|
How do we learn to keep on in this difficult political time, and
keep on with courage and vision? A few years ago, I heard Archbishop
Desmond Tutu speak at a Los Angeles benefit for a South African
project. He'd been fighting prostate cancer, was tired that evening,
and had taken a nap before his talk. But when Tutu addressed the
audience he became animated, expressing amazement that his long-oppressed
country had provided the world with an unforgettable lesson in reconciliation
and hope. Afterward, a few other people spoke, and then a band from
East L.A. took the stage and launched into an irresistibly rhythmic
tune. People started dancing.
Suddenly I noticed Tutu, boogying away in the middle of the crowd.
I'd never seen a Nobel Peace Prize winner, still less one with a
potentially fatal illness, move with such joy and abandonment. Tutu,
I realized, knows how to have a good time. Indeed, it dawned on
me that his ability to recognize and embrace life's pleasures helps
him face its cruelties and disappointments, be they personal or
political.
Few of us will match Tutu's achievements, but in a political time
that's hard and likely to get harder, we'd do well to learn from
someone who's spent years challenging abuses of human dignity from
apartheid's brutal system to Bush's Iraq war, yet has remained light-hearted
and free of bitterness. Because Tutu embodies a defiant, resilient,
persistent hope, where we act no matter what the seeming odds, both
to be true to our deepest moral values, and to open up new possibilities.
As Jim Wallis, editor of the evangelical social justice magazine
Sojourners, writes, "Hope is believing in spite of the
evidence, then watching the evidence change."
We need to be strategic, of course -- to learn new ways of framing
our vision and reaching out to those who supported George Bush because
they saw no other alternative. We need to muster enough power to
convince mainline Democrats that capitulation was at the core of
the most recent defeats, and that changing America's politics requires
drawing the line. But none of this will happen unless we persist
and find ways to keep engaged those several million Americans who've
just come in to peace and justice movements in the past couple years.
We do this by recognizing that hope is a way of looking at the world,
a way of life. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the stories
of those who, like Tutu and Nelson Mandela, persist under the most
dangerous conditions, when simply to imagine aloud the possibility
of change is deemed a crime or viewed as a type of madness. We can
also draw strength from the example of former Czech president Václav
Havel, whose country's experience, he argues, proves that a series
of small, seemingly futile moral actions can bring down an empire.
When the Czech rock band Plastic People of the Universe was first
outlawed and arrested because the authorities said their Zappa-influenced
music was "morbid" and had a "negative social impact,"
Havel organized a defense committee. That in turn evolved into the
Charter 77 organization, which set the stage for Czechoslovakia's
broader democracy movement. As Havel wrote, three years before the
Communist dictatorship fell, "Hope is not prognostication.
It is an orientation of the spirit, an orientation of the heart."
Even in a seemingly losing cause, one person may unknowingly inspire
another, and that person yet a third, who could go on to change
the world, or at least a small corner of it. Rosa Parks's husband
Raymond convinced her to attend her first NAACP meeting, the initial
step on a 12-year path that brought her to that fateful day on the
bus in Montgomery. But who got Raymond Parks involved? And why did
that person take the trouble to do so? What experiences shaped their
outlook, forged their convictions? The links in any chain of influence
are too numerous, too complex to trace. But it helps to know that
such chains exist, that we can choose to join them, and that lasting
change doesn't occur in their absence. A primary way to sustain
hope, especially when our actions seem too insignificant to amount
to anything, is to see ourselves as links on such a chain.
|
The unforeseen benefits of our actions mean that any effort may
prove more consequential than it seems at first. In 1969, Henry
Kissinger told the North Vietnamese that Richard Nixon would escalate
the Vietnam War, and even use nuclear strikes, unless they capitulated
and forced the National Liberation Front in the South to surrender
as well. Nixon had military advisers prepare detailed plans, including
mission folders with photographs of potential nuclear targets. But
two weeks before the president's November 1 deadline, there was
a nationwide day of protest, the Moratorium, when millions of Americans
joined local demonstrations, vigils, church services, petition drives,
and other forms of opposition. The next month, more than half-a-million
people marched in Washington, DC. An administration spokesperson
announced that Nixon had watched the Washington Redskins football
game and that the demonstrations wouldn't affect his policies in
the slightest. That fed the frustration of far too many in the peace
movement and accelerated the descent of some, like the Weathermen,
into violence. Yet privately, as we now know from Nixon's memoirs,
he decided the movement had, in his words, so "polarized"
American opinion that he couldn't carry out his threat. Moratorium
participants had no idea that their efforts may have been helping
to stop a nuclear attack.
Although we may never know, I'd argue that America's recent movement
against the war on Iraq similarly helped make further wars against
countries like Iran and Syria less likely, and paved the way for
more widespread questioning, even if not quite enough to turn the
election. The protests of early 2003, the largest in decades, brought
many into their first public stand, or their first in years. It
wasn't easy to voice opposition when being called allies of terrorism.
Yet people did, in every community in the country, joined by the
largest global peace demonstrations in history. Many then continued
through electoral involvement, raising further issues and building
further alliances. These movements may have inspired the next Rosa
Parks, Benjamin Spock, or Susan B. Anthony. They certainly marked
the first steps for innumerable individuals who if they continue
on will become a powerful force for justice, joining the ranks of
the other unsung heroes who ultimately create all change.
Even if the struggle outlives us, conviction matters. Actions of
conscience confirm the link between our fate and that of everyone
and everything else on the planet, respecting and reinforcing the
fundamental connections without which life itself is impossible.
Whether we flourish or perish depends on how well we can honor the
interdependence that Martin Luther King evoked: "We are caught
in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment
of destiny."
Nor should we forget that courage is contagious, that it overcomes
the silence and fear that estrange people from one another. In Poland,
during the early 1980s, leaders of the workers' support movement
KOR made a point of printing their names and phone numbers on the
back of mimeographed sheets describing incidents of police harassment
against then-unknown activists such as Lech Walesa. It was as if,
in the words of reporter Lawrence Weschler, they were "calling
out to everyone else, 'Come on out! Be open. What can they do to
us if we all start taking responsibility for our true dreams?'"
As the Polish activists discovered, we gain something profound when
we stand up for our beliefs, just as part of us dies when we know
that something is wrong, yet do nothing. We could call this radical
dignity. We don't have to tackle every issue, but if we remain silent
in the face of cruelty, injustice, and oppression, we sacrifice
part of our soul. In this sense, we keep on acting because by doing
so we affirm our humanity-the core of who we are, and what we hold
in common with others. We need to do this more than ever in the
current time.
|