Barbara's Sharebook 

Last night I saw an uplifting film on 3 Army Resisters, all inspired and motivated by their deeply-felt Spiritual values to face whatever the Army had to throw at them. Some Army Resisters have done jail time; among those was Camillo Meijas, who had this to say among other things:

"People ask me {in reference to his Conscientious Objector position against all war}, what about Nazi Germany? Well, if there had been a sufficient number of Conscientious Objectors in the German Army, it would have stopped the war from even beginning!" {I am paraphrasing.}

Do you think this is a vain dream by a misty-eyed but impractical Idealist??????? You may very well think so..... BUT, the next thing that appeared on the screen after that statement, and I remember the figures very well, was this statement:

In Germany, {a year or so ago}, 150,000 soldiers were called up for Military Service. {I didn't know that Germany had a draft; but there you are.}

Of these, 70,000 served in the Military.

But, 80,000 of those called up, registered as Conscientious Objectors! and did NON-MILITARY SERVICE.

I guess the Germans have learned a lesson others have yet to learn???!!!

This ought to be MUCH MORE WIDELY KNOWN.

Another great idea I brought out of that meeting to view and discuss the film, a meeting of neighbors known as "Friday Night at the Meaningful Movies", was this:

All high school boys in the U.S., without exception, when they reach their 18th birthday are REQUIRED BY LAW to register for Military Service -- even tho we supposedly don't have a Draft! At one time, there was a box they could mark, saying "Conscientious Objector". Under the Reagan presidency, this box, the "C.O. option", was removed!!! It should definitely be put back in! This is a specific anti-Military "small" but important thing we Activists can agitate for.

The Pacifist Quakers {Friends}, who often help individuals who resist the Military, both spiritually and with legal help, suggest that those {young men and women} who desire a C.O. option start collecting a "file", now. Things like photographs of themselves at anti-war rallies, statements of teachers and religious counselors and relatives, books on non-violence they have read that influenced them, etc. {This in case a Draft should be re-instituted.}

For more on Resistance in the Military to Imperialist War waged by the U.S. and allies over control of the world's resources: you can go to my group, "These Boots Were Made For Walkin' -- Bring All Troops Home Now". All sincere War Resisters with friends in and out of the Military, are invited to join this group.

Some thots to revive and clarify the LEFT: Re-defining terms.

"PEACE" is such an amorphous term, used so loosely now, that it could mean almost anything. The Inquisition burned heretics in the name of "The Prince of PEACE". Every Xmas we get all these Peace, Peace, Peace cards. Every Xmas there's another WAR going on!

So I have decided instead to use the term, NO IMPERIALIST WAR! that makes it specific. Besides, while I do admire Pacifists and Quakers immensely, I am not all that non-violent in my views, as they are. I believe that indigenous peoples, for example, have a right to defend their lands, lives and communities either by non-violent means, or by arms. It is not for me to choose for them. I believe in the right of self-defense. I would not take away the right to defend themselves during invasion or occupation, for example, from Afghans or Iraqis. I would not take away the right of people to defend themselves any way they chose, from Hitler's Nazi stormtroopers, from Soviet Communist invaders, from British, French, Japanese, or any other Imperialists, including the United States. {My Dad, a civilian schoolteacher, was once caught in the crossfire of a 'Moro' uprising in the Phillipines, in the 1920's!}

People have the right to defend themselves; but NO-ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO INVADE ANOTHER COUNTRY FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER. That is why I will from now on, whenever possible, use the phrase "NO IMPERIALIST WAR" when others would use the wishy-washy, blah-nothing merely "feel-good" term covering anything and everything including masked aggression, "Peace".

The other loose term, "Social Justice", while fine in intent, actually MEANS, when you come RIGHT DOWN TO IT, it means SOCIALISM. Gasp! Because of propaganda, Americans have gotten all sorts of weird ideas about SOCIALISM. It is NOT A BAD THING! SOCIALISM and Social Justice, are terms that can be used for GOOD things interchangeably; but "SOCIALISM" expresses the REAL meaning, without euphemisms. {Besides, "Justice" is a term that here on Care2 has taken on some ambiguous meanings. Is it "Justice", or "revenge", to seek to punish someone in the same way that they hurt someone else? Some people here act like this is a proper thing; which is quite disturbing.}

SOCIALISM is not Communism; it is not Authoritarian or Totalitarian in its nature.

SOCIALISM is not Marxism; Socialism and Socialists existed before Marx wrote; and have continued to exist, after Marx wrote. {Marxists may be Socialists; but not all Socialists are Marxists.}

SOCIALISM merely means, that ALL HAVE A BASIC HUMAN RIGHT TO THE NECESSITIES OF SURVIVAL AS HUMAN BEINGS: TO FOOD, CLOTHING, SHELTER, MEDICINE AND MEDICAL CARE, and in today's society, TO AN EDUCATION.

ALL: all children, babies, the sick, the elderly, the handicapped, and the presently poor, homeless and unemployed. ALL. ALL have a RIGHT to the same basic necessities of life. Not ONLY the rich. ALL.

This has nothing to do with weird and obsolete 19th-century theories about "workers owning the means of production", etc. Nothing to do with theories of economics, arguments, ideologies, "predictions", theories of "history", etc. etc. etc. FORGET all that.

"Social Justice" implies that ALL have the ground floor of the BASIC NECESSITIES. Not that all have the "same things". People all have different perceived needs, wants and fancies! But you should NOT have a situation where John McCain can't even count the number of houses he owns; while millions sleep HOMELESS on the mean streets, in dangerous shelters, in Tent Cities -- including entire FAMILIES living this way. THAT is NOT "Social Justice". And REMEDYING that situation by building housing units for the poor, yes, that WOULD be SOCIALISM. Using Society's, and Nature's, resources for the benefit of ALL; NOT just for the few wealthy at the top.

I trust that Human Ingenuity COULD, if given half-a-chance, figure out how to bring this about. They already HAVE SOCIALIST measures, to one degree or another, in several countries of the world. You DON'T need a friggin' theory; that just stands in the way of practicality! Yes, Universal Health Care for All, in America, such as they have had for decades in ALL OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD; Yes, that would be SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. {You'd have to get rid of the Corporations to get there, the HMOs, etc.}

The CHIEF ENEMY of both SOCIALISM, and of the American People, {and of the entire PLANET}, is the huge and totally VILE and EVIL, Military-Industrial-Prison-Advertising Complex.

Jesus if he were living today, would be a SOCIALIST.