Patriarchy

Patriarchy is a very strange thing. Why should an individual’s sex create inequality? I was brought up in a church which clearly preached female submission. It was not as strict as many churches. For instance, women were not required to wear skirts. However, it was expected that a woman was to submit to her husband. It was also faux pas for a woman to preach. That was a “man’s job”. The Hierarchy was as follows: children submit to their parents, women submit to their husbands, men submit to God.

My personal belief is that female submission is just another way of saying misogyny; it’s a system based on distrust and mistreatment of women. Furthermore, it is a degradation of women’s basic human rights. Why should a woman ingratiate herself to appease her husband? Such ideology is deplorable.

Clearly, these biases extend beyond the church. I’ll never forget reading about inequality in the workforce in Sociology. My textbook started off by saying that there is a secret in our society that can allow you to make more money and be more successful with less effort. To do that, all you have to do is be born male. If you want to make even more money, also be born white and tall

Much of the social interaction between men and women has sexist undertones. For instance, we see the glass ceiling and the glass escalator in the work force. Women, when in positions primarily occupied by men, must take on masculine characteristics in order to attain the same level of respect and promotion. Men on the other hand, when placed in positions primarily occupied by women are often promoted rapidly. I think this is because people associate masculinity with power and competitiveness and femininity with nurturing and caring.

What I learned from Bruce Kokopeli and George Lakey’s essay merely reaffirmed my beliefs and understanding of sexism in contemporary society. This is a cause that I would be willing to fight for. I cannot stand to see such a violation of human rights.

Denmark

Denmark’s strategic resistance to the Nazi occupation serves as a testament to the power of nonviolent action. The Danish movement tied in with the class discussion on power. By not working and not completely conforming to the Nazi’s will, the Danish took away the power held by the regime.

Wealth and availability of resources drove the occupation of many countries during Hitler’s reign. One of the main factors in Denmark’s success was making the resources more difficult to obtain or inaccessible. The Danish used noncooperation to regain some control over their country. By making the access and production of resources extremely difficult, the Danish made the Nazi’s occupation more trouble than it was worth.

The Nazis also expected the Danish to work. So, when the Danish people refused to labor, the Nazi’s place of power was compromised. By separating the Nazi’s from their means of production, the Danish were empowered. The Nazis tried to gain control of the country by making living conditions uncomfortable for the Danish people; but the Danish did not cave in to the pressure. They remained steadfast and continued to not cooperate with the Nazi power.

Through noncooperation, omission of action, and resistance in the form of collateral damage, the Danish drove the Nazi regime out of Denmark. I feel that, even though some Danish people were killed, the numbers were far less because of the nonviolent action used.

The Center of Gravity

I was fascinated by the center of gravity theory. I was considering how our own nation functions. My perception - The US is run by two driving forces: 1) the government, which is of the people and for the people. Within the democratic confines established in our constitution, the lay-person is capable of influencing political action. 2) The corporations which, according to Annie Leonard, are now bigger than the government. The government is currently in the pocket of big business.

In class, one of the students mentioned the energy crisis. I was trying to figure out where the center of gravity is in the struggle for alternative energy. Is it with the corporations? Is it with our government? The answer is with the money. Even if the power was with the government, which is supposedly controlled by the people, then the government’s power to change is still largely affected by the corporations that will be financially impacted.

If the power is with the people, it is only marginally so. Consequently, the majority of power is with the elite. If we expect change, it must be through corporate influence.

In order to have change, there must be a will to change. Are the corporations willing to make change that will not be in their best interest? Oil companies are driven by people’s dependence on their fossil fuels. I feel that the corporations pushing the fossil fuel industries will continue to make alternative energy, which is in the public’s best interest, very difficult to obtain.

198 Methods of Nonviolent Action

Sharp’s 198 Methods of Nonviolent Action were interesting in that he had a well defined list of interventions that had proven useful in the history of peaceful intercession. He tried to make nonviolence almost scientific by categorizing different techniques.

I feel that the methods listed in Sharp’s list do not always produce the desired results. One must be selective in the form of action they use. For instance, it would not make sense to use religious processions (Method 40) to advocate separation of church and state. However, one of PETA’s campaign slogans was, “I would rather go naked than wear fur.” Demonstrators then performed protest disrobings (Method 22) to drive their point home.
One nonviolent action that I never previously considered is turning one’s back (Method 54). It’s remarkably simple and rather effective in many circumstances. By turning your back to someone, you are empowered. You are showing them that what they have to say is no longer important.

I also appreciated method 174, establishing new social patterns. That technique seems to encompass many different nonviolent acts. The whole purpose of nonviolent action is to alter social patterns.

It was a very useful teaching tool for individuals interested in the application of nonviolence. It can give them a clear picture of how many options are out there.

Poland

Poland, a formerly communistic country, has a history strewn with violence and suffering. During the Warsaw Uprising alone, more than 200,000 people were killed and the capital was destroyed. Due to their military struggles, Poles referred to their country as “the Christ among Nations.” It was not until the 1970s and 1980s that nonviolence was truly embraced.

The nonviolent movement in Poland was largely centered around the Catholic Church. Poland was and is a primarily Catholic nation, so when Cardinal Karol Wojtyla became Pope John Paul II, the church’s connection to the movement was strengthened. He desired for transformation in Poland. Like in the civil rights movement, the church became a place where ideas could flow freely. People could talk at the church openly, without being silenced by a communist oppressor.

The movement for freedom from communist oppression in Poland became known as the Solidarity Movement. In 1989, it led to the democratization of Poland. This was the first time that a communist country was converted to a multi-party democracy. Originally, the goal was not for democratization, but rather a more liberal communist rule.

This movement showed me how people become empowered. The church was one of the main motivating forces. It helped create a sense of unity and allowed for people to express their ideas and feelings.