Landet som själv har mer skulder än hela Europa tillsammans och som behöver 25% av världens bränsle för att hålla den “drömmen” vid liv… Som behöver ha militär närvaro i 62 länder för tillfället, som själv behöver spendera lika mycket som världen i övrigt på det militärindustriella komplexet… “the land of the free, country of the brave”,… jo tjena! Varför gnäller man inte på den ‘kultur’, det samhällsystem och den ekonomiska modell som både lagt grunden, utvecklat, spritt och verkligen orsakat krisen,… de som bombar vart de vill för att hålla denna sötsliskiga “dröm” igång? Kan man gnälla på ett land som utgör 2% av den Europeiska ekonomin, och som har en överdriven statsskuld, skall man fanimej gnälla tusenfalt mer om USA’s skuld.

materialism2Så här ligger det till:

Det fåtal ”slipsar” som verkligen bestämmer, beslutade endast att krisen skall ”initieras” i Grekland p.g.a orsaker jag förklarar mycket väl i min artikel (varfor-plundringen-av-grekland-iscensattes/)… Ingenting av det ni hört om orsakerna till grekernas kris, är i själva verket de verkliga orsakerna. De är garnityren, dressingen som för hela kakans smak har ytterst marginell betydelse. Det handlar om dimridåer, för att få pseudo-experterna, de inskränkta och deras partiledare att snacka i nattmössan… Varken pensionsåldern, allmänt överflöd eller någon påstådd “lathet” är de egntliga orsakerna till krisen i Grekland. Krisen är importerad av ett par banker och några skruppelfria affärsmän som tillsammans med grekiska politiker ljugit och förgripit sig på det grekiska folket. Fattar man inte detta numera beror det på ovilja och inte brist på information. Såvida inte man öppet definierar vad i den grekiska skulden som är offenlig skuld och vad som är privat skuld, kan heller ingen yra om ”grekernas skuld”! Vi i Grekland vet numera hur dessa skulder egentligen uppstått och nu vet ni också det, om ni bara läser ett par av de svenska artiklarna om Greklandskrisen på “athenianvoice” och lyssnar på de få i svenska sociala medier som förklarar hur det verkligen ligger till! När vi talar om Grekland numera skall vi inte tala om kris för krisen är över, den ledde tyvärr till döden för landet, dess suveränitet och dess självständighet och att leva i exil är enda möjlighet till ett värdigt liv för oerhört många greker nu.

“Det är före våldtäkten man opponerar sig och slåss för sin frihet och inte i sitt egna badrum, morgonen efter våldtäkten, fortfarande tvekandes om man skall bjuda på te eller ringa polisen.”

3 år har Europa haft på sig att lyssna på de tänkande i Grekland, men europeisk media, inte minst den svenska, stryper rösterna… Inte heller har grekiska föreningar eller andra grekiska organisationer, som borde ha basunerat ut fakta högt och tydligt, gjort något alls av värde för att sprida kunskap i frågan. De få som har uttalat sig har gjort det halvhjärtat, tillknäppt och försiktigt för att inte störa den svenska media-atmosfären, med ”lifestyle-journalistiken” i centrum. Det är vulgärt, osmakligt och respektlöst att uttnyttja mina bröders och systrar lidande, för att skaffa sig pluspoäng som en av systemet “godkända samhällskritiker”, när man egentligen inte vågar ställa de rätta frågorna. De mätta, festprissarna som vill skaffa sig humanistisk kredibilitet genom att ytligt röra i grytan, bör antingen rycka upp sig rent moraliskt eller hålla sina fingrar borta från frågor de inte längre har känsloliv nog att bedömma rättvist och med tillbörlig respekt.

_________________________________________________________

HUR EURO KNÄCKTE DEN NATIONELLA SJÄLVSTÄNDIGHETEN I EUROPA!!!

Published 25 januari in i ‘Oikonomia.info’, 2013 | By Christer Brandt

Hur började det??. Valutahaveriet med dollarn 1971 öppnade en lavin som orsakade Oljechocken 1973 som knäckte nationers handelsbalanser. 70-talskrisen slog sig ned som väldig Gam. Andra gamar kom – valutaspekulatörerna!

Nyliberalisterna ropade. VÄLFÄRDEN HAR GETT OSS KRISEN!

Ekonomipristagare och prof. Robert Mundell från Chicagoskolan är designern bakom euron.

Robert Mundell, evil genius of the euro http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/26/robert-mundell-evil-genius-euro

Kriget mot välfärden sker när 70-talet spränger vallar. Revolution mot den nationella självständigheten.

Robert Mundell utarbetade spjutet  med  “utsidans ekonomi” in i nationer  med  centralbank (ECB) 1998 som nu står  utanför för nationerna för  en enda  gemensamma valutan och ränta. En metod att lösa problemet att undergräva den självständiga nationalekonomin, det sociala systemet och det fackliga inflytandet. EU:s käpphäst är valutasystemet “über alles”.

“Det är mycket svårt att avskeda arbetare i Europa”, klagade han. Hans svar är: euron. Euron skulle verkligen få göra sitt arbete när kriser slår, förklarade Mundell. Att ta bort regeringenens och centralbankens kontroll över sin valuta skulle förhindra en keynesiansk penning- och finanspolitik.

“Det sätter penningpolitiken utom räckhåll för politikerna”. Det enda sättet för nationerna utan sin finanspolitik för att behåll jobben blir att genomföra en konkurrensutsatt reduktion av den sociala lagstiftningen. Han tar upp arbetsrätten, miljöbestämmelser och naturligtvis skatter. Allt skulle då spolas bort genom euron. Demokrati skulle då inte tillåtas störa marknaden!

EURO blev ett svärd att kapa friheten!!!  Euro blev en stålkrage runt nationens hals kedjade till ECB som tvingade dem till stålbad. Utan sin bank och egen räntepolitik blev redlösa skepp, som seglade på grund. Mundells plan fungerade. Olikheterna var för stora meveringd en bank, en ränta och en valuta. Välfärd skrotas för att släppa in “Marknaden”.

Liberalism förkunnas? Vad är frihet och vad är liberalism?

  • Frihet är med ansvar.
  • Liberalism är väg till frihet utan ansvar och till individualism och egenintresse.
  • Nyliberalism innehåller en väg utan ansvar för samhällets utveckling, människors välfärd eller naturens hållbarhet. Etik är lönsamhet
  • Ett samhälle utan sammanhålling

Tyskland blev vinnaren med en dold devalvering. Euro stod i lägre kurs än D-mark. Exporten gynnades. Tyskland ser att “det storTyska riket” förverkligas. Tyskland är med i alla slagen VK I och VK II och nu Unionen Europa.

Storbritanniens premiärminister David Cameron talade Han talade igår i Världsekonomiskt forum i Davos om landets medlemskap i EU.

• Det pågår en utveckling mot en politisk union i Europa, och Storbritannien kommer aldrig att delta i en sådan, • Vore ett stort misstag för Europa. … Om ni anser, att Europa måste förvandlas till en politisk union, att det ska bli mer av ett land som heter Europa. Då håller jag inte med, sade David Cameron. • Förändringen är redan på gång i klubben som vi tillhör. Det är euroländerna som driver på förändringen. • Vi måste ha ett nytt EU. Med respekt för ländernas olikheter, sade han.

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=5420762

Avhumanisering av de sjuka, fattiga och arbetslösa

. Lagen 2008 om arbetskraftsinvandring är redan skojar- och traffickingbransch. En bristfällig lag som korrupta entreprenörer svindlar med.

Arbetare luras på löner och blir slavarbetare. Alliansen som skapat lagen och uttalar sig att beteendet  är oacceptabelt!!

Effekten är att fack, löner och arbetsrätt trasas sönder enligt “krismetoden”. Ny lucka öppnas att riva välfärd. Vargarna kommer och tar för sig. Ekot hörs igen.

”Endast en kris – verklig eller inbillad – kan åstadkomma verklig förändring” – först i krisskeden och chocktillstånd kan nyliberala idéer ta initiativet för att privatisera allmänningarna, förbjuda fackförbunden, avskaffa social välfärd, släppa priserna fria och cementera äganderätten och centralbankens överhöghet, Milton Friedman, Chicagoskolan.

 Mörkläggningen

Alliansregeringen innehåller demolering av det svenska välfärdssystemet till  fragment.  Vi vet att läget är katastrofalt på den ena eller andra fronten; men den informationen liknar mest styckvisa eldhärdar, som snabbt slocknar eller snarare släcks. Från ”oppositionen” kommer ingen sammanfattning av läget om denna EU-revolution. Skall vi få veta det efteråt, när det är klart??

  • det fattas hundratusen bostäder i Sverige,
  • Svenskarna är världens åttonde mest skuldsatta folk (bostadsbubbla)
  • landsbygden är på väg i urbaniseringen att bli ett stort åldrinngshem med alla utflyttning
  • avreglerignar med lönsamma ambualer med avlastning
  • privatiserad järväg är ett haverie i ledarskap, samhällsnytta och långsiktigt milöarbete
  • arbetslösheten i det rika Sverige närmar sig åtta procent, Tal i hög sysselsättningsgrad = de som står i en kö för arbete
  • sänkt moms resulterade i 5000 nya arbeten = kostade 1 milj/arbete.
  • brist i resurser i vård, skola och annan samhällsnytta
  • vi har färre vårdplatser per invånare på sjukhus än resten av Europa
  • privatiserade apoteken ger mycket sämre service än den tidigae modellen. Landsbyggden drabbas
  • satsningen på jobbcoacher har kostat tre miljarder kronor men inte gett några mätbara resultat.
  • fas3-kränkning av människor
  • memanningsföretagsanställda ökar i rekordfart.
  • 150 000 svenskar saknar A-kassa, vilket betyder arbetslösa som får noll ersättning.
  • utförsäljning av vård till reaspris. 7,5 miljarder av privata vårdföretags vinster, skattepengar, går till skatteparadis. Serafimerlasarettat i Stockholm och Tibbleskolan i Täby, Reinfeldtarnas hemkommun, såldes till skandalösa underpriser, ingen görs ansvarig. Åtalan  läggs ner.
  • friskoler som kassakor och vinstbolag.
  • Sverige har gått från första plats till fjärde som världens mest jämställda land under alliansregeringen
  • export till diktaturer. Telias mutaffärer i diktaturen Azerbajdzan,
  • ett försvar som kan hålla 1 vecka

Nylberal värdesym, Maria-Pia Boëthius, ETC

Skapa en vilt konsumerande medelklass, som helst bara läser nyheter som bekräftar deras egen världsbild. När bubblan spricker kommer deras främsta mål vara att bevara sitt riggade välstånd; också på bekostnad av att ”andra” går under. Det gäller ju mig och min familj! Demokratin är trevlig, men inte om den hotar mitt välstånd, då kan jag tänka mig andra lösningar.

