politics. It?s only by learning how to replace self-blaming with compassion in our own lives that we will have the necessary skill to help others in American society do the same for themselves. And a liberal/progressive movement that does help people develop a sense of compassion for themselves will be a movement that ?nally gains the credibility it needs to heal and repair this society. Still, compassion is not meant as a replacement for moral sensitivity, and there must still be a place for moral outrage. Certainly when we see Israel engaging in activi- ties that are not only morally inappropriate but actually self-destructive, we must cry out in anguish. Taking strong stands against Shamir?s policies, for example, is not inappropriate?though blaming the entire Jewish people or every Israeli or all of Zionism for what Shamir does is precisely the kind of globalizing that is destruc- tive. Looking at my own mistakes in the 19605, and knowing how easy it is to fall into these traps once again, I feel that I need to keep careful check on my judgmental tendencies. The task, I believe, is to mix that sense of outrage at injustice with an adequate dose of compassion so that we don?t begin to turn on the Jewish people and judge ourselves too If I personally don?t always achieve the right balance, at least it?s to articulate the goal. Editorials Revolutions: France 1789, Claim 1989 or a moment in May of 1989 hundreds of millions of people, watching students and workers rallying in the streets of China, allowed themselves to hope once again. No matter how hard the ideologues of every form of established oppression try to convince people that the way of the world is is immutable, over and over again the indomitable spirit of the human race reasserts itself, struggles for change, refuses to accom- modate. And that?s why we are convinced that the brutal repression of the Chinese students by the Communist government will ultimately fail, though there may be months or even decades of further suffering before that ?ultimately? is reached. The legacy of the French Revolution is this: every ruling class knows at the bottom of its heart that its time is limited, that there are human passions and human needs that cannot be extinguished?no matter how hard the established order tries to convince people that they live in the best of all possible worlds, that any change will lead to anarchy or self-destruction, that 12 TIKKUN VOL. 4, N0. 4 dissatisfaction re?ects personal defects or character flaws or a misunderstanding of the complexities of the world or a failure to apprehend the inevitability of evil. The need for freedom and self-determination, the need for community and solidarity with others, the need for creativity and understanding, the need to be recognized and af?rmed by other free and self?determining beings, the need for purpose and meaning in life, and the need for connection with the spiritual dimension of reality? all these needs are so fundamental to what it is to be human that they can never be ultimately extinguished. The forms that these needs take are shaped by the social, economic, and historical realities of any given time and place. For example, the need for freedom and self-determination may be structured in a capitalist society in such a way that it is typically channeled into a competitive marketplace, so that people feel that their needs are being realized through their ability effectively to compete for money, recognition, or consumer goods. Yet people who shape themselves to succeed in this way have a hard time ful?lling their needs for solidarity, community, and loving relationships. The good news is that because every system of op- pression represses at least some of these needs, no such system can ever last. Ever since the French Revolution, almost every ruling class in the modern world has known, deep in its heart, that its days are numbered, that it cannot hope to pass on to endless generations to come the power and privilege that it has temporarily managed to amass and defend. The bad news is that this very recognition may in part explain why ruling elites have been so reckless, so willing to risk destruction of the entire planet in order to preserve their current advantages: they have no faith in their own future, and hence they recklessly disregard the consequences of their actions (shown most dramatically in their willingness to destroy the earth?s resources and life-support systems in order to increase their own material gain). The turmoil within most contemporary societies is largely a reflection of the fact that no existing social order adequately promotes our human capacities or allows us to ful?ll our fundamental needs. The Western media may rejoice in the manifestation of contradic- tions within Communist societies, thinking that ?the free marketplace? has suddenly triumphed as the secret answer to the meaning of human existence. But they are unable to see the vast human suffering and unhappiness that exist within their own societies or to conceptualize how a competitive market society has generated its own set of contradictions. Their obliviousness would be almost humorous if we didn?t know the painful conse- quences of their attitudes. This wrongheaded approach is evident, for example, in the media?s and politicians? approach to who will most effectively repress the drug epidemic or who can repress violent crime. Rightfully angry at the destructive consequences of drug use, our society cannot begin to consider the possibility that drug use might not be stopped by repression, because it is re?ective of people?s deep and pervasive unhappiness. Many Americans ?nd solace through drugs, alcohol, television, and dozens of other mechanisms of escape. For those in power it may be too frightening to ask, ?What aspects of this society make people so unhappy that they are willing to break the law and pay dearly for some vehicles of escape?? It may be easier for public of?cials and the media to de?ne tens of millions of people as criminals than to seriously confront the human needs that are not being met and to consider what changes would be necessary in order to meet them. Liberals often trivialize this discussion by reducing the problem to economic dis- crimination, and then are confounded when they ?nd that some of those engaged in violent crimes or random acts of violence or heavy drug use are not economically deprived. Nor is it particularly helpful to talk about these issues in terms of ?individual rights?-those who support the legalization of drugs, for example, don?t usually focus on the fundamental issue of the pain in people?s lives that induces them to use drugs, pain that is often rooted in the frustration of these most basic human needs. In complex and subtle ways virtually every existing social order frustrates our basic laurnan needs. Nothing can succeed in totally silencing our unmet human needs. That?s why when we think of 1789, or when we see the struggle of the Chinese students in 1989, we can?t help feeling new hope. The struggle to heal, repair, and transform the world so that it will no longer stifle our human needs, though at times it seems to have been defeated, remains the central item on the collective agenda of humanity. The reason that the struggle of Chinese students could excite the American public in ways that the Democratic party or sections of the social change move- ments have failed is not merely a re?ection of the American media?s desire to expose the failures of com- munism. Most Americans have lost interest in liberal politics because the liberals and the Democrats fail to present any visionary conception of how things might be changed fundamentally enough to allow our frustrated fundamental needs to be met. Flashing the Sign: Sedition in Israel? Israelis have been traveling to the West Bank to meet with Palestinians and show them that many Israelis oppose Prime Minister Shamir?s policies. Tikkun editorial board member Adi O?r helped create ?The Twenty-First Year? (of occupation), and Tikkun editorial board member Sidra Ezrahi helped create ?Israelis by Choice? (a group of former Americans who made aliyah and are now attempting to promote democratic values). These peace groups have regularly helped arrange the ?solidarity? visits. Typically, Israeli peace activists play a cat-and-mouse game with the Israeli army, since the army often declares a ?restricted military security zone? around any area that peaceniks intend to visit. The peace forces then try to sneak into the Arab villages through back roads or over hills and farmland; they are often arrested and removed, and then released by the army. On May 26 the rules were suddenly changed for twenty-seven solidarity visitors to the West Bank. This group, including not only Adi Ophir but also Tz'kkun?s two representatives in Israel (Aaron Back and Beth Sandweiss), were arrested during a solidarity Visit after the IDF troops were outraged by the group ?ashing the sign to Palestinian villagers. They were held for ?ve days and were charged with encouraging Palestinian rebellion (in US. judicial terms: sedition). They face long jail sentences for a totally nