Notion on a better system

…The most important thing today is for economic units to maintain – or, rather, renew – their relationship with individuals, so that the work those people perform has human substance and meaning, so that people can see into how the enterprise they work for works, have a say in that, and assume responsibility for it. Such enterprises must have – I repeat – a human dimension: people must be able to work in them as people, as beings with a soul and a sense of responsibility, not as robots, regardless of how primitive or highly intelligent they may be…

…I would tend to favor an economic system based on the maximum possible plurality of many decentralized, structurally varied, and preferably small enterprises that respect the specific nature of different localities and different traditions and that resist the pressures of uniformity by maintaining a plurality of modes of ownership and economic decision-making, from private through various types of cooperative and shareholding ventures, collective ownerships, right up to state ownership…

Vaclav Havel (1990) Disturbing the Peace: A Conversation with Karel Hvizdala. NY: Alfred A. Knopf, p.13-18.

Genuine Change for the better

A genuine, profound, and lasting change for the better – as I shall attempt to show – can no longer result from the victory (were such a victory possible) of any particular traditional political conception, which can ultimately be only external, that is, a structural or systemic conception. More than ever before, such a change will have to derive from human existence, from the fundamental reconstitution of the position of people in the world, their relationships to themselves and to each other, and to the universe. If a better economic and political model is to be created, then perhaps more than ever before it must derive from profound existential and moral changes in society. This is not something that can be designed and introduced like a new car. If it is to be more than just a new variation of the old degeneration, it must above all be an expression of life in the process of transforming itself. A better system will not automatically ensure a better life. In fact, the opposite is true: only by creating a better life can a better system be developed.

…We know from a number of harsh experiences that neither reform nor change is in itself a guarantee of anything…Our concern is whether we can live with dignity in such as system, where it serves people rather than people serving it.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber, p.70-71.

Demoralization

The profound crisis of human identity brought on by living within a lie, a crisis which in turn makes such a life possible, certainly possesses a moral dimension as well; it appears, among other things, as a deep moral crisis in society. A person who has been seduced by the consumer value system, whose identity is dissolved in an amalgam of the accoutrements of mass civilization, and who has no roots in the order of being, no sense of responsibility for anything higher than his or her own personal survival, is a demoralized person. The system depends on this demoralization, deepens it, is in fact a projection of it into society.

Living within the truth, as humanity’s revolt against an enforced position, is, on the contrary, an attempt to regain control over one’s own sense of responsibility. In other words, it is clearly a moral act, not only because one must pay so dearly for it, but principally because it is not self-serving: the risk may bring rewards in the form of a general amelioration in the situation, or it may not. In this regard, as I stated previously, it is an all-or-nothing gamble, and it is difficult to imagine a reasonable person embarking on such a course merely because he or she reckons that sacrifice today will bring rewards tomorrow, be it only in the form of general gratitude.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.62.

天鵝絨革命

天鵝絨革命 (Velvet Revolution），又譯絲絨革命，狹義上是指捷克斯洛伐克於1989年11月（東歐劇變時期）發生的反共產黨統治的民主化革命。從廣義來說，天鵝絨革命是指「通過不流血的方式實現政權和平轉移」的政變或革命，有如天鵝絨般「温柔、柔軟」。 (wikipedia)

捷克的天鵝絨革命

　　捷克斯洛伐克的大學生是所謂"天鵝絨革命"的發起人。他們於1989年11月17日在布拉格舉行的聲勢浩大的示威引起了世界的關注。

　　本來，大學生發起集會是為了紀念1939年被納粹殺害的奧普雷塔爾同學。然而，一周前，柏林圍牆倒塌。本來計劃的紀念活動突然間變成了一場抗議示威。大學生們抨擊共産主義統治。警察使用警棍阻止學生的示威。

　　那次示威造成600人受傷。第二天，大學生發出無限期罷課的呼籲。當時捷克的共産黨領袖皮特拉還試圖在電視講話中安撫民心， "尊敬的公民們，我直接以捷克共和國政府主席的身份同你們講話。兩年前我們走上了改革的道路並開始了民主建設。可以理解的是，這一過程是漫長的，因為它是尋找、探討和交換意見的過程。 "

　　共産黨統治的國家試圖採取拖延戰術，不過，這一計謀未能得逞。越來越多的公民參與抗議活動，其中包括作家哈維爾(Vaclav Havel)。哈維爾曾參與了著名的"77憲章"民權運動，被判處5年有期徒刑。1989年11月24日，布拉格繼續舉行大規模抗議活動，這時人們開始呼喊哈維爾的名字。

　　哈維爾以及布拉格之春時代的共産黨改革派杜布切克在示威活動中，呼籲解散政治局。不久，該國共産黨的政治局真的宣佈集體辭職。哈維爾的名言"真理和愛心終將戰勝謊言和仇恨"此後成為"天鵝絨革命"的指導精神。

　　這時，共産黨領導的國家政權還沒有交出所有權力，在全國性大罷工以及大規模遊行的壓力下，共産黨才又作出了進一步讓步。12月5日，捷克通往奧地利邊境的鐵絲網被拆除，12月10日，該國成立多數由非共産黨人組成的民族統一政府。到了這個時候，捷克斯洛伐克的和平革命的動力已無法阻擋。憲法修改了，杜布切克因為歷史功績受到人們的尊敬，他被推選為議會議長。12月29日，共産黨仍占多數的議會卻選舉哈維爾為該國總統。直到不久前，哈維爾一直是所謂的國家公敵。選舉當天，哈維爾宣誓就職， "我宣誓，以我的尊嚴和良心作保證，效忠捷克斯洛伐克社會主義共和國。我將以人民的意志和利益為前提履行我的義務並遵守憲法和法律。"

　　在哈維爾領導下，捷克斯洛伐克於1990年舉行了第一次民主選舉。而哈維爾本人，則成為"天鵝絨革命"中的最具光彩的形象。(Daniel Scheschkewitz, 2009)

參考:

維基百科

德國之聲中文網

吳非:《顏色革命》

Fifth Column of Social Consciousness

The effective range of this special power (living within the truth) cannot be measured in terms of disciples, voters, or soldiers, because it lies spread out in the fifth column of social consciousness, in the hidden aims of life, in human beings’ repressed longing for dignity and fundamental rights, for the realization of their real social and political interests. Its power, therefore, does not reside in the strength of definable political or social groups, but chiefly in the strength of a potential, which is hidden throughout the whole of society, including the official power structures of that society. Therefore this power does not rely on soldiers of its own, but on the soldiers of the enemy as it were – that is to say, on everyone who is living with the lie and who may be struck at any moment (in theory, at least) by the force of truth. It is a bacteriological weapon, so to speak, utilized when conditions are ripe by a single civilian to disarm an entire division.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.58-59.

Live within the truth (2)

…Living with the lie can constitute the system only if it is universal. The principle must embrace and permeate everything. There are no terms whatsoever on which it can coexist with living within the truth, and therefore everyone who steps out of line denies it in principle and threatens it in its entirety.

This is understandable: as long as appearance is not confronted with reality, it does not seem to be appearance. As long as living a lie is not confronted with living the truth, the perspective needed to expose its mendacity is lacking. As soon as the alternative appears, however, it threatens the very existence of appearance and living a lie in terms of what they are, both their essence and their all-inclusiveness. And at the same time, it is utterly unimportant how large a space this alternative occupies: its power does not consist in its physical attributes but in the light it casts on those pillars of the system and on its unstable foundations…

In the post-totalitarian system, therefore, living within the truth has more than a mere existential dimension (returning humanity to its inherent nature or a noetic dimension, revealing reality as it is), or a moral dimension (setting an example for others). It also has an unambiguous political dimension. If the main pillar of the system is living a lie, then it is not surprising that the fundamental threat to it is living the truth. This is why it must be suppressed more severely than anything else.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.56-57.

Live within a lie (2)

There is obviously something in human beings which responds to this system, something they reflect and accommodate, something within them which paralyses every effort of their better selves to revolt. Human beings are compelled to live within a lie, but they can be compelled to do so only because they are in fact capable of living in this way. Therefore not only does the system alienate humanity, but at the same time alienated humanity supports this system as its own involuntary masterplan, as a degenerate image of its own degeneration, as a record of people’s own failure as individuals.