Vad gör EU? EU genomför en revolt mot

  • den självständiga nationen
  • fragmentiserar välfärde
  • folkmakten
  • fragmentiserar den fria människan till  en förslavning

Människan kapitaliseras som vilken vara som helst att brukas.

  • Det mänskliga “etiska” värdet är graden av produktionsduglighet.
  • Den utbytbara människan. En koponent i ett system. Kan ersättas med dator
  • En elit urskiljs – 1 %-folket med alla tillgångarna (idag 40 %)

Känns systemet igen???

  • förslavning av människor
  • teknokratiseringen
  • eliten
  • Unionen

“A Radical Revolution of Values”: Dr. King’s Most Important (And Dangerous) Speech

By Ed Ciaccio (republished from Thomas Paine’s Corner)

Martin_Luther_King_Jr._and_Lyndon_Johnson

“A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”

No, it’s not the “I Have a Dream” speech most people associate with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and ceremoniously trot out every year as we commemorate his birthday. It’s a speech largely ignored by mainstream commentators who are content to pigeonhole Dr. King as a “slain civil rights leader”, as though his Nobel Prize was awarded solely for his civil rights efforts. It’s a speech known very well to advocates of peace and social justice. It’s an audacious, even dangerous speech which turned many former supporters against him after he gave it, and may even have accelerated the efforts of those who felt so threatened by this audacity that they murdered him a year after he delivered it. And it’s a speech that has even more resonance for us today than it did over 40 years ago, and not merely because we will see our first African-American President inaugurated five days after what would have been Dr. King’s 80th birthday.

On April 4, 1967, exactly a year before his assassination, Dr. King gave a speech titled “Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence” at a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City. Clergy and Laity Concerned was one of many groups opposed to the Vietnam War.

This powerful, enlightening speech contains passages which are strikingly, even eerily, more relevant to us today than when Dr. King first spoke them. Replace “Vietnam” with “Iraq and Afghanistan” and this speech is as timely as if it was given this morning.

Anticipating and answering those who criticized him for speaking out against the illegal, unnecessary war on the people of Vietnam, he said:

I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such…I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government.

martin-luther-king- picBy calling the United States “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today”, King even antagonized many of his own supporters, who then, and still, today, choose to ignore United States’ foreign policy, including the many violent military and CIA “operations” conducted by various administrations since at least 1947 “to protect America’s vital interests and security” while overthrowing elected governments and causing the deaths of millions of innocent people. In doing so, he not only expanded his message beyond civil rights to the violence of war and exploitation, but also beyond Americans to all people in words which still sear our consciences:

This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy, for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

Speaking today, he would no doubt have decried the ongoing genocide in Darfur, the slaughter of civilians in Gaza by U.S.-supplied weapons, and the threat to all life on earth from human-caused climate chaos. But he would be especially critical of our own nation, the most powerful and wealthy on earth, which maintains that power and wealth through an empire of over 760 military bases in more than 130 foreign nations, supporting exploitative, impoverishing, environmentally-devastating economic policies such as NAFTA and through control of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization whose “structural adjustment” policies serve mainly to drive poor Third World nations even deeper into un-repayable debt.

Meanwhile, as the world’s biggest arms merchant, the U.S. supplies advanced military equipment to oppressive governments such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, and all of this with mostly unquestioning bipartisan Congressional support.

In his 1967 speech, citing such a U.S. foreign policy, even before the term ‘blowback’ was widely known, Dr. King said:

It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken — the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment.

But it is the passage immediately following those words which should force us all to recall Dr. King’s prescience, and the tragic truth his words still hold for us today:

I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a “thing-oriented” society to a “person-oriented” society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies…

True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: “This is not just.” It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of Latin America and say: “This is not just.” The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just. A true revolution of values will lay hands on the world order and say of war: “This way of settling differences is not just.” This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into veins of people normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.

This call for a world-wide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all men.

We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.

In 2009, in the midst of yet other illegal wars, with a Congress well-funded by corporations profiting from such wars, and following a presidential campaign in which the candidates of both major parties were beholden to their corporate benefactors, it is doubtful that King’s “revolution of values” will come from any of our elected leaders.

If we truly “recall the fullness of his message,” it is we ourselves who are called to act today to make the “great revolution of values” happen for us, and for our children. As Dr. King said, near the end of that Riverside Church speech, “We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late.”

How can we put Dr. King’s words into action? He gave us a hint in a speech, “Where Do We Go from Here?” which he gave later that same year, on August 16, 1967, at the SCLC Conference in Atlanta, Georgia:

And one of the great problems of history is that the concepts of love and power have usually been contrasted as opposites, polar opposites, so that love is identified with a resignation of power, and power with a denial of love… What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love. And this is what we must see as we move on. What has happened is that we have had it wrong and confused in our own country, and this has led Negro Americans in the past to seek their goals through power devoid of love and conscience.

“Power devoid of love and conscience” is exactly what we in the U.S. have been blighted with for at least the past eight years, but which has also been the modus operandi of all governments, whether they call it “realpolitik” or “pragmatism”, for most of human history. That is why “reform” will not suffice. That is why “a radical revolution of values is needed now, meaning “radical” in both the sense of “extreme” and “going to the root of”, and “revolution” as in “overthrowing” the accepted, but continuously failing, value system of our culture.

