University of Virginia Library

Politics Of Violence

The newly fashionably cult of violence is
scheduled to reach the United Kingdom this
autumn, according to many observers. It has
been a long time since the British have had to
face violence as a means of changing the
political system. In fact, two of the
characteristics of British government are a
general consensus and unanimity of the
people.

The British society is changing due to the
influence of American television and as more
citizens join "the middle class." The antics of
Columbia and other universities in the United
States have served to influence British schools.
Even staid Oxford has had its disturbances
recently, but not on the scale of Columbia.
Very few of the intellectuals who cultivate
violence choose or even dare to practice it.
But it does not take many to have a profound
effect on societies with political and police
systems open enough to permit organized
dissent.

America's influence is growing more and
more. For example, Britain is currently
involved in a huge discussion about the nature
of its schools. In the past ten years seven
entirely new universities have been established
in Britain. Ten former local authority
Colleges, after a brief period in which they
were called Colleges of Advanced Technology,
have been turned into universities too. The
numbers of full-time university students rose
between 1953 and 1966 from 80,602 to
169,486. Not only does Britain have to worry
about its university system but also about the
concept of its secondary schools. The schools
have previously not been designed to send
people to universities. Selective tests are given
earlier in a student's career to determine
whether he goes on to a university or simply
tapers off his education. American culture
influenced Britain to see the need to emulate
the system of an education for all those
qualified and that a modern state is dependent
upon technology developed in its schools.
Since there is an expansion of the
university system, more teachers are needed.
And the teacher-hunters are turning to the
United States. As a result many of the
teachers who were active in campus politics in
this country are continuing their interests in
Britain.

But back to the politics of violence. The
Economist, a weekly journal in Britain, said,
"if you cannot change the system, you might
as well smash it. A tiny minority in the United
States believe just that." The magazine
continues with the advice that to stop this
American import the thing to do is for the
television networks "to tell the truth." The
magazine points up that if Mr. Humphrey has
a hard time with hecklers here, Mr. Wilson will
have an equally hard time when he campaigns.
The Economist believes if only 20
demonstrators are involved in breaking up a
meeting, than the television cameras should
record that fact, and not just focus on the
rowdy demonstrations.

We believe the British observers have
completely missed the boat in looking at
American demonstrations. While they are
correct in their assessment that violence has
become the cult of the intellectual
community in some kind of link to early
twentieth century anarchism, what they do not
realize is that this movement is a moral one.

We do not believe that the people who
disrupt classes and a university do so solely
out of a desire to "smash" the system. Rather
they want to change wrongs as a matter of
moral consciousness.

For example, if a student thinks the
Vietnam War is morally wrong and the United
States should not be involved, then he has a
moral duty to himself to oppose that war in
any way he can, i.e., avoid the draft even if it
means sneaking into Canada.

The other side of the argument is that if a
student feels he has a moral obligation to his
country than he should serve it through the
armed forces. Obviously the moral issue
depends on who is defining it.

It is just this type of search for truth, for a
clear conscious and for preserving the right of
the individual against a system he can not
possibly hope to influence alone that we say
these things. Idealistically, it is a search for
being true to your own self or for "doing your
own thing."

The reason so many young people have
turned to violence is because there are no
other avenues left open to influence the
leaders, of, say, a political party. In order to
move the common denominator over to their
liking, they have to take an extreme stance.
The right has become so entrenched that to
get a settlement or attract attention to a bad
situation, violence has become almost a
political necessity.

The Economist's article ends with, "A very
great deal depends on the way the police
behave this autumn, and on how the television
audience reacts. What is at stake is the
continuance of peaceful democratic
government and, no less, the right to peaceful
dissent from it." We would hope that,
regarding students and their stand, the moral
and truth issues come before police control
and television beams. C.L.W.