Is LIFE WORTH LIVING if I have to follow blatant injustice?
The criminal Swiss immigrants, so the Swiss People’s Party claims is plain ol’ injustice, well in my crude mind at least.
Just look at the image, for all you non- francophones (it reads “For more security”). The Swiss immigrant’s situation is very similar to MLK’s, and I just want to know whether the minority which is segregated as criminals, should continue living in Switzerland following these unjust accusations or do something radical that would propagate change. MLK states that
Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority.
The situation in Switzerland is an issue of segregation as it tries to blame its foreign population for the criminal problems in the country, which degrades human personality – so it is unjust. But my question is simply whether they should fight for their justice or give the general acceptance. Of course, they should fight for justice is an answer we will all give, but when you ask an immigrant who has not been granted citizenship even though he has lived in the country for many years or even worse, you are denied of citizenship at your birthplace of the mere fact that your parents were immigrants, he/she who has no other choice or place for living would resort to accepting these injustices as MLK put it in his scenario as a segregated person being in a “phase of obnoxious negative peace” and MLK would certainly encourage people to fight for their justice
phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro (immigrant) passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality.
But does human personality have that courage? I do not know. I am an immigrant, I have been treated wonderfully in the United States so far but if I had to live in Switzerland, I do not know whether I would have the “balls” to resort to civil disobedience. We know great people like MLK are rightfully not
not afraid of the word “tension”
but I would certainly ask you the question that MLK wonderfully poses
“Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” “Are you able to endure the ordeal of jail?”
My heart certainly does believe these immigrants should start a non-violent campaign just as MLK did because the scarier thought is that the Swiss People’s party claims that they have received a positive response to this poster, which certainly brings me to the thought that Switzerland’s citizens are resorting to the state of obnoxious negative peace.
On a counter view, in situations like these we always tend to favor the minorities – but I want to think about the Swiss party’s point of view as well. They certainly do have a problem of Dirty hands, one – they have to control crime and their stats point out that immigrants are the culprits and at the same time – they knew that it was morally and racially corrupt thought but their perspective might just be we have to do it, what Waltzer points out as a “moral dilemma” where choice has negative consequences.
In the article, the party member bashed the UN saying they should “not interfere in internal Swiss politics” and it provided as nice segue into Hobbesian view of the Swiss People’s party being the sovereign and in this situation, there is a controversy. How is controversy decided? When there is
“no judge to decide the controversy; it returns therefore to the sword again; every man recovereth the right of protecting himself by his own strength” (Levithan, Chapter 18, 176)
This does not mean, we go killing each other but more of an MLK style – the sovereign has disrupted state of peace, bringing back to the state of war, where civil disobedience BECOMES JUSTIFIED. So what should these people do? I say, follow MLK’s 4 step process
collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action.
A NON-VIOLENT CAMPAIGN is certainly my answer. And it is not worth living in blatant injustice.