"Peace does not just mean the absence of war." Narayan Desai

In our daily routines we are constantly aware that our work to ensure the respect of rights for persons with disabilities is merely one form of action to combat the multitudes of forces which dominate, paralyze, and destroy persons and their communities. Thus we consider it fundamental to enrich our reflection with documents derived from the experiences of other liberators; although some of these may not have an immediately recognizable link with disability issues. In this entry we present you with a reading by Narayan Desai, chancellor of Gujarat Vidyapith (a university founded upon the educational work of Ghandi), Ahmadabad, and the founder of the “Institute of the Total Revolution.” This reading was performed during the inaugaral ceremony of the “International Congress on Peace and Non-Violence,” which commemorated the 60th anniversary of Gandhi’s assassination. The photo used to illustrate this text is from Sebastiao Salgado’s work, "The End of Polio."

Sevagram/Wardha, India / January 29, 2008.

Dear lovers of peace and non-violence,

The three dates with have been selected for this International Congress on Peace and Non-violence are likely more significant than we can imagine. Tomorrow is the 60th anniversary of Gandhi’s death. However, I consider today, the 29th of January, to also be important. On this very day, 60 years ago, Gandhi spoke of his death as though he had anticipated it. During the year 1947, he had spoken of his vision three times. One day before his death he told his niece, “if I die of a common ailment, please tell the world that Gandhi was not a Mahatma. However, if I am shot due to my prayers and I take all of the bullets in my open chest, and if I have the name of God on the tip of my tongue and do not have hate in my heart, then tell the world that I was a humble servant of God.” He was anticipating and describing what was about to happen the next day.

The theme of this Congress is very important. Many of us use the terms “peace,” and “non-violence” as synonyms. However during the last few decades the meanings of these words have been transformed. Peace does not merely mean the absence of war. Peace expresses the meaning of peace with justice. Non-violence is not more passive; it is a radical force. However these ideas have been transformed and these terms now have different meanings. While a great many people have contributed to the concept of peace, Gandhi was the possibly the only person who changed the concept of non-violence. Ahimsa, the Hindu word for non-violence, is commonly understood as “to not harm or wound another person.” However Gandhi imagined this as a radical force. During the initial periods he explained the idea of non-violence as positive.

This idea was so original that he adopted a new term to explain it. He called it, “Satyagraha.” he gave three synonyms for the term Satyagraha. First, he called it, “force of the truth.” He also called it, “force of love,” and “force of the soul.” The force of the truth is based in the principle of justice. In Sanskrit the word for truth is “Satya” from the root “Sat,” meaning “existence.” For many who understand these concepts, there is no difference between “truth,” and “existence.” The force of love can move mountains. The force of the soul visualizes the unified souls of all people. Satyagraha is the philosophy based in voluntary suffering. I will give you all an example. Many of you have read Gandhi’s beautiful story of his first confession to his father. Gandhi´s father was practically on his deathbed. Gandhi had lied, stolen, and broken a gold ornament belonging to his older brother. He was unable to to make a verbal confession, so he wrote down a confession to his father. He requested a punishment and did not know how his father would react. After he read the confession, his father became silent for a while, then tore up the note and laid down. Tears streamed down his cheeks and he did not utter a single word. Gandhi described this as his first experience with non-violence. He understood that one’s own suffering could change others. Suffering in and of itself could be used as a tool of satyagrahi to transfer one’s own suffering to that of an adversary.

All of us gathered here today have had many experiences and many concerns about current affairs. We seek to find common ground and design strategies to change the world with peace and justice. I am sure that during these three days we will discuss current affairs and strategies to change the world for the better. To me the world seems to be divided between two camps. On one side we have the force of life and on the other the forces of death.

The forces of death are highly centralized and connected to each other. The forces of life do not appear to be very well organized. They do not resonate nor manifest clearly. We should search for the manner in which the forces of life can change our current situation. While reading the papers submitted for this congress by our African friends, I noted that over 70% of them applied to the situation in India. Thus, it is not just a matter of Africa, it is a matter of the north versus the south.