Down the River of Pseudo-life

The essential aims of life are present naturally in every person. In everyone there is some longing for humanity’s rightful dignity, for moral integrity, for free expression of being and a sense of transcendence over the world of existence. Yet, at the same time, each person is capable, to a greater or lesser degree, of coming to terms with living within the lie. Each person somehow succumbs to a profane trivialization of his or her inherent humanity, and to utilitarianism. In everyone there is some willingness to merge with the anonymous crowd and to flow comfortably along with it down the river of pseudo-life. This is much more than a simple conflict between two identities. It is something far worse: it is a challenge to the very notion of identity itself.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.53-54.

哈维尔给中国的啟示

李慎之这样概述哈维尔所谓的后极权主义，就是极权主义的原始动力已经衰竭的时期，“革命的总发条已经松动”，权力者已经失去他们的前辈所拥有的原创力与残酷性，权力者不得不多讲一点法制，消费主义盛行，腐败也愈益严重，社会冷漠非人性，权力中心仍然是真理的中心，“这个社会的最高原则是稳定”。而为了稳定它赖以运转的基本条件仍然是恐惧和谎言。

身处这样的后极权社会，用什么与之对抗？

哈维尔说，用良心和责任。要摆脱这样的社会，“必须回到政治的原点——有个性的个人，必须唤醒个人的良知”。坚守自己的道德立场和良心底线，讲求原则政治而不是利益政治。

在极权主义时代的政治作恶中，每一个人都是受害者，又是参与者。在这个世界上，没有一个人是无辜的，没有一个人是超然世外的。现制度不仅使人类异化，异化了的人同时支持这个制度。人不仅是它的受害者，又是创建者；人们即是囚徒，又是狱卒。因此，责任感是至关重要的，每一个人都应敢于挑担当自己的责任，当权力向我们逼近时，我们要敢于拒绝和反抗，用正义感和良心来对抗权力的奴役和诱惑。当权力在伤害与我们不相干的人时，我们有责任起来呼吁和声援，因为一个人受伤害，我们的社会就是不完美的；因为一个人不自由，我们的社会就是不自由，或许下一步权力的刀就会向我们走来，下一个被剥夺，被奴役的人就是我们自己。

从这里，我看了一丝希望，因为我们的社会里有越来越多的敢于担负责任的人，有越来越多的人敢于跟权力周旋，敢于向权力发出声讨之声，在权力的恶作剧中喊出了微弱的“我控诉！”。这一点，在网络上尤为突出。

这，就是哈维尔，一个刚刚离去的老人、哲人，给予我们的启示和对于中国的意义。

來源:

http://citizenforce.blogspot.hk/search/label/%E5%93%88%E7%BB%B4%E5%B0%94

Live within the truth

I think that the origins of Charter 77 illustrate very well what I have already suggested above: that in the post-totalitarian system, the real background to the movements that gradually assume political significance does not usually consist of overtly political events or confrontations between different forces or concepts that are openly political. These movements for the most part originate elsewhere, in the far broader area of the ‘pre-political,’ where ‘living within a lie’ confronts ‘living within the truth,’ that is, where the demands of the post-totalitarian system conflict with the real aims of life. These real aims can naturally assume a great many forms. Sometimes they appear as the basic material or social interests of a group or an individual; at other times, they may appear as certain intellectual and spiritual interests; at still other times, they may be the most fundamental of existential demands, such as the simple longing of people to live their own lives in dignity. Such a conflict acquires a political character, then, not because of the elementary political nature of the aims demanding to be heard but simply because, given the complex system of manipulation on which the post-totalitarian system is founded and on which it is also dependent, every free human act or expression, every attempt to live within the truth, must necessarily appear as a threat to the system and, thus, as something which is political par excellence. Any eventual political articulation of the movements that grow out of this ‘pre-political’ hinterland is secondary. It develops and matures as a result of a subsequent confrontation with the system, and not because it started off as a political programme, project or impulse.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.65-66.

