The Second Declaration of Havana (1962)
On Coalition Government (1945)
No Compromise – No Political Trading (1899)
Source: "Some Social and Psychological Consequences of the Long Wall Method of Coal-Getting", 1951, p. 14
Source: Democracy for the Few (2010 [1974]), sixth edition, Chapter 16, p. 298
Source: Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action
ZNet forum reply (26 May 1999) http://forum.zmag.org/~ZNetCmt/read?224,7
Context: I am not an absolute pacifist, because I can't rule out the possibility that under some, carefully defined circumstances, some degree of violence may be justified, if it is focused directly at a great evil. Slave revolts are justified, and if John Brown had really succeeded in arousing such revolts throughout the South, it would have been much preferable to losing 600,000 lives in the Civil War, where the makers of the war — unlike slave rebels — would not have as their first priority the plight of the black slaves, as shown by the betrayal of black interests after the war. Again, the Zapatista uprising seems justified to me, but some armed struggles that start for a good cause get out of hand and the ensuing violence becomes indiscriminate. Each situation has to be evaluated separately, for all are different. In general, I believe in non-violent direct action, which involve organizing large numbers of people, whereas too often violent uprisings are the product of a small group. If enough people are organized, violence can be minimized in bringing about social change.
Source: Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs (1970), p. 359
On Coalition Government (1945)