Rather than creating a global family, globalization has created a global market. The market trading is quite difficult, as trust for others is lacking. The base of the family is love and trust. Freedom of the global market includes the freedom to die. Economic forces have joined with military forces to maintain control and political power. If humanity does not wish to commit suicide, we need to find the manner to ward off death.

I am trying to explain how we might confront these problems using Gandhi´s methods. The principle method of Gandhi is to increase people’s consciousness. Many western and Hindu groups view Gandhi´s methods as a simple technique. But for Gandhi non-violence was a technique derived from a whole lifestyle. One cannot use non-violence without having love for one’s adversary. I continue to see non-violence used while having anger within oneself.

Gandhi described the Satyagraha as the force of love. The three essential elements of the Satyagraha are as follows: 1) strong faith in the truth, 2) love of one’s adversary as the most important principle, and 3) capacity to weather and accept suffering. I am aware of the fact that in Western culture the word “suffering” has a negative connotation. However, for Gandhi voluntary and conscious suffering was positive as it allowed him to communicate his feelings and ideas to his adversaries and to the entire world.

The first condition is that the non-violent person acts. The absence of violence is not non-violence. Love should have such an impact that it changes the adversary. Mothers change children with their love. We should first apply these principles to ourselves, not to others. Another condition is that individuals, including Gandhi, cannot complete the revolution. This can only happen when the public changes. Empowerment of the public is the first step towards the revolution.

Thus, there are 4 steps to carrying out the revolution:

1) Consciousness, according to Freire. If the public is not at least conscious, revolution is not possible. One’s own dignity is the first step towards consciousness; to have consciousness of problems and social injustices.

2) The organization cannot be limited to the organization of the forces of death. We have followed this model: that of an organization with a topdown structure of centralized power. We have to encounter new strategies, with the power based in the people. We must decentralize, work within networks, and honor humanistic values within our own organizations. To Gandhi, “organization is the testimony to non-violence.” How can we organize ourselves in a non-violent form? This is the dilemma that we need to discuss during the days of this congress.

3) Never forget that the power of the force of the truth applies to us as well. If we do not have the whole truth ourselves, we cannot share the truth with others. Towards the end of his life, Gandhi maintained a fast for the truth, although he was also open to seeing the other side. On his last day he said, “I am not mahatma; I am merely a seeker of the truth. He did not exclude his adversaries from knowing the truth.

4) It appears that today we have a conspiracy of the government against the people. As this occurs, we see people suffering and the government working towards its own interests. How can we empower the people and diminish government oppression. This is a question worthy of debate.

Gandhi´s method was to fight on one side while create on the other. Fight and create are two sides of the same coin. He went to prison fighting against the empire, and while incarcerated he spun thread and sewed clothes for the poor. Not satisfied to do one or the other, he combined fighting with creating. These two strategies should always go together.

I do not mean to say that we can only use Gandhian methods for achieving peace with justice. Gandhi never would have said this, as he was always continuing to learn. There are many experiences of problem resolution in this world. I am sure that no international conference can solve all of the problems confronted by humanity. They can only give us solidarity and clarify our ideas surrounding the problems. This is only the beginning towards solving problems. I hope that we can begin with solidarity.

Thank you.

Originally published on http://wwwderechospcd.blogspot.com by Eduardo Garcia

The Beginning of Liberation: The Political Dimension of Disability

Capitalism (and at its extremes Neoliberalism as the most advanced phase of Imperialism) is by nature a project of exclusion, as pointed out in the following article from the magazine Region Latinoamericana de la Organizacion Mundial de las Personas con Discapacidad. This article seeks to provoke an urgently needed reflection on the voracity of the model which has irremediably resulted in what Viviane Forrester calls, "Economic Terror." We welcome you to this latest entry of Nothing Can Stop Us!

In our public consciousness, disability is not a theme with elicits much atention, nor does it have a group of influential lobbyists. Power evades us, although clearly this does not mean that we do not know of certain persons with disabilities whom, thanks to their merits, generate a certain amount of public interest. However, in collective terms, there exists only a burgeoning process to elevate our interests from the priority level of social problem to that of political problem.