The “love” Dr. King speaks of is not the sentimental, Hallmark card variety. It is not a mushy, “bleeding-heart liberal” emotion. It is a very active verb. Its closest meaning in English is demonstrating “compassion” and “empathy” (not mere “sympathy”), two words which carry within them the meanings of putting oneself in the place of those who are suffering, of “feeling the way they feel”, not just “feeling for them.” Out of this compassion comes the realization not only of our literal as well as moral kinship, but of the need for justice or fairness for those suffering and oppressed, especially due to our values and our way of living. It is the basis of the Golden Rule as well as of our own Declaration of Independence.

It, therefore, requires not only feelings, but actions which put that compassion and empathy into practice on personal and local levels, and especially on national and international levels. This is the power, which, “…at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best…correcting everything that stands against love.”

The policies and programs, environmental, social, and economic, which we must now demand of our leaders at this crucial time of human and environmental crises, especially in this, the most influential nation on earth, should and must be policies of compassion and justice which embody Dr. King’s “radical revolution of values.”

Let us commemorate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. then, as not only a civil rights or anti-war leader, but also as a world leader against the ethic of greed, materialism, and exploitation (what he termed “the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism”) and for the values of compassion and justice for all people, especially the poor and powerless, both at home and abroad. It is precisely those roles which are his true, lasting legacy to all of us today, and we can best and truly celebrate his legacy by putting those “revolutionary” values into practice in our personal and public lives. We ignore, or choose to forget this full legacy, to our shame and peril, and that of future generations.

Ed Ciaccio, a conscientious objector since 1970, is a retired teacher.

Full text of the speech – Beyond Vietnam — A Time to Break Silence

Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

I need not pause to say how very delighted I am to be here tonight, and how very delighted I am to see you expressing your concern about the issues that will be discussed tonight by turning out in such large numbers. I also want to say that I consider it a great honor to share this program with Dr. Bennett, Dr. Commager, and Rabbi Heschel, and some of the distinguished leaders and personalities of our nation. And of course it’s always good to come back to Riverside church. Over the last eight years, I have had the privilege of preaching here almost every year in that period, and it is always a rich and rewarding experience to come to this great church and this great pulpit.

I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join you in this meeting because I’m in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization which has brought us together: Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam. The recent statements of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart, and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: “A time comes when silence is betrayal.” And that time has come for us in relation to Vietnam.

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government’s policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one’s own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation’s history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam, many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns this query has often loomed large and loud: “Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King?” “Why are you joining the voices of dissent?” “Peace and civil rights don’t mix,” they say. “Aren’t you hurting the cause of your people,” they ask? And when I hear them, though I often understand the source of their concern, I am nevertheless greatly saddened, for such questions mean that the inquirers have not really known me, my commitment or my calling. Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live.

In the light of such tragic misunderstanding, I deem it of signal importance to try to state clearly, and I trust concisely, why I believe that the path from Dexter Avenue Baptist Church — the church in Montgomery, Alabama, where I began my pastorate — leads clearly to this sanctuary tonight.

I come to this platform tonight to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation. This speech is not addressed to Hanoi or to the National Liberation Front. It is not addressed to China or to Russia. Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Neither is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they must play in the successful resolution of the problem. While they both may have justifiable reasons to be suspicious of the good faith of the United States, life and history give eloquent testimony to the fact that conflicts are never resolved without trustful give and take on both sides.

Tonight, however, I wish not to speak with Hanoi and the National Liberation Front, but rather to my fellow Americans.

Since I am a preacher by calling, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision. There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor — both black and white — through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So, I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such.

Perhaps a more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem. And so we have been repeatedly faced with the cruel irony of watching Negro and white boys on TV screens as they kill and die together for a nation that has been unable to seat them together in the same schools. And so we watch them in brutal solidarity burning the huts of a poor village, but we realize that they would hardly live on the same block in Chicago. I could not be silent in the face of such cruel manipulation of the poor.

My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years — especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.

For those who ask the question, “Aren’t you a civil rights leader?” and thereby mean to exclude me from the movement for peace, I have this further answer. In 1957 when a group of us formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, we chose as our motto: “To save the soul of America.” We were convinced that we could not limit our vision to certain rights for black people, but instead affirmed the conviction that America would never be free or saved from itself until the descendants of its slaves were loosed completely from the shackles they still wear. In a way we were agreeing with Langston Hughes, that black bard of Harlem, who had written earlier:

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath —
America will be!

Now, it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America’s soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read: Vietnam. It can never be saved so long as it destroys the deepest hopes of men the world over. So it is that those of us who are yet determined that America will be — are — are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land.

As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 19541; and I cannot forget that the Nobel Peace Prize was also a commission, a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for “the brotherhood of man.” This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances, but even if it were not present I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I’m speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men — for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the One who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the Vietcong or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this One? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life?

And finally, as I try to explain for you and for myself the road that leads from Montgomery to this place I would have offered all that was most valid if I simply said that I must be true to my conviction that I share with all men the calling to be a son of the living God. Beyond the calling of race or nation or creed is this vocation of sonship and brotherhood, and because I believe that the Father is deeply concerned especially for his suffering and helpless and outcast children, I come tonight to speak for them.

This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls “enemy,” for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers.

