परिवर्तनकारी शक्तिहरु को लागि एक आवाज
  • Janakpur Railway

    नेपाल को एकमात्र रेल्वे सेवा जनकपुर मा छ तर सरकार पक्ष बाट मधेशीमाथि मात्र विभेद नभएर यस रेल्वे मा पनि भएछ जसले गर्दा यसको हालत झन् झर-झर हुन् पुगेको छ ।

    कहिले काही त् बिना driver पनि कूद छ यो रेल्वे !

    See Full Story
  • Lumbini- Birth place of Lord Buddha

    Lumbinī is a Buddhist pilgrimage site in the Rupandehi district of Nepal. It is the place where Queen Mayadevi gave birth to Siddhartha Gautama. Siddhartha Gautama lived roughly between 623 and 543 BCE and he founded Buddhism as Gautama Buddha.

    See All Features
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Article by Kanak Dixit in Hindustan Times


कनक मणि दीक्षित, वरिष्ठ नेपाली पत्रकार
First Published:15-07-14 08:45 PM in Hindustan Times

नेपाल के मधेसी और भारत की चिंता
नेपाल में राजनीतिक स्थिरता और उसका आर्थिक विकास, दोनों भारत के लिए अत्यंत महत्वपूर्ण हैं, खासकर नेपाल से लगे इसके दो प्रदेशों- उत्तर प्रदेश और बिहार के सुख-चैन इससे खासा प्रभावित होते हैं। भारत के नए राजनीतिक नेतृत्व के लिए यह निहायत जरूरी है कि वह नेपाल के साथ रिश्तों पर ध्यान दे। प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी की टीम को इस दिशा में तत्काल सक्रिय होना चाहिए और काठमांडू में संघीय प्रणाली को लेकर छिड़ी बहस से जुड़ना चाहिए। इस बहस में नेपाल में जो प्रस्तावित किया जा रहा है और भारतीय वार्ताकारों के जो सुझाव हैं, वे किसी भी पक्ष के हित में नहीं हैं। उनके भी नहीं, जो दोनों तरफ के सीमावर्ती मैदानी इलाकों के बाशिंदे हैं।
Kanak Dixit

साल 2007 में नेपाल के अंतरिम संविधान ने इसे संघीय गणराज्य घोषित किया था, लेकिन राज्यों का खाका खींचने का काम संविधान सभा पर छोड़ दिया था। चार वर्षो की कोशिशों के बाद आखिरकार संविधान सभा साल 2012 में धराशायी हो गई और इसके मूल में संघीय स्वरूप को लेकर पैदा हुई कटुता ही थी। पिछले वर्ष नवंबर में हुए चुनावों के बाद यह दूसरी संविधान सभा अस्तित्व में है और अब भी संघीय स्वरूप का निर्धारण ही बहस का केंद्र है। जिस तरीके से राज्यों का गठन होगा, उनसे ही यह तय होगा कि संतुलित विकास के लायक स्थितियां होंगी या फिर ऐसे राज्य गठित होंगे, जिनके तहत कुलीन तबके को फायदा होगा तथा वंचित लोग और अशक्त कर दिए जाएंगे।
नेपाल के संघीये ढांचे को लेकर दो तरह के विचार आमने-सामने हैं। एक तरफ वे लोग हैं, जो आर्थिक भूगोल के आधार पर राज्य गठित करने की मांग कर रहे हैं, तो दूसरी तरफ वे लोग हैं, जो पहचान के आधार पर राज्यों का खाका खींचने की बात कर रहे हैं। पहले समूह के लोगों का तर्क है कि पहाड़ और मैदान, दोनों को मिलाकर राज्यों की रूपरेखा तय की जाए, ताकि उनमें आर्थिक सहयोग बढ़े और उनका समुचित विकास हो। दूसरी तरफ जातीय (जनजाति) और मधेसी समुदाय के कार्यकर्ताओं (तराई के लोगों) का कहना है कि केवल पहचान पर आधारित संघीय ढांचा ही उन्हें काठमांडू की सत्ताधारी जातियों और वर्गो के ऐतिहासिक चंगुल से मुक्ति दिलाएगा। नेपाल के लोग इस मसले को खुद ही सुलझा लेते, मगर बीजिंग और नई दिल्ली के इसमें कूद पड़ने से यह मसला और उलझ गया है। बीजिंग यह साफ कर चुका है कि वह पहाड़ी इलाकों में जातीय पहचान पर आधारित राज्यों के गठन के पक्ष में नहीं है, शायद चीन तिब्बत में फैली जातीय राजनीति से चिंतित है।दूसरी तरफ, भारत की प्राथमिकता ‘एक मधेसी प्रदेश’ की है। एक मैदानी राज्य के पक्ष में उठी लोकप्रिय मांग को देखते हुए मधेसी समुदाय के संशयवादी भी अब खामोश हो गए हैं।
न तो चीन ने और न ही भारत ने नेपाल के संघीय ढांचे पर अपना पुराना रुख बदला है, जबकि नवंबर 2013 के चुनाव के बाद नेपाल की जमीनी सच्चई बदल चुकी है। नेपाली मतदाता अपने वोट के जरिये आर्थिक भूगोल पर आधारित राज्यों की रूपरेखा के पक्ष में अपनी राय जाहिर कर चुके हैं और इसीलिए उन्होंने नेपाली कांग्रेस और सीपीएन (यूएमएल) को नई संविधान सभा में दो-तिहाई सीटें दीं। माओवादी और मधेसीवादी पार्टियों और पहचान आधारित सूबों के पक्षधरों को उन्होंने इस चुनाव में परास्त कर दिया।
नेपाल के मधेसी नागरिकों को लंबे समय से बोझ समझा जाता रहा है। वे न सिर्फ सामाजिक-आर्थिक रूप से हाशिये पर धकेले जाते रहे, बल्कि काठमांडू में मान्य पहाड़ केंद्रित ‘पहाड़िया’ पहचान से भी वे बेदखल किए गए। ऐसे में, साल 2007 की जनवरी-फरवरी में स्वत:स्फूर्त मधेस आंदोलन एक निर्णायक मोड़ के रूप में सामने आया और इस आंदोलन ने यह सुनिश्चित किया कि काठमांडू व देश के दूसरे हिस्सों में भी मैदान के लोग बराबर सम्मान के हकदार हैं। पहाड़ और मैदान को मिलाकर ही एक नेपाल की समझ विकसित होने लगी। ऐसे में, सवाल यह उठता है कि ऐतिहासिक विलगाव के आधार पर नेपाल के संघीय स्वरूप का ढांचा तैयार होना चाहिए या फिर पूर्व में उपेक्षित समुदायों की समृद्धि को पक्का करने के लक्ष्य के आधार पर? पहचान के आधार पर राज्यों के गठन की मांग ने संघ के स्वरूप की बहस को तराई क्षेत्र के राज्यों पर केंद्रित कर दिया है।
नेपाल में सबसे अधिक गरीबी और शोषण मधेस नागरिकों के बीच ही है और संघ को उनकी राजनीतिक और आर्थिक मुक्ति का वचन देना ही चाहिए। मेरा मानना है कि एक ही सूबे के नागरिक के तौर पर मैदान के लोगों की भी पहाड़ के संसाधनों तक स्वाभाविक पहुंच होनी चाहिए। तराई के इलाके मूलत: कृषि पर निर्भर हैं, यहां औद्योगीकरण की अपार संभावनाएं हैं। केवल खेती से तराई के गरीबों का जीवन-स्तर नहीं सुधर सकता। ये गरीब मधेसी काठमांडू के साथ-साथ मैदानी सामंतों की उपेक्षा के शिकार रहे हैं। इसलिए हमें पहाड़ों की उदार सहायता का यह वादा भी सुनिश्चित करना पड़ेगा कि कृषि-वानिकी, पर्यटन, पनबिजली, सेवा-उद्योग, जल प्रबंधन और सिंचाई आदि पर मैदान के लोगों का भी हक है।
अलग तराई प्रदेश के विचार का पहाड़िया नेताओं द्वारा जोरदार विरोध न किए जाने से भी संदेह होता है। यदि पहाड़ों की प्राकृतिक संपदा तराई की विशाल और गरीब आबादी के साथ साझा नहीं की गई, तो उन पर सिर्फ पहाड़ी सूबों का एकाधिकार होगा। जहां तक अलग तराई प्रदेश में भारत की दिलचस्पी का सवाल है, तो इसके पीछे उसकी अपनी राष्ट्रीय सुरक्षा की चिंता हो सकती है। वह शायद चाहता है कि इस तरह उसकी खुली सीमा के साथ एक बफर क्षेत्र बन जाए। लेकिन बेहतर विकल्प यह है कि भारत में उग्रवादियों की घुसपैठ को रोकने के लिए नेपाल से अधिक सहयोग मांगा जाए। इस लिहाज से मौजूदा व्यवस्था से अधिक कारगर प्रत्यर्पण संधि होगी। यदि इसके पीछे नेपाल में चीन के बढ़ते प्रभाव को (यदि वह है) रोकना है, तो बफर क्षेत्र का यह विचार कारगर साबित नहीं होगा, क्योंकि चुरे/ शिवालिक पहाड़ियों की तरफ से चीन का वह प्रभाव आ सकता है।
साफ है, नेपाल में संघीय ढांचे को लेकर जारी बहस में भू-राजनीतिक, राजनीतिक-आर्थिक और सामुदायिक पहलुओं के साथ न्याय नहीं हो रहा। इस मसले पर दिल्ली, लखनऊ और पटना की सिविल सोसायटी, अकादमिक क्षेत्र और राजनीतिक तबके में किसी प्रकार की खुली बहस न होने के घातक निष्कर्ष निकल सकते हैं। एक समृद्ध तराई नेपाल के लिए तो अच्छा है ही, इससे उत्तरी बिहार और उत्तर प्रदेश को भी आर्थिक संबल मिलेगा। मगर यदि नेपाल के संघीय ढांचे को गढ़ने में कोई चूक हुई, तो इसकी कीमत दोनों देशों के लोगों और समाज को चुकानी पड़ेगी।