In Latin America, there continues to be more conscientiousness towards reclaiming our rights. Along with this, we are made more aware of the cruelty of social exclusion. Following more than a decade of framework adjustments, such as the application a liberal model for the economic market, and the privatization and reduction of budgets, our governments have refused to take responsibility for their now scarce resources. In Peru, during the debate over the 1993 Fujimorist administration, the minister of public health insisted that the problem of persons with disabilities was the problem of their families...Amidst this, studies of international organizations financed by BID (Inter-American Development Bank), as expressed by Bernardo Kingsberg, indicate that as a result of the continental changes there are seven vulnerable groups. One of these vulnerable groups is persons with disability.

While for some macroeconomic policies have generated stability and growth, we cannot disregard the studies which indicate that in order to maintain our current standard of living, we must maintain precisely six percent of annual economic growth. Clearly implicit in this growth, which will be enjoyed by only a few, there will be many hidden exclusions, abandonments, and shameful inequalities.

In the midst of this process there is a conflict. On one side we have a few people who insist that we must ensure economic stability and growth through minimizing the role of the governments and allowing the market forces to regulate social norms. On the other side, we point out that this economic model only aggrevates inequalities, as the market forces will never give us security in terms of social justice, educational opportunity, nor employment opportunity. By definition, within the scheme of capitalism the inclusion of persons with disabilities is not possible.

The global tendencies in employment are an increasinglevel of qualifications required for job applicants and a decreasing quantity of jobs. Unemployment is generating large migrations. Within this context, how is it possible to speak of productive inclusion for persons with disabilities? We are facing a reality in which there is not enough employment for persons without disability. OIT recognizes an unemployment level in the PEA (Economically Active Population) with disability of approximately eighty percent. Without employment, one cannot have costly services such as private health care, education, etc.

In Peru, where 54 percent of the population lives below the poverty line, we see diverse groups, including our group, fighting to survive. It is apparent that in Latin America, poverty and exclusion characterize the social class of persons with disabilities.

In the struggle for social inclusion we are fighting for rehabilitation services, health care, and social security. We are also fighting for inclusive education, decent employment, and an adequate standard of living. In summary, this is a political fight; not merely for the recognition of our rights, but also for the power that permits us to exercise our rights.

This perspective is visible in the Carta de Paraguay (RLOMPD 2005), "the fight for the integration of persons with disabilities is tied to the fight against poverty and against the power structures which sustain a condition of social exclusion in diverse social groups of vulnerable people (paragraph 30)."

In order to fight more effectively, we need to achieve political solidarity and work with other sectors of excluded people. As we demand civic participation, we must distance ourselves from opportunistic politicians. We must refine our system of representation and clarify our requirements for leadership. We need to leave behind our homegrown ideas of disability, open our eyes to reality, and commit ourselves to transforming our homelands.

In light of this, our brothers and sisters to the north (persons with disabilities in more developed countries) there are principles which must be taken into account regarding the politics surrounding disability. As they say in Peru, " there is no 'independent living' without the satisfaction of the basics necessities of persons with disabilities." Thus, from an understanding of this reality in developing countries, we can affirm the "Beginning of Liberation." This can be the starting point in the politics surrounding disability. We must understand the individual and collective characteristics of persons with disabilities. We must note the manner in which recognition of their dignity relates to overcoming their complexes. We must also recognize their abilities and their limitations. We must finally understand that overcoming the culture of domination will determine whether they are socially excluded.

Having said this, we must note that some tecnocratas (professionals who believe in Free Market principles) who claim to work on disability issues do not want to familiarize themselves with the political dimension. They construct theorical projects which are supposedly in favor of persons with disabilities but rarely consider their instrumentation. Within this vision, they fulfill a paternalistic role which interferes with our process of integration. Prioritizing the civic participation of persons with disabilities is key to the process of social inclusion. Their leadership in a Movement of the Excluded in our native continent is urgently needed work.

In Latin America, the course of action is clear. Within a few years it will not appear at all strange to see elected representatives in the city government, state senate, and possibly even those in command of our nation. These elected officials will responsibly lead within their homelands and within the Movement of the Excluded.

Originally published on http://wwwderechospcd.blogspot.com/ by Eduardo Garcia