Live within a lie

The post-totalitarian system touches people at every step, but it does so with its ideological gloves on. This is why life in the system is so thoroughly permeated with hypocrisy and lies: government by bureaucracy is called popular government; the working class is enslaved in the name of the working class; the complete degradation of the individual is presented as his or her ultimate liberation; depriving people of information is called making it available; the use of power to manipulate is called the public control of power, and the arbitrary abuse of power is called observing the legal code; the repression of culture is called its development; the expansion of imperial influence is presented as support of for the oppressed; the lack of free expression becomes the highest form of freedom; farcical elections become the highest form of democracy; banning independent thought becomes the most scientific of world views; military occupation becomes fraternal assistance. Because the regime is captive to its own lies, it must falsify everything. It falsifies the past. It falsifies the present, and it falsifies the future. It falsifies statistics. It pretends not to possess an omnipotent and unprincipled police apparatus. It pretends to respect human rights. It pretends to persecute no one. It pretends to fear nothing. It pretends to pretend nothing.

Individuals need not believe all these mystifications, but they must behave as though they did, or they must at least tolerate them in silence, or get along well with those who work with them. For this reason, however, they must live within a lie. They need not accept the lie. It is enough for them to have accepted their life with it and in it. For by this very fact, individuals confirm the system, fulfil the system, make the system, are the system.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.44-45.

Monstrosity 一頭怪物

It is the total rule of a bloated, anonymously bureaucratic power, not yet irresponsible but already operating outside all conscience, a power grounded in an omnipresent ideological fiction which can rationalize anything without ever having to brush against the truth. Power as the omnipresent monopoly of control, repression and fear; power which makes thought, morality and privacy a state monopoly and so dehumanizes them; power which long since has ceased to be the matter of a group of arbitrary rulers but which, rather, occupies and swallows up everyone so that all should become integrated within it, at least through their silence. No one actually possesses such power, since it is the power itself which possesses everyone; it is a monstrosity which is not guided by humans but which, on the contrary, drags all persons along with its ‘objective’ self-momentum – objective in the sense of being cut off from all human standards, including human reason and hence entirely irrational – to a terrifying unknown future.

Havel, Vaclav (1984) Politics and Conscience. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber, p.146-147.

鞭子下的權威

…他們所建立的乃是徹頭徹尾世俗化的鞭子的權威，而不是那種來自超凡魅力的權威、那種如同被內在感知和廣泛認可的天職的權威、那種與他們自封的使命格格不入的高度責任感所標誌的權威。

…這讓我想到了孔子，他曾經恰當地描述過行使真正的權威意謂著什麼。他的標準和今天那些執鞭者的想法亳無共同之處。在他看來，在家庭中的父親或國家統治者那裏存在的權威，是上天所賜予的禮物，權威的強度源自他或她不斷增強的責任，而不是他或她可以行使的權力工具的力量。此外，一旦某人背叛了責任，其超凡的魅力就喪失殆盡。

哈維爾(1995)<追尋東西方文明的共同價值>，載於《政治，再見!》台北：左岸文化；傾向出版社，第85-96頁。

共謀者

我為什麼這樣說？如果把之前四十年所留下來的不幸遺產理解為與我們自已毫不相干的某件東西，那是非常不明智的。相反地，我們必須承認這項遺產是我們對自已所犯下的一樁罪過。如果我們接受這樣的解釋，那麼我們就能明白該由我們每一個人來為此做點什麼，而且只能由我們自已來面對。我們不能每件事都歸咎於之前的統治者，不只是因為這樣做不合乎事實，而且也會削弱今天我們每個人所面對對的責任，亦即獨立地、自由地、理性地、迅速地採取行動。讓我們不要受此蒙蔽：即使是世界上最好的政府、國會和總統，都不可能單靠他們的力量獲得成功。同樣地，我們也不能僅指望這些人挽救天下。自由和民主要求必須參與，因此所有人都有參與的責任。

哈維爾(1990)<當前最大的道德危機>，載於《政治，再見!》台北：左岸文化；傾向出版社，第54-62頁。(這是他就任捷克總統的首篇重要演說。)

Anti-political Politics

Solidarity of the Shaken

Auto-totality Society

Part of the essence of the post-totalitarian system is that it draws everyone into the sphere of power, not so they may realize themselves as human beings, but so they may surrender their human dignity in favour of the identity of the system, that is, so they may become agents of the system’s general automatism and servants of its self-determined goals, so they may participate in the common responsibility for it, so they may pulled into and ensnared by it, like Faust with Mephistopheles. More than this: so they may create through their involvement a general norm and, thus, bring pressure to bear on their fellow citizens. And further: so they may learn to be comfortable with their involvement, to identify with it as though it were something natural and inevitable and , ultimately, so they may – with no external urging – come to treat any non-involvement as an abnormality, as arrogance, as an attack on themselves, as a form of dropping out of society. By pulling everyone into its power structure, the post-totalitarian system makes everyone instruments of a mutual totality, the auto-totality of society.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.52.

The Prague Spring

The Prague Spring is usually understood as a clash between two groups on the level of real power: those who wanted to maintain the system as it was and those who wanted to reform it. It is frequently forgotten, however, that this encounter was merely the final act and the inevitable consequence of a long drama originally played out chiefly in the theatre of the spirit and the conscience of society. And that somewhere at the beginning of this drama, there were individuals who were willing to live within the truth, even when things were at their worst. These people had no access to real power, nor did they aspire to it. The sphere in which they were living the truth was not necessarily even that of political thought. They could equally have been poets, painters, musicians, or simply ordinary citizens who were able to maintain their human dignity. Today it is naturally difficult to pinpoint when and through which hidden, winding channel a certain action or attitude influenced a given milieu, and to trace the virus of truth as it slowly spread through the tissue of the life of lies, gradually causing it to disintegrate. One thing, however, seems clear: the attempt at political reform was not the cause of society’s awakening, but rather the final outcome of that reawakening.

Havel, Vaclav (1986) The Power of the Powerless. In “Living with Truth.” London and Boston: Faber and faber. p.60.

Automatism

Unquestioning Submission to authority

People in many countries have experienced decades or even centuries of oppression, whether of domestic or foreign origin. Frequently, unquestioning submission to authority figures and rulers has been long inculcated. In extreme cases, the social, political, economic, and even religious institutions of the society – outside of state control – have been deliberately weakened, subordinated, or even replaced by new regimented institutions used by the state or ruling party to control the society. The population has often been atomized (turned into a mass of isolated individuals) unable to work together to achieve freedom, to confide in each other, or even to do much of anything at their own initiative.

The result is predictable: the population becomes weak, lacks self-confidence, and is incapable of resistance. People often are too frightened to share their hatred of the dictatorship and their hunger for freedom even with family and friends. People are often too terrified to think seriously of public resistance. In any case, what would be the use? Instead, they face suffering without purpose and a future without hope.

Gene Sharp (2012) “From Dictatorship to Democracy: A conceptual framework for liberation.” London: Serpent’s Tail, p.5. (First published in 1993)

Quotation from Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Secret of Constructive Program

This aspect of nonviolence is generally called a constructive program. In the long term, a constructive program provides the glue that keeps movements together, building on the spontaneous energy that may erupt in the face of some severe injustice and preventing that energy from melting away when the injustice has been addressed or the movement meets with unexpected resistance. These are strategic advantages that rest on the fact that nonviolence, as a positive force, lends itself even more natively to “cooperating with good” as King would say, than to “noncooperating with evil,” though that, too, has its place.

Other strategic advantages follow from this principle. For instance, working together for an overriding goal makes for an effective and enduring bond among people. Constructive work also can reassure the public, which may be frightened by even nonviolent resistance to an established authority, and it can undermine a repressive regime without provoking the reaction that confrontation does. Most importantly, a well-developed constructive program builds the infrastructure for a new society before the old society crumbles, preventing the emergence of a power vacuum into which new repressive elements often rush…

Confrontational nonviolence, or what I like to call “obstructive program,” can be very effective, indeed dramatically so, but it requires that we maintain momentum and group solidarity until an opportune moment arrives. It also requires that we make progress without provoking undue hostility from our opponents and that we demonstrate our underlying commitment to the well-being of all, so as to leave the least possible legacy of bitterness, neither of which is always easy. Finally, oppression operates on the false assumption that the oppressed are helpless and dependent, but confrontational nonviolence does not always help to convince ourselves, our people, and in time the oppressor that we can govern and provide for ourselves….

Nagler, N. Michael (2014) The nonviolence handbook: a guide for practical action. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, p.33-38.

Gandhi’s way in facing Japan Invasion

As Gandhi said, “Real noncooperation is noncooperation with evil, and not with the evildoer,” … In 1942, when India, her hands tied by the British, feared invasion by Japanese armies, Gandhi indicated how this could be done:

“If we were a free country, things could be done nonviolently to prevent the Japanese from entering the country. As it is, nonviolent resistance could commence the moment the Japanese effect a landing. Thus, nonviolent resisters would refuse them any help, even water. For it is no part of their duty to help anyone to steal their country. But if a Japanese had missed his way and was dying of thirst and sought help as a human being, a nonviolent resister, who may not regard anyone as his enemy, would give water to the thirsty one. Suppose the Japanese compel resisters to give them water, the resisters must die in the act of resistance.”

Nagler, N. Michael (2014) The nonviolence handbook: a guide for practical action. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, p.16.

No humiliation

…we must try never to humiliate or to accept humiliation, for that hurts everyone. It is extremely difficult for anyone to live with shame or humiliation, and when someone threatens us with violence he or she does feel a little tug of shame for using that method, even if not consciously. When we offer to shift the ground of the conversation toward nonviolence, therefore, we are giving our counterpart a way out. This intention is acknowledged in one of the best terms for nonviolence that I know if in any language, alay dangal, or “to offer dignity,” which was coined during the Philippines People Power Revolution of 1986.

Nagler, N. Michael (2014) The nonviolence handbook: a guide for practical action. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, p.15.

Power of Nonviolence

Nonviolence offers us a viable, natural third way out of the fight-or-flight conundrum…Natural as nonviolence may be, however, there is no denying that empathy and care for the well-being of someone who’s against us do not come easily. It can be quite a struggle, but it’s encouraging to remember that this very struggle is the source of nonviolent power. As King put it, “The phrase ‘passive resistance’ often gives the false impression that this is a sort of ‘do-nothing method’ in which the resister quietly and passively accepts evil. But nothing is further from the truth. For while the nonviolent resister is passive in the sense that he is not physically aggressive toward his opponent, his mind and emotions are always active, constantly seeking to persuade his opponent that he is wrong.”

Nagler, N. Michael (2014) The nonviolence handbook: a guide for practical action. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, p.5-6.

Quotation from Mahatma Gandhi

How useful are Symbols?

Symbols, like numbers, are of limited use in satyagraha – recall that satyagraha means “clinging to truth.” And, as with our overestimation of the importance of numbers, we have tended to overuse symbols. Perhaps the most tragic example of a symbol gone wrong is the June 4, 1989, massacre in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. Students, workers, and many supporters gathered in vast numbers to demonstrate their solidarity and desire for reform. Because they lacked a long-term strategy, however, the square itself and their refusal to leave it became a symbol of their disobedience and a distraction from the eminently legitimate goal of democratic reforms. We all know the results. On the other hand, if the resisters had left the square and gone back to their universities and villages to educate the people and to take concrete, achievable steps for change, the democracy movement in China – and the brave people who embodied it – might still be alive…

Nagler, N. Michael (2014) The nonviolence handbook: a guide for practical action. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, p.50.

Not Just Umbrellas

Michael Nagler comments on the danger of clinging to symbols and draws a comparison to the Tienanmen Square demonstrations in 1989. In essence once the movement was driven out of the square, it ended. Nonviolent movements are much more than an occupation or demonstration. To channel the movement’s energy outside occupation of the downtown area and maintain pressure on government, the movement must diversify its tactics. This could include the implementation of constructive programs, education of the public, and lightening protests. read more

Source: Metta Center for Nonviolence