Source: Hindustan Times

8 Bunde Agreement

Agreement between the GoN and Samyukta Loktantrik Madheshi Morcha

Respecting the sentiments and aspirations of the Madheshi people of Nepal, expressed
during the protests and movements that they have organized time and again for equal
rights, this Agreement was signed between the Government of Nepal and the Samyukta
Loktrantik Madheshi Morcha [United Democratic Madheshi Front] to ensure the
establishment of federal democratic republic in Nepal for multiparty democratic system
of governance, to guarantee equality, freedom and justice for all, and to end all forms of
discrimination. This Agreement shall be implemented at once. The points of the
agreement are as follows:

1. The State shall declare those killed during the Madhesh Movement as martyrs, and
shall provide appropriate compensation to those maimed and yet to receive
compensation. Similarly, arrangements shall be made for those injured during the
Movement to receive medical expenses and those martyred shall be given due
recognition and their families shall be provided with relief at the rate of Rs 1 million,
and those arrested shall be immediately released.

2. Nepal shall become a federal democratic republic by accepting people’s aspiration for
a federal structure with autonomous regions, including the Madheshi people’s
aspiration for an autonomous Madhesh state. In the federal structure, power between
the Centre and the states shall be divided clearly according to a list. The states shall
be fully autonomous and shall enjoy full rights. The structure, full details of the lists
of the Centre and the states and the division of power between them shall be
determined by the Constituent Assembly, keeping Nepal’s sovereignty and integrity
intact.

3. The existing legal provision of 20 per cent in Sub-section 14 of Section 7 of the
Election of Members to the Constituent Assembly Act 2064 shall be changed to 30
per cent.

4. The Government shall execute appointments, promotions and nominations in a
manner that ensures inclusive and proportional participation of Madheshi people,
Adivasi, Jananati, women, Dalits, backward regions and minority communities in all
state bodies, including the security bodies.

5. Proportional, inclusive group entry of Madheshi people and other communities into
the Nepal Army shall be ensured to impart national character to Nepal Army and to
make it more inclusive.

6. The Government of Nepal and the United Democratic Madhesi Front together request
all armed groups agitating in the Terai to begin negotiations for a peaceful political
process and to find solutions to all outstanding problems through dialogue. The
Government of Nepal shall take necessary steps to create an environment conducive
to this purpose. We appeal everyone to help conduct the Constituent Assembly
election on April 10 in an environment which is peaceful, non-violent, impartial, fair
and free of fear.

7. The Government of Nepal shall immediately release all those who have been
detained, withdraw cases filed against Madheshi leaders and party cadres of the
Forum as well as of other parties, and immediately implement all other points of the
22-Point Agreement signed between the Government of Nepal and the Madheshi
Janadhikar Forum on August 30, 2007.

8. All protest programmes called by the United Democratic Madhesi Forum shall be
immediately withdrawn.

The Government of Nepal shall be responsible for the constitutional, legal, political and
administrative aspects of the issues mentioned in this Agreement. The Government shall
form a high-level monitoring committee, comprising, among others, members of the
Front, to monitor the implementation of this agreement.

Signatories to the Agreement:
Sd. Sd.
Rajendra Mahato Girija Prasad Koirala
National Chairperson Prime Minister
Sadbhavana Party Government of Nepal

Sd.
Upendra Yadav
Central Coordinator
Madheshi Janadhikar Forum, Nepal

Sd.
Mahanath Thakur
Chairperson
Terai Madhesh Loktrantik Party

 (February 28, 2008)

Nepali Version


नेपाल सरकार र संयुक्त लोकतान्त्रिक मधेशी मोर्चा बिच भएको ८ बुंदे सम्झौता (Feb 28, 2008)

मधेशीहरुले गरेको मधेश आन्दोलनको मर्मलाई बुझ्दै संघीय गणतान्त्रिक नेपालको स्थापनालाई सुनिश्चित गर्न र सबै नेपालीहरुमा समानता, स्वतन्त्रता र न्यायको प्रत्याभूति होस् भनेर नेपाल सरकार र संयुक्त मधेशी मोर्चा बिच तपसिल बमोजिमको आठ (८) बुंदे सम्झौता एकै साथ लागु हुने गरि गरिएको छ:

(१) मधेश आन्दोलनको बेला सहादत प्राप्त गर्नेहरु सबैलाई सरकारले सहिद घोषणा गर्नु पर्छ र उचित क्षतिपुर्ति को साथ-साथै रु. १० लाख प्रत्येकको परिवारले पाउनु पर्छ साथै आन्दोलनको बेला घाइते हुनेहरु पनि इलाज खर्चको साथ-साथै उचित क्षतिपुर्ति पाउनु पर्छ ।मधेश आन्दोलनको बेला जेल, थुनुवा र हिरासतमा परेका सम्पूर्णलाई नि-शर्त छोड्नु पर्छ ।

(२) नेपाली जनताको चाहना अनुसार नेपाललाई स्वायत शासन हुनेगरी संघीय गणतान्त्रिक प्रणालीमा लैजानु पर्छ र मधेशी जनताको चाहना अनुरुप मधेशलाई एक स्वायत मधेश प्रदेश घोषणा गर्नु पर्छ । संघीय प्रणालीमा शक्तिको बांडफांड केन्द्र र राज्यमा लिस्ट अनुसार लागु गर्नु पर्छ । प्रदेशहरु पूर्णरुपले स्वायत हुन्छ र जनताले पूर्ण अधिकारको प्रत्याभूति लिन पाउनु पर्छ । प्रदेशको बनावट, केन्द्र र राज्य बीच शक्तिको बांडफाडको लिस्ट संविधान सभाले नेपालको प्रभुत्व र सम्पुर्णतालाई आत्म-साथ गरि निर्धारण गर्नेछ ।

(३) संविधान सभा सदस्य एन २०६४ को निर्वाचन खण्ड ७ को उपखण्ड १४ मा व्याख्या गरे अनुसार २०% कानुनी प्रक्रिया रहेकोलाई ३०% गर्नु पर्छ ।

(४) सरकारले कुनै पनि नियुक्ति, बढुवा र दरखास्त =देशको सबै अंगमा (सुरक्षा निकाय समेत) मधेशी, दलित, जनजाती, आदिवासी, महिला, शोषित र पिछडिएका तथा अल्पसंख्यकहरुलाई समानुपातिक आधारमा सङ्लग्न गराउनु पर्छ ।

(५) नेपाली सेनामा मधेशी र अन्य समुदायको समानुपातिक र समुहगत प्रवेशको लागि नेपाली सेनाले राष्ट्रिय चरित्र अनुसार वातावरण मिलाउनु पर्छ ।

(६) मधेशका सम्पूर्ण सशस्त्र समुहलाई शान्ति प्रक्रियामा आउन र आफ्नो विशिष्ट मांगहरुलाई वार्ताबाट समाधान गर्न नेपाल सरकार र लोकतान्त्रिक मधेशी मोर्चा अनुरोध गर्दछ । नेपाल सरकारले वार्ताको लागि सहज वातावरण मिलाउनु पर्छ । April 10 मा सम्पन्न हुन् गइरहेको संविधान सभाको चुनाव शान्तिपूर्ण, धाँदली रहित, हिंसा विरोधी, र निस्पक्ष रुपले सम्पन्न गराई दिनमा मद्दत गर्न सबैमा हामी अनुरोध गर्दछौ ।

(७) सरकारले तत्कालै मधेशी जनअधिकार फोरम लगायत अन्य पार्टीका नेता तथा कार्यकर्ताहरुलाई हिरासत बाट मुक्त र उनीहरु प्रति चलाएको मुद्दा खारिज गर्नु पर्छ तथा फोरम र सरकार बीच August 30, 2007 मा भएका २२ बुंदे सम्झौता तुरुन्त लागु गर्नु पर्छ ।

(८) संयुक्त लोकतान्त्रिक मधेशी मोर्चाले घोषणा गरेका आफ्नो विरोधका सबै कार्यक्रमहरु फिर्ता लिन्छ ।

यस सम्झौतामा उल्लेख गरिएका सम्पूर्ण मुद्दाहरुको संवैधानिक, कानुनी, राजनीतिक र प्रशाशनिक दृष्‍टिकोणको जिम्मेवारी सरकारको हुनेछ । यस सम्झौतालाई लागुगर्न को लागि सरकारले एक उच्च स्तरीय कमिटि बनाउने छ जुन यस मोर्चाका प्रतिनिधि संग तालमेल बसाएर काम गर्नेछ ।
हस्ताक्षर गर्नेहरु:

सरकार पक्षबाट: 
गिरिजा प्रसाद कोइराला
(प्रधानमन्त्री, नेपाल सरकार)


मोर्चा पक्षबाट:
(१) उपेन्द्र यादव
(केन्द्रिय संयोजक)
मधेशी जनअधिकार फोरम, नेपाल 
(२) राजेन्द्र महतो 
राष्ट्रिय अध्यक्ष, सदभावना पार्टी 
(३) महन्त ठाकुर 
अध्यक्ष, तराई मधेश लोकतान्त्रिक पार्टी 

(लेखाईमा कुनै त्रुटी भएमा यसलाई सच्चियाउन हामीलाई रिपोर्ट गर्नुस)


Power and Methods of Nonviolent Action & Lists of Civil Rights Leaders

The Power of Nonviolent Direct Action

M. Gandhi
Written by Daniel Hunter, Training for Change www.TrainingForChange.org
Author of the book Strategy And Soul www.strategyandsoul.org

Nonviolent direct action is known by many names. Gandhi called it satyagraha (truth or
soul force). Henry Thoreau called it civil disobedience. Activists in North Philadelphia
sometimes call it street heat. In the Philippines, democracy activists call it people power.
Underneath all of these definitions are similar themes such as a use of tactics outside of
normal institutions (e.g. use of the street or fasting) and a commitment to refraining from
violence. But even more core to all of these is that direct action is about power – bringing
together people to make a united change.

A DEFINITION OF NONVIOLENT DIRECT ACTION

Nonviolent action are techniques outside of institutionalized behavior for social change that challenges an unjust power dynamic using methods of protest, noncooperation, and intervention without the use or threat of injurious force.

In essence, people turn to nonviolent direct action after the institutionalized ways of
settling disagreements are unsuccessful. In the civil rights movement, black people turned
to nonviolent action after years of fighting in the courts to end institutionalized
segregation. The courts did not provide the relief needed, and so nonviolent action was
born. The methods of nonviolent action lie outside institutionalized behavior.
In using these methods people either do the unexpected or what they’re forbidden to do,
for example demanding coffee at a segregated lunch counter if they're African American.
Or nonviolent action can be refusing to do what they are expected or required to do, like
pay a special tax to the English king for the tea they drink.
In the Philadelphia struggle against casinos, Casino-Free Philadelphia (CFP) turned to
nonviolent action after it became obvious the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) and then-elected officials had no interest in protecting the rights of residents and city taxpayers regarding the ills of casinos. The actions included noncooperation such as
refusing to cooperate with the PGCB’s demands that the public not speak at “public”
meetings. Other tactics were what we were not expected to do, such as the Citizens’
Document Search to get public documents made secret by the PGCB by a nonviolent
“search and seizure” to liberate the plans from their offices.1 All of those tactics put
pressure on institutions, like the PGCB, but were actions which, of themselves, were
outside tradition.
Nonviolent action, therefore, can be distinguished from other forms of doing conflict
which are within current institutions and traditions, like going to court or competing in an
election. They are not considered nonviolent action. It was not nonviolent action when
CFP collected 27,000 signatures to give citizens a vote on the question of if casinos should
be built within 1,500-feet of homes, places of worship, and schools. Getting petitions to
place a referendum on the ballot is within the City’s rules and therefore institutionalized. But when the Supreme Court stripped the question from the ballot and CFP ran Philly’s
Ballot Box – running our own election – it was nonviolent direct action.
When the courts, elected officials, and official institutions, like the City Planning
Commission, abandon their roles to protect citizens and instead act corruptly, where to
turn? People turn to nonviolent direct action after the institutional modes fail.
So why does nonviolent action work? Aren’t institutions like the Supreme Court imbued
with more power than frustrated citizens? The answer, surprisingly, is no – not when
people use their power.

IT’S ALL ABOUT POWER

Baba Saheb Ambedkar

Traditionally politics is seen as flowing from the top downwards. Those on top have
power. A janitor takes orders from their supervisor who takes orders from the district
head and so on – all the way up to the President of the United States.
Most institutions in our society are viewed this way: corporations have at their top the
CEO, cities have Mayors at the top, and our legal system has a federal Supreme Court. In
that view of society everyone below has to follow orders or face consequences: such as
being fired, facing political retribution, or being placed in jail.
But that is not the only type of power.
Power also flows up. The CEO is helpless if employees refuse to take their orders. The
Mayor is helpless if the citizens withhold their financial support for his initiatives (e.g.
refuse to pay taxes), undermine his policies, and collectively refuse to go along with her
orders. The Supreme Court is disabled if cities refuse to implement their interpretation of
laws.
Direct action uses this form of power: power flowing from the bottom upwards. People
power. A group in Serbia fighting against a dictator wrote:

By themselves, rulers cannot collect taxes, enforce repressive laws and regulations, keep trains running on time, prepare national budgets, direct traffic, manage ports, print money, repair roads, keep food supplied to the markets, make steel, build rockets, train the police and the army, issue postage stamps or even milk a cow. People provide these services to the ruler through a variety of organizations and institutions. If the people stop providing these skills, the ruler cannot rule.

Casino-Free Philadelphia has regularly used this type of power to change policies. For
example, the public was not allowed to testify at the PGCB meetings for most of its
existence. Rather than accept orders from the PGCB chair that said they could not testify,
members decided to testify anyway.

At a meeting in fall 2007, several members of Casino-Free Philadelphia stood up, one at a
time, during the PGCB board meeting. and started testifying. Each one was gaveled down
and told to be quiet by the chairwoman. A recess was immediately called. The three
members who spoke – unfortunately all the designated spokespeople – were escorted out
of the building and told they would not be allowed to return.

When the board reconvened after recess, the chairwoman warned the group not to
continue to interrupt. The remainder of the group immediately stood up and attempted to
testify. Another recess was called.
When the PGCB reconvened again, the group again attempted to speak up. Finally, the
chairwoman shut down the entire PGCB meeting rather than allow people to speak.

The result: rather than risk another engagement like that, she allowed the public to speak
at the next hearing. Moreover, she initiated a larger shift in policy and now gives time for
citizens to speak at several meetings throughout the year.
Mohandas Gandhi said that ultimately the power of people lies in their choice to either
cooperate or not cooperate. Noncooperation with unjust or wrong authority is the heart of
nonviolent direct action.
This flies in the face of the old notion of power which says it flows downwards. Instead,
the theory of nonviolent action is that power flows upwards. It’s a democratic way of
viewing power by seeing that unjust authority is only in place because of the cooperation
of all of the layers below it.
That’s why people who are oppressed and disenfranchised turn to nonviolent action: it’s a
step towards empowerment to see how we have power – even if we are not powerful
politicians, judges, or mayors of a city.

NONVIOLENT ACTION REQUIRES DISCIPLINE

W.E.B. DuBois

Members of Casino-Free Philadelphia could not have been successful in that action if they
did not carry themselves with respect, show respect to the humanity of the chairwoman
while disobeying her orders to be silent, and stay focused on their goals during the action.
The action is the message in nonviolent action.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. laid out four principles that he used during the civil rights
movement. We offer them because when we use people power it does require that we act
civilly, respectfully, and modeling the highest integrity we can muster:

1) Define your objectives. Injustice and violence are everywhere around us. A single
campaign or action will not remove it all. One must begin by focusing on a specific
injustice; it should be possible to discuss it in fairly simple and clear-cut terms. Decisionmaking
and negotiations during a campaign will be helped immensely if you have
defined clearly your short-range objective and your long-range goal.

2) Be honest and listen well. Part of your goal is to win your opponent's respect. Conduct
yourself in a way which encourages that respect by showing your scrupulous care for
truth and justice. A crucial part of nonviolent direct action is the understanding that no
one knows the complete truth about the issues at hand. Listening with openness to what
your opponents have to say about your campaign is very important in your pursuit of the
whole truth. Similarly, listening carefully to those who are struggling at your side helps
ensure that the oppression which you are fighting is not replaced by another oppression.

3) Love your enemies. No matter how deeply involved in unjust and violent systems
some people are, your goal is to break down those systems, not to punish others for
wrong-doing. Real justice is established when people refuse to maintain oppressive
systems, not when the people in those systems are destroyed. Nonviolence requires a
steadfast and conscious willingness to mentally separate respect for all people from
disrespect for what some people are doing in a given situation.

4) Give your opponents a way out. By using nonviolence, you are showing a kind of
strength that overcomes injustice. Avoid self-righteousness with opponents. Recognize
their weaknesses, embarrassments and fears. In specific confrontations, as well as in the
larger campaign, find a way to let them participate in finding a solution. Give them
options to respond to, not non-negotiable demands.

[These principles were first developed in the context of the struggle for civil rights in the U.S. at the request of Dr. Martin Luther King. The present
version has been slightly revised for international use by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation]

While many would never even consider violent actions, the purpose of clarifying nonviolent action is to limit the actions of participants to only those within a framework of
disciplined, unified action. Casino-Free Philadelphia uses the following Nonviolent Action
Guidelines in all of its direct actions, which are agreed upon by all participants.
In our actions, we will...

✦ bring humor;
✦ adopt a dignified, open and friendly attitude towards anybody we encounter;
✦ demonstrate our creativity in the use of new slogans, songs, and props;
✦ keep our calm, and our eyes on the prize.
In our actions, we will not...
✦ bring weapons;
✦ use verbal or physical violence;
✦ damage property;
✦ use drugs or alcohol;
✦ hide our identity behind hoods or masks;
✦ risk arrest without the required training;
✦ run, as it contributes to heightening tensions for everybody.

By setting clear agreed upon guidelines we ensure mutual respect. We know what people
around us will and will not do. No provocation will get us off our message.

THE ACTION IS THE MESSAGE

Alice Paul

Nonviolent action differs from other forms of protest that are fundamentally about asking
for our rights. Strategic nonviolent action is about acting for our rights.
Strategic nonviolent action gives us a basis for mutual trust, greater public support, and a
focused channel to highlight injustice.

In strategic nonviolent action our action is our message. For example, Casino-Free
Philadelphia ran a direct action campaign called Operation Transparency in the fall of
2007. The PGCB refused to make public their documents, such as updated site plans and
traffic plans. No meaningful public input could be made without access to such basic
documents.

The goal was to get the PGCB to stop violating our right to know and release the hidden
documents. If they did not release the documents by our December 1 deadline, we vowed
to go to their offices in Harrisburg to carry out a “citizens’ document search” to make the
documents public ourselves. The citizens’ document search is a direct action tactic first
designed in Ottawa, which we had learned about and brought to our work.

Operation Transparency lasted for two-months, with small media-friendly actions like
washing the PGCB’s windows to help them become more transparent. After the deadline
passed, the documents still had not been released.

Fourteen people carried out the citizens’ document search. Two at a time, people stepped
forward. They read a “citizens’ search warrant” and asked the PGCB to release the
documents. They walked forward and were promptly arrested.

All were later found to be “Not Guilty” by a judge who scolded the PGCB’s behavior. The
judge virtually invited us to return to Harrisburg and do it again if the PGCB did not
release the documents and become transparent. Public pressure mounted.

The power of direct action was that our refusal – our noncooperation – resulted in new
allies coming to our sides, an increase in dramatic tension for the PGCB, and shed light on
the clarity of the wrongfulness of their position.

Without direct action, most pundits would not be citing how bad the PGCB’s behavior has
been. They would ignore it, just like most ignore most forms of public abuse.
(In fact, while we are on the topic of the media, you can see in their reporting how the
media is biased towards a top-down view of power. Their insistence that the casinos are
inevitable is because they believe power flows from the top. Like politicians, they are not
used to power flowing from the bottom. Without us exerting it often enough, why should
they see it flow any other way?)

Instead, though, the press consistently reported the action: citizens attempting to get
documents that the PGCB was hiding. Several reporters got very involved and began
asking the PGCB what was their reason for hiding the documents and why weren’t they
releasing them.

Asking the PGCB for the documents via a public request would not have done that. (We
previously did public requests and were consistently rejected.) Even a rally would not
have that result. We needed a media-friendly, savvy way to highlight the injustice. The
strategic value: show, don’t tell.

Unlike a strategy which merely asks the government to do the right thing, nonviolent
action sees that when people withdraw their consent from an unjust system, it can be
forced to give them what they want. The citizens’ document search is a classic tactic for
that: use our power as citizens to apply power and pressure to our institutions.
It is not reliant upon the current system to give us what we want. It is about using our
political power to get it.

In that way, nonviolent direct action is much more powerful than traditional marches or
rallies, which are merely protests asking the government to do the right thing. Nonviolent
direct action highlights the injustice by acting in congruence with what we want: we
believe we have a right to the documents. Then we won’t be satisfied when our rights are
denied – we will go take them ourselves.

Nonviolence is thus more than protesting and more than a philosophy of not harming
people.
Now that’s power to the people.

198 Methods of Nonviolent Action

THE METHODS OF NONVIOLENT PROTEST AND PERSUASION


Formal Statements

1. Public Speeches
2. Letters of opposition or support
3. Declarations by organizations and institutions
4. Signed public statements
5. Declarations of indictment and intention
6. Group or mass petitions

Communications with a Wider Audience

7. Slogans, caricatures, and symbols
8. Banners, posters, displayed communications
9. Leaflets, pamphlets, and books
10. Newspapers and journals
11. Records, radio, and television
12. Skywriting and earthwriting

Group Representations

13. Deputations
14. Mock awards
15. Group lobbying
16. Picketing
17. Mock elections

Symbolic Public Acts

18. Displays of flags and symbolic colors
19. Wearing of symbols
20. Prayer and worship
21. Delivering symbolic objects
22. Protest disrobings
23. Destruction of own property
24. Symbolic lights
25. Displays of portraits
26. Paint as protest
27. New signs and names
28. Symbolic sounds
29. Symbolic reclamations
30. Rude gestures

Pressures on Individuals

31. “Haunting” officials
32. Taunting officials
33. Fraternization
34. Vigils

Drama and Music

35. Humorous skits and pranks
36. Performances of plays and music
37. Singing

Processions

38. Marches
39. Parades
40. Religious processions
41. Pilgrimages
42. Motorcades

Honoring the Dead

43. Political mourning
44. Mock funerals
45. Demonstrative funerals
46. Homage at burial places

Public Assemblies

47. Assemblies of protest or support
48. Protest meetings
49. Camouflaged meetings of protest
50. Teach-ins

Withdrawal and Renunciation

51. Walk-outs
52. Silence
53. Renouncing honors
54. Turning one’s back

THE METHODS OF SOCIAL NONCOOPERATION

Ostracism of Persons

55. Social boycott
56. Selective social boycott
57. Lysistratic nonaction
58. Excommunication
59. Interdict

Noncooperation with Social Events, Customs, and Institutions

60. Suspension of social and sports activities
61. Boycott of social affairs
62. Student strike
63. Social disobedience
64. Withdrawal from social institutions

Withdrawal from the Social System

65. Stay-at-home
66. Total personal noncooperation
67. “Flight” of workers
68. Sanctuary
69. Collective disappearance
70. Protest emigration (hijrat )

THE METHODS OF ECONOMIC NONCOOPERATION: ECONOMIC BOYCOTTS

Actions by Consumers

71. Consumers’ boycott
72. Nonconsumption of boycotted goods
73. Policy of austerity
74. Rent withholding
75. Refusal to rent
76. National consumers’ boycott
77. International consumers’ boycott

Action by Workers and Producers

78. Workmen’s boycott
79. Producers’ boycott

Action by Middlemen

80. Suppliers’ and handlers’ boycott

Action by Owners and Management

81. Traders’ boycott
82. Refusal to let or sell property
83. Lockout
84. Refusal of industrial assistance
85. Merchants’ “general strike”

Action by Holders of Financial Resources

86. Withdrawal of bank deposits
87. Refusal to pay fees, dues, and assessments
88. Refusal to pay debts or interest
89. Severance of funds and credit
90. Revenue refusal
91. Refusal of a government’s money

Action by Governments

92. Domestic embargo
93. Blacklisting of traders
94. International sellers’ embargo
95. International buyers’ embargo
96. International trade embargo

THE METHODS OF ECONOMIC NONCOOPERATION: 
THE STRIKE

Symbolic Strikes

97. Protest strike
98. Quickie walkout (lightning strike)

Agricultural Strikes

99. Peasant strike
100. Farm Workers’ strike

Strikes by Special Groups

101. Refusal of impressed labor
102. Prisoners’ strike
103. Craft strike
104. Professional strike

Ordinary Industrial Strikes

105. Establishment strike
106. Industry strike
107. Sympathetic strike

Restricted Strikes

108. Detailed strike
109. Bumper strike
110. Slowdown strike
111. Working-to-rule strike
112. Reporting “sick” (sick-in)
113. Strike by resignation
114. Limited strike
115. Selective strike

Multi-Industry Strikes

116. Generalized strike
117. General strike

Combination of Strikes and Economic Closures

118. Hartal
119. Economic shutdown

THE METHODS OF POLITICAL NONCOOPERATION

Rejection of Authority

120. Withholding or withdrawal of allegiance
121. Refusal of public support
122. Literature and speeches advocating resistance

Citizens’ Noncooperation with Government

123. Boycott of legislative bodies
124. Boycott of elections
125. Boycott of government employment and positions
126. Boycott of government depts., agencies, and other bodies
127. Withdrawal from government educational institutions
128. Boycott of government-supported organizations
129. Refusal of assistance to enforcement agents
130. Removal of own signs and placemarks
131. Refusal to accept appointed officials
132. Refusal to dissolve existing institutions

Citizens’ Alternatives to Obedience

133. Reluctant and slow compliance
134. Nonobedience in absence of direct supervision
135. Popular nonobedience
136. Disguised disobedience
137. Refusal of an assemblage or meeting to disperse
138. Sitdown
139. Noncooperation with conscription and deportation
140. Hiding, escape, and false identities
141. Civil disobedience of “illegitimate” laws

Action by Government Personnel

142. Selective refusal of assistance by government aides
143. Blocking of lines of command and information
144. Stalling and obstruction
145. General administrative noncooperation
146. Judicial noncooperation
147. Deliberate inefficiency and selective noncooperation by enforcement agents
148. Mutiny

Domestic Governmental Action

149. Quasi-legal evasions and delays
150. Noncooperation by constituent governmental units

International Governmental Action

151. Changes in diplomatic and other representations
152. Delay and cancellation of diplomatic events
153. Withholding of diplomatic recognition
154. Severance of diplomatic relations
155. Withdrawal from international organizations
156. Refusal of membership in international bodies
157. Expulsion from international organizations

THE METHODS OF NONVIOLENT INTERVENTION

Psychological Intervention

158. Self-exposure to the elements
159. The fast
a) Fast of moral pressure
b) Hunger strike
c) Satyagrahic fast
160. Reverse trial
161. Nonviolent harassment

Physical Intervention

162. Sit-in
163. Stand-in
164. Ride-in
165. Wade-in
166. Mill-in
167. Pray-in
168. Nonviolent raids
169. Nonviolent air raids
170. Nonviolent invasion
171. Nonviolent interjection
172. Nonviolent obstruction
173. Nonviolent occupation

Social Intervention

174. Establishing new social patterns
175. Overloading of facilities
176. Stall-in
177. Speak-in
178. Guerrilla theater
179. Alternative social institutions
180. Alternative communication system

Economic Intervention

181. Reverse strike
182. Stay-in strike
183. Nonviolent land seizure
184. Defiance of blockades
185. Politically motivated counterfeiting
186. Preclusive purchasing
187. Seizure of assets
188. Dumping
189. Selective patronage
190. Alternative markets
191. Alternative transportation systems
192. Alternative economic institutions

Political Intervention

193. Overloading of administrative systems
194. Disclosing identities of secret agents
195. Seeking imprisonment
196. Civil disobedience of “neutral” laws
197. Work-on without collaboration
198. Dual sovereignty and parallel government

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:
web:
www.aeinstein.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of civil rights leaders

Betty Friedan

Civil rights leaders are influential figures in the promotion and implementation of political freedom and the expansion of personal liberties. They work to protect individuals and groups from political repression and discrimination by governments and private organizations, and seek to ensure the ability of all members of society to participate in the civil and political life of the state. Civil rights include individual rights to equal protection and service, privacy, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to travel, freedom of worship, protection of civil liberties, the right to vote, and the right to freely share ideas and opinions through all forms of communication and media. People who motivated themselves and then led others to gain and protect these rights include:

1. Ralph Abernathy (1926–1990) - American activist, Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) official

2. B.R. Ambedkar (1891-1956) - Indian activist for caste abolition, writer, philosopher, economist, co-wrote and influenced Indian constitution which focused on social rights.

3. Susan B. Anthony (1820–1906) - American Women's suffrage leader, speaker, inspiration

4. Ella Baker (1903–1986) - American SCLC activist, initiated the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC)

5. James Baldwin (1924–1987) - American essayist, novelist, public speaker, SNCC activist

6. Daisy Bates (1914–1999)

7. Dana Beal (1947– ) - American pro-hemp activist, organizer, speaker, initiator

8. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) - British philosopher, writer, and teacher on civil rights, inspiration

9. James Bevel (1936–2008) - American organizer and Direct Action leader, SCLC's main strategist, movement initiator, and movement director.

10. Claude Black (1916–2009)

11. Antoinette Brown Blackwell (1825-1921) - founded American Woman Suffrage Association with Lucy Stone in 1869

12. Julian Bond (1940–) - American activist, politician, scholar, lawyer, NAACP chairman

13. Lenny Bruce - free speech advocate, comedian, political satirist

14. Lucy Burns (1879–1966) - American women's suffrage/voting rights leader

15. Stokely Carmichael (1941–1998) - American SNCC and Black Panther activist, organizer, speaker

16. Carrie Chapman Catt (1859–1947) - suffrage leader, president National American Woman Suffrage Association, founder League of Women Voters and International Alliance of Women

17. Cesar Chavez (1927–1993) - Chicano activist, organizer, trade unionist,inspiration

18. Claudette Colvin (1939–) - American Montgomery Bus Boycott pioneer, independent activist

19. Marvel Cooke (1903–2000) - American journalist, writer, trade unionist

20. Humberto "Bert" Corona (1918–2001) - labor and civil rights leader

21. Dorothy Cotton (1930–) - American SCLC official, activist, organizer, and leader

22. Eugene Debs (1855–1926) - American organizer, campaigner for the poor, women, dissenters, prisoners

23. Frederick Douglass (1818–1895) - American abolitionist, women's rights and suffrage advocate, writer, organizer, inspiration

24. W. E. B. Du Bois (1868–1963) - American writer, scholar, founder of NAACP

25. Charles Evers (1922–) - American civil rights movement activist

26. Medgar Evers (1925–1963) - American, NAACP official in the Mississippi Movement

27. James Farmer (1920–1999) - Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) leader and activist

28. Louis Farrakhan (1933–) - American, Minister and National Representative of the Nation of Islam

29. James Forman (1928–2005) - American SNCC official and civil rights movement activist

30. Marie Foster (1917–2003) - American voting rights activist, a local leader in the Selma Voting Rights Movement

31. Frankie Muse Freeman (1916-) American civil rights attorney, and the first woman to be appointed to the United States Commission on Civil Rights

32. Betty Friedan (1921–2006) - American writer, women's rights activist, feminist

33. Kasturba Gandhi (1869 – 1944) wife of Mohandas Gandhi, activist in South Africa and India, often led her husband's movements in India when he was imprisoned.

34. Mohandas Gandhi (1869–1948) - Indian activist and movement leader, writer, philosopher, teacher, inspiration

35. William Lloyd Garrison (1805–1879) - writer, organizer, feminist, initiator

36. Dick Gregory - American free speech advocate and activist in the civil rights movement, comedian

37. Olympe de Gouges (1748–1793) - French women's rights pioneer, writer, beheaded during French Revolution

38. Prathia Hall (1940–2002) - American SNCC activist, a leading speaker in the civil rights movement

39. Fannie Lou Hamer (1917–1977) - activist in Mississippi movements

40. Harry Hay (1912–2002) - early leader in American LGBT rights movement, founder Mattachine Society

41. Lola Hendricks (1932–) - activist, local leader in Birmingham Movement

42. Jack Herer (1939–2010) - American pro-hemp activist, speaker, organizer, author

43. Gordon Hirabayashi (1918–2012) - Japanese-American civil rights hero

44. Myles Horton (1905–1990) - American teacher of nonviolence, pioneer activist, founded and led the Highlander Folk School

45. T.R.M. Howard (1908–1976) - founder of Mississippi's Regional Council of Negro Leadership

46. Julia Ward Howe (1818–1910) - American writer, organizer, suffragette

47. Dolores Huerta (1930– ) - American labor and civil rights activist, initiator, organizer

48. John Peters Humphrey (1905–1995) - author of Universal Declaration of Human Rights

49. Jesse Jackson (1941–) - American clergyman, activist, politician

50. Nellie Stone Johnson (1905–2002) - labor and civil rights activist

51. Toyohiko Kagawa (1888 – 1960) - Japanese labour activist, Christian reformer, author

52. Meir Kahane - controversial Jewish rights leader, founder of the Jewish Defense League

53. Abby Kelley (1811–1887) - American abolitionist and suffragette

54. Coretta Scott King (1927–2006) - American SCLC leader, activist, inspiration

55. Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929–1968) - SCLC co-founder/president/chairman, activist, author, speaker, inspiration

56. James Lawson (1928–) - American minister and activist, SCLC's teacher of nonviolence in late 1950's and early 1960a civil rights movement

57. Bernard Lafayette (1940–) - American SCLC and SNCC activist, organizer, and leader

58. John Lewis (1940–) - American Nashville Student Movement and SNCC activist, organizer, speaker, inspiration

59. Sigmund Livingston (1872-1946) - Jewish rights activist, founder of the Anti-Defamation League

60. Joseph Lowery (1921–) - American SCLC leader and co-founder, activist

61. Clara Luper (1923–2011) - American sit-in movement leader in Oklahoma, activist

62. James Madison (1751–1836) - American founding father, introduced and lobbied for the U.S. Bill of Rights

63. Nelson Mandela (1918–2013) - South African statesman, leading figure in anti-apartheid movement, inspiration

64. George Mason (1725–1792) - American who wrote the Virginia Declaration of Rights and influenced U.S. Bill of Rights

65. Rigoberta Menchú (1959) - Guatemalan indigenous rights leader, co-founder Nobel Women's Initiative

66. James Meredith (1933–) - American independent student leader and self–starting Mississippi activist

67. Mamie Till Bradley Mobley - American who held an open casket funeral for her son, Emmett Till; speaker, activist

68. Charles Morgan, Jr. (1930–2009) - attorney, established principle of "one man, one vote"

69. Harvey Milk (1930–1978) - American politician, gay rights activist and leader, inspiration

70. Bob Moses (1935–) - leader, activist, and organizer in '60s Mississippi Movement

71. Diane Nash (1938–) - American SNCC and SCLC activist and official, strategist, organizer

72. Edgar Nixon (1899–1987) - Montgomery Bus Boycott organizer, civil rights activist

73. James Orange (1942–2008) - American SCLC activist and organizer, a voting rights movement leader, trade unionist

74. Emmeline Pankhurst (1858-1928) - a founder and the leader of the British Suffragette Movement

75. Rosa Parks (1913–2005) - NAACP official, activist, Montgomery Bus Boycott inspiration

76. Alice Paul (1885–1977) - American 1910's Women's Voting Rights Movement leader, strategist, and organizer

77. Thomas Paine (1737-1809) - English-American activist, author, theorist, wrote Rights of Man

78. Elizabeth Peratrovich (1911–1958) - Alaska activist for native people

79. A. Philip Randolph (1889–1979) - American labor and civil rights movement leader

80. Amelia Boynton Robinson (1911–) - Selma Voting Rights Movement activist and early leader

81. Jo Ann Robinson (1912–1992) - Montgomery Bus Boycott activist.

82. Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) - women's rights and human rights activist both in the United States and in the United Nations

83. Bayard Rustin (1912–1987) - American civil rights activist

84. Sonia Schlesin (1888–1956) - worked with Mohandas Gandhi in South Africa and led his movements there when he was absent.

85. Al Sharpton (1954–) - American clergyman, activist, media

86. Charles Sherrod - American civil rights activist, SNCC leader

87. Judy Shepard (1952–) - gay rights activist, public speaker

88. Kate Sheppard (1847–1934) - New Zealand suffragist in first country to have universal suffrage

89. Fred Shuttlesworth (1922–2011) - American clergyman, activist, SCLC co-founder, initiated the Birmingham Movement

90. Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815–1902) - American women's suffrage/women's rights leader

91. Gloria Steinem (1934–) - writer, activist, feminist

92. Lucy Stone (1818–1893) - women's suffrage/voting rights leader

93. Thich Quang Duc (1897–1963) - Vietnamese monk, freedom of religion self-martyr

94. Desmond Tutu (1931–) - South African anti-apartheid organizer, advocate, inspiration

95. Karl Heinrich Ulrichs (1825-1895) - German writer, organizer, and the pioneer of the modern LGBT rights movement.

96. C.T. Vivian (1924–) - American student civil rights leader, SNCC activist

97. Wyatt Tee Walker - American activist and organizer with NAACP, CORE, and SCLC

98. Ida B. Wells (1862–1931) - journalist, early activist in 20th Century Civil Rights Movement, women's suffrage/voting rights activist

99. Walter Francis White (1895–1955) - American NAACP executive secretary

100. Elie Wiesel - (1928–) Jewish rights leader

101. Roy Wilkins - (1901–1981) American NAACP executive secretary/executive director

102. Frances Willard (1839–1898) - American women's rights activist, suffrage leader

103. Hosea Williams (1926–2000) - American civil rights activist, an SCLC organizer and strategist

104. Victoria Woodhull (1838–1927) - American suffragette organizer, women's rights leader

105. Malcolm X (1925–1965) - American author, speaker, activist, inspiration

106. Andrew Young (1932–) - American SCLC activist and executive director

107. Whitney M. Young, Jr. (1921–1971) - Exec. Director National Urban League, advisor to U.S. Presidents

108. William Wilberforce (1759-1833) - leader of English abolition movement

    About

    Admin: Saroj Kumar Ray
    Address:
    Janakpur, Dhanusha
    Nepal

    email: Mail to me
    On Facebook
    On Google

    Contact Details

    Ek Awaaj
    Email: ekawaaj40@gmail.com

    Our Group on Facebook
    Ek Awaaj एक आवाज