And as I ponder the madness of Vietnam and search within myself for ways to understand and respond in compassion, my mind goes constantly to the people of that peninsula. I speak now not of the soldiers of each side, not of the ideologies of the Liberation Front, not of the junta in Saigon, but simply of the people who have been living under the curse of war for almost three continuous decades now. I think of them, too, because it is clear to me that there will be no meaningful solution there until some attempt is made to know them and hear their broken cries.

They must see Americans as strange liberators. The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1954 — in 1945 rather — after a combined French and Japanese occupation and before the communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of Independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony. Our government felt then that the Vietnamese people were not ready for independence, and we again fell victim to the deadly Western arrogance that has poisoned the international atmosphere for so long. With that tragic decision we rejected a revolutionary government seeking self-determination and a government that had been established not by China — for whom the Vietnamese have no great love — but by clearly indigenous forces that included some communists. For the peasants this new government meant real land reform, one of the most important needs in their lives.

For nine years following 1945 we denied the people of Vietnam the right of independence. For nine years we vigorously supported the French in their abortive effort to recolonize Vietnam. Before the end of the war we were meeting eighty percent of the French war costs. Even before the French were defeated at Dien Bien Phu, they began to despair of their reckless action, but we did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will. Soon we would be paying almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization.

After the French were defeated, it looked as if independence and land reform would come again through the Geneva Agreement. But instead there came the United States, determined that Ho should not unify the temporarily divided nation, and the peasants watched again as we supported one of the most vicious modern dictators, our chosen man, Premier Diem. The peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition, supported their extortionist landlords, and refused even to discuss reunification with the North. The peasants watched as all this was presided over by United States’ influence and then by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem’s methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown they may have been happy, but the long line of military dictators seemed to offer no real change, especially in terms of their need for land and peace.

The only change came from America, as we increased our troop commitments in support of governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support. All the while the people read our leaflets and received the regular promises of peace and democracy and land reform. Now they languish under our bombs and consider us, not their fellow Vietnamese, the real enemy. They move sadly and apathetically as we herd them off the land of their fathers into concentration camps where minimal social needs are rarely met. They know they must move on or be destroyed by our bombs.

So they go, primarily women and children and the aged. They watch as we poison their water, as we kill a million acres of their crops. They must weep as the bulldozers roar through their areas preparing to destroy the precious trees. They wander into the hospitals with at least twenty casualties from American firepower for one Vietcong-inflicted injury. So far we may have killed a million of them, mostly children. They wander into the towns and see thousands of the children, homeless, without clothes, running in packs on the streets like animals. They see the children degraded by our soldiers as they beg for food. They see the children selling their sisters to our soldiers, soliciting for their mothers.

What do the peasants think as we ally ourselves with the landlords and as we refuse to put any action into our many words concerning land reform? What do they think as we test out our latest weapons on them, just as the Germans tested out new medicine and new tortures in the concentration camps of Europe? Where are the roots of the independent Vietnam we claim to be building? Is it among these voiceless ones?

We have destroyed their two most cherished institutions: the family and the village. We have destroyed their land and their crops. We have cooperated in the crushing — in the crushing of the nation’s only non-Communist revolutionary political force, the unified Buddhist Church. We have supported the enemies of the peasants of Saigon. We have corrupted their women and children and killed their men.

Now there is little left to build on, save bitterness. Soon, the only solid — solid physical foundations remaining will be found at our military bases and in the concrete of the concentration camps we call “fortified hamlets.” The peasants may well wonder if we plan to build our new Vietnam on such grounds as these. Could we blame them for such thoughts? We must speak for them and raise the questions they cannot raise. These, too, are our brothers.

Perhaps a more difficult but no less necessary task is to speak for those who have been designated as our enemies. What of the National Liberation Front, that strangely anonymous group we call “VC” or “communists”? What must they think of the United States of America when they realize that we permitted the repression and cruelty of Diem, which helped to bring them into being as a resistance group in the South? What do they think of our condoning the violence which led to their own taking up of arms? How can they believe in our integrity when now we speak of “aggression from the North” as if there were nothing more essential to the war? How can they trust us when now we charge them with violence after the murderous reign of Diem and charge them with violence while we pour every new weapon of death into their land? Surely we must understand their feelings, even if we do not condone their actions. Surely we must see that the men we supported pressed them to their violence. Surely we must see that our own computerized plans of destruction simply dwarf their greatest acts.

How do they judge us when our officials know that their membership is less than twenty-five percent communist, and yet insist on giving them the blanket name? What must they be thinking when they know that we are aware of their control of major sections of Vietnam, and yet we appear ready to allow national elections in which this highly organized political parallel government will not have a part? They ask how we can speak of free elections when the Saigon press is censored and controlled by the military junta. And they are surely right to wonder what kind of new government we plan to help form without them, the only party in real touch with the peasants. They question our political goals and they deny the reality of a peace settlement from which they will be excluded. Their questions are frighteningly relevant. Is our nation planning to build on political myth again, and then shore it up upon the power of new violence?

Here is the true meaning and value of compassion and nonviolence, when it helps us to see the enemy’s point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition.

So, too, with Hanoi. In the North, where our bombs now pummel the land, and our mines endanger the waterways, we are met by a deep but understandable mistrust. To speak for them is to explain this lack of confidence in Western words, and especially their distrust of American intentions now. In Hanoi are the men who led the nation to independence against the Japanese and the French, the men who sought membership in the French Commonwealth and were betrayed by the weakness of Paris and the willfulness of the colonial armies. It was they who led a second struggle against French domination at tremendous costs, and then were persuaded to give up the land they controlled between the thirteenth and seventeenth parallel as a temporary measure at Geneva. After 1954 they watched us conspire with Diem to prevent elections which could have surely brought Ho Chi Minh to power over a united Vietnam, and they realized they had been betrayed again. When we ask why they do not leap to negotiate, these things must be remembered.

Also, it must be clear that the leaders of Hanoi considered the presence of American troops in support of the Diem regime to have been the initial military breach of the Geneva Agreement concerning foreign troops. They remind us that they did not begin to send troops in large numbers and even supplies into the South until American forces had moved into the tens of thousands.

Hanoi remembers how our leaders refused to tell us the truth about the earlier North Vietnamese overtures for peace, how the president claimed that none existed when they had clearly been made. Ho Chi Minh has watched as America has spoken of peace and built up its forces, and now he has surely heard the increasing international rumors of American plans for an invasion of the North. He knows the bombing and shelling and mining we are doing are part of traditional pre-invasion strategy. Perhaps only his sense of humor and of irony can save him when he hears the most powerful nation of the world speaking of aggression as it drops thousands of bombs on a poor, weak nation more than eight hundred — rather, eight thousand miles away from its shores.

At this point I should make it clear that while I have tried in these last few minutes to give a voice to the voiceless in Vietnam and to understand the arguments of those who are called “enemy,” I am as deeply concerned about our own troops there as anything else. For it occurs to me that what we are submitting them to in Vietnam is not simply the brutalizing process that goes on in any war where armies face each other and seek to destroy. We are adding cynicism to the process of death, for they must know after a short period there that none of the things we claim to be fighting for are really involved. Before long they must know that their government has sent them into a struggle among Vietnamese, and the more sophisticated surely realize that we are on the side of the wealthy, and the secure, while we create a hell for the poor.

Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak of the — for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.

This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote:

Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism (unquote).

If we continue, there will be no doubt in my mind and in the mind of the world that we have no honorable intentions in Vietnam. If we do not stop our war against the people of Vietnam immediately, the world will be left with no other alternative than to see this as some horrible, clumsy, and deadly game we have decided to play. The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people. The situation is one in which we must be ready to turn sharply from our present ways. In order to atone for our sins and errors in Vietnam, we should take the initiative in bringing a halt to this tragic war.

I would like to suggest five concrete things that our government should do [immediately] to begin the long and difficult process of extricating ourselves from this nightmarish conflict:

Number one: End all bombing in North and South Vietnam.

Number two: Declare a unilateral cease-fire in the hope that such action will create the atmosphere for negotiation.

Three: Take immediate steps to prevent other battlegrounds in Southeast Asia by curtailing our military buildup in Thailand and our interference in Laos.

Four: Realistically accept the fact that the National Liberation Front has substantial support in South Vietnam and must thereby play a role in any meaningful negotiations and any future Vietnam government.

Five: Set a date that we will remove all foreign troops from Vietnam in accordance with the 1954 Geneva Agreement.

Part of our ongoing — Part of our ongoing commitment might well express itself in an offer to grant asylum to any Vietnamese who fears for his life under a new regime which included the Liberation Front. Then we must make what reparations we can for the damage we have done. We must provide the medical aid that is badly needed, making it available in this country, if necessary. Meanwhile — Meanwhile, we in the churches and synagogues have a continuing task while we urge our government to disengage itself from a disgraceful commitment. We must continue to raise our voices and our lives if our nation persists in its perverse ways in Vietnam. We must be prepared to match actions with words by seeking out every creative method of protest possible.

As we counsel young men concerning military service, we must clarify for them our nation’s role in Vietnam and challenge them with the alternative of conscientious objection. I am pleased to say that this is a path now chosen by more than seventy students at my own alma mater, Morehouse College, and I recommend it to all who find the American course in Vietnam a dishonorable and unjust one. Moreover, I would encourage all ministers of draft age to give up their ministerial exemptions and seek status as conscientious objectors. These are the times for real choices and not false ones. We are at the moment when our lives must be placed on the line if our nation is to survive its own folly. Every man of humane convictions must decide on the protest that best suits his convictions, but we must all protest.

Now there is something seductively tempting about stopping there and sending us all off on what in some circles has become a popular crusade against the war in Vietnam. I say we must enter that struggle, but I wish to go on now to say something even more disturbing.

The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit, and if we ignore this sobering reality…and if we ignore this sobering reality, we will find ourselves organizing “clergy and laymen concerned” committees for the next generation. They will be concerned about Guatemala — Guatemala and Peru. They will be concerned about Thailand and Cambodia. They will be concerned about Mozambique and South Africa. We will be marching for these and a dozen other names and attending rallies without end, unless there is a significant and profound change in American life and policy.

And so, such thoughts take us beyond Vietnam, but not beyond our calling as sons of the living God.

In 1957, a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution. During the past ten years, we have seen emerge a pattern of suppression which has now justified the presence of U.S. military advisors in Venezuela. This need to maintain social stability for our investments accounts for the counterrevolutionary action of American forces in Guatemala. It tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Cambodia and why American napalm and Green Beret forces have already been active against rebels in Peru.

It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin…we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. On the one hand, we are called to play the Good Samaritan on life’s roadside, but that will be only an initial act. One day we must come to see that the whole Jericho Road must be transformed so that men and women will not be constantly beaten and robbed as they make their journey on life’s highway. True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say, “This is not just.” It will look at our alliance with the landed gentry of South America and say, “This is not just.” The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, “This way of settling differences is not just.” This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation’s homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood.

This kind of positive revolution of values is our best defense against communism. War is not the answer. Communism will never be defeated by the use of atomic bombs or nuclear weapons. Let us not join those who shout war and, through their misguided passions, urge the United States to relinquish its participation in the United Nations. These are days which demand wise restraint and calm reasonableness. We must not engage in a negative anticommunism, but rather in a positive thrust for democracy, realizing that our greatest defense against communism is to take offensive action in behalf of justice. We must with positive action seek to remove those conditions of poverty, insecurity, and injustice, which are the fertile soil in which the seed of communism grows and develops.

These are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and oppression, and out of the wounds of a frail world, new systems of justice and equality are being born. The shirtless and barefoot people of the land are rising up as never before. “The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light.”2 We in the West must support these revolutions.

It is a sad fact that because of comfort, complacency, a morbid fear of communism, and our proneness to adjust to injustice, the Western nations that initiated so much of the revolutionary spirit of the modern world have now become the arch antirevolutionaries. This has driven many to feel that only Marxism has a revolutionary spirit. Therefore, communism is a judgment against our failure to make democracy real and follow through on the revolutions that we initiated. Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism. With this powerful commitment we shall boldly challenge the status quo and unjust mores, and thereby speed the day when “every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low, and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain.”3

A genuine revolution of values means in the final analysis that our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Every nation must now develop an overriding loyalty to mankind as a whole in order to preserve the best in their individual societies.

This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class, and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing — embracing and unconditional love for all mankind. This oft misunderstood, this oft misinterpreted concept, so readily dismissed by the Nietzsches of the world as a weak and cowardly force, has now become an absolute necessity for the survival of man. When I speak of love I am not speaking of some sentimental and weak response. I am not speaking of that force which is just emotional bosh. I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as the supreme unifying principle of life. Love is somehow the key that unlocks the door which leads to ultimate reality. This Hindu-Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist belief about ultimate — ultimate reality is beautifully summed up in the first epistle of Saint John: “Let us love one another, for love is God. And every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love.” “If we love one another, God dwelleth in us and his love is perfected in us.”4 Let us hope that this spirit will become the order of the day.

We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. The oceans of history are made turbulent by the ever-rising tides of hate. And history is cluttered with the wreckage of nations and individuals that pursued this self-defeating path of hate. As Arnold Toynbee says:

Love is the ultimate force that makes for the saving choice of life and good against the damning choice of death and evil. Therefore the first hope in our inventory must be the hope that love is going to have the last word (unquote).

We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at flood — it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is adamant to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, “Too late.” There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. Omar Khayyam is right: “The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on.”

We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and justice throughout the developing world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of time reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight.

Now let us begin. Now let us rededicate ourselves to the long and bitter, but beautiful, struggle for a new world. This is the calling of the sons of God, and our brothers wait eagerly for our response. Shall we say the odds are too great? Shall we tell them the struggle is too hard? Will our message be that the forces of American life militate against their arrival as full men, and we send our deepest regrets? Or will there be another message — of longing, of hope, of solidarity with their yearnings, of commitment to their cause, whatever the cost? The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise, we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.

As that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell, eloquently stated:

Once to every man and nation comes a moment to decide,
In the strife of truth and Falsehood, for the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God’s new Messiah offering each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever ‘twixt that darkness and that light.
Though the cause of evil prosper, yet ‘tis truth alone is strong
Though her portions be the scaffold, and upon the throne be wrong
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and behind the dim unknown
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above his own.

And if we will only make the right choice, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace. If we will make the right choice, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when “justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”5

__________________________________________________________

Anders Carlberg intervjuad, efter sin sista föreläsning 21 Dec 2012

Människan, mannen, mentorn, vännen och kollegan Anders, som såg när andra endast tittade, som lyssnade när andra endast hörde,  som agerade när andra endast pratade och som lämnade efter sig en av världens största mötesplatser för ungdomar och de bästa praktiska fundamenten och läroforumen för mänskliga frågor, och alltid med barns och ungdomars behov i fokus. Hans förståelse för de sociala sammanhangen, enkelheten i hans goda gärning och hans djupa insikt i det mänskliga känslolivet, var av sådan kaliber att man önskar att dessa kvalitéer kunde utgöra den verkliga språngbrädan för ALLT socialt, men också politiskt arbete.

Han själv sa ofta, efter ett citat av Khalil Gibran, att “förståndet är som rodret på en skuta och känslan är som seglen” – Det är känslan som ger vind i seglen, energin som krävs, för att man skall kunna företa sig att förverkliga sina drömmar, och förståndet behöver man för att kunna rikta skeppet rätt och hålla kursen.

“Vad du lämnar efter dig är inte vad som är ingraverat i stenmonument, utan vad som är invävt i andras liv”

Pericles (495 f.Kr – 429 f.Kr)

Det Anders Carlberg lämnade efter sig, kommer att vävas in i många människoliv för generationer framöver och NU mer än någonsin behöver världen det Anders gav oss!

CARLGREN_sxcf19b5

Han sista föreläsning ägde rum på Fryshuset den 21 December 2012 och här nedan följer delar ur intervjun efter den föreläsningen…

Publicerad Dec 21, 2012

Anders Carlberg är både en av vår tids största tänkare – och en driven praktiker. På samma gång en bildad filosof, en kristen islamvän, en idrottstokig samhällsförändrare. För snart 30 år sedan grundade han Fryshuset som idag är en av världens största mötesplatser för unga, en grogrund som gör det möjligt för unga människor att genom sina passioner förändra världen.

Carlbergs arbete med unga människor bottnar hans orubbliga tro på människan — och på vår skyldighet att ge unga möjligheter att växa och utvecklas.

Hans nya bok Mina förebilder och berättelser (Hjalmarson & Högberg) innehåller hans samlade visdom, tankar och berättelser om människans behov och drivkrafter, vår utveckling genom historien, de stora religionernas inverkan på människans kultur och självbild, vad vi människor och framtidens barn behöver för att skapa en bättre värld.

För frågor kontakta:
Lotta Lundberg, tlf 0739 50 22 65, email lotta.lundberg@fryshuset.se eller
Karin Filipsson, tlf 0739 50 22 04, email karin.filipsson@fryshuset.se

Läs mer om Fryshuset och Anders Carlberg på http://www.fryshuset.se

Kapitalismens skygglappar gör dig känslomässigt handikappad och själsligt sjuk!

av Kosmas Loumakis

imagesVi skall vara medvetna om i dessa tider att det finns en stark ‘lobby’ som sedan två decennier tillbaka, vill få oss att tro att tiggare egentligen är rika, att de sitter på enorma förmögenheter som de tiggt ihop och att de lurar folk (detta är förstås effektivt för att ännu mer bedöva empatin och altruismen hos ett redan samvetsbedövat folk)!… En människa som sitter ute i 10-20 minusgrader och tigger, har oftast problem, STORA problem… De som är beredda att ge 100 kr i dricks på en sötsliskig innekrog, där alla egentligen bedrar varandra (med plast-leenden och löften om ‘lönande’ och kreditvärdigt sex eller profitbaserad vänskap), men inte kan avvara en krona för en medmänniska, har MYCKET, MYCKET STÖRRE problem… Vi tränas hela tiden av lifestyle-media och skvaller-rapporteringar i att sparka nedåt och slicka uppåt, så se upp med vilka “sanningar” ni tar till er och sprider.

Falska insamlingar och tiggar-ligor skall man självklart se upp med, men det absolut största antalet av de ‘vanliga’ tiggarna är egentligen inget annat än en skamligt uppenbar bekräftelse av stadens “ruttnande” medborgar-samvete – Hur folk nonchalerar dessa människor bekräftar mer de själsliga och känslomässiga ökenlandskapen som dagligen växer hos de s.k vanliga medborgarna, än någon slags ‘trashankarnas’ komplott för att sno våra enkronor. De samvetslösas emotionella sjukdomstillstånd kan inte längre döljas med hjälp av lögn-propagandor om “tiggar-eliten” som blåser oss på våra mynt. Man är fan ta mig beredd att kasta enkronor i en löjlig fontän nånstans och önska sig något, men inte ge en krona till en medmänniska och önska honom/henne ett break i livet, ett bättre öde och samtidigt göra sin egna frusna själ en jätte-tjänst. Man mutar sina barn, med i snitt 50 kr i veckan, men man kan inte avvara en femkrona till någon som till 95% chans är i stort behov av den.

metrohomeless1I takt med att arbetslösheten och fattigdomen kraftigt stiger i samhället, vill Mammons agitatorer, kapitalismens skugga, alltså få oss att INTE titta på dess skamligaste ansikte, “väfärdsstatens” växande antal fattiga… Detta är vad sådana “va-försiktig-med-vem-du-ger-ditt-mynt-till-kampanjer” egentligen säger och inget annat. Ville man skydda medborgaren från att bli lurad, skulle man vara mer öppen med finansbolagens och investmentbankernas förehavanden. De som vill undvika att bli lurade på en krona av en påstådd girig ‘krösus’, som tigger under julen, men samtidigt accepterar att dagligen bli ordentligt blåsta av bankerna och nyhetspapegojorna, bör först söka upp en duktig och erfaren psykoanalytiker och försöka att komma över sina uppenbara, emotionella blockeringar och kanske även väcka sitt uppenbart avdomnade samvete och förmåga till empati!

Nu när det är svinkallt ute föreslår jag istället att ni tar fram gamla jackor, rockar, tjocka tröjor och filtar ni inte använt på flera år och förmodligen aldrig mer kommer att använda, och ge dessa till de som sitter ute och tigger och de som måste sova under broar, garage, trapphus, cykelstall eller soprum… Tänk med hjärtat, ge bort julmat och en extra ‘slant’ till jul dessutom! Ni fastighetsägare, bostadsrättsförenings-ordförande och vaktmästare som kör ut uteliggare från era trapphus och pannrum, i detta klimatet, är inte ett dugg bättre människor än de som medvetet plågar både djur och människor för nöjes skull… Varm-garage för bilar och isiga och svinkalla trottoarer för människorna… Överrockar åt pudlar, men inte ens en varm blick åt en hemlös. Jag kan upplysa er om att jag lätt kan hålla mig från att jubla av stolthet, över det som fortfarande de allra flesta svenskar har mage att kalla “välfärd”.

“Förbannad vare den, framför alla andra, som förslavas av kärlek till pengar. Pengar ersätter syskon, pengar tar föräldrars plats och pengar bringar oss krig och slakt”

Anacreon (570 BC – 488 BC)

800RevolutionaryBeggarStencil-KeepYourCoinsIWantChange

________________________________________________________________

%d bloggers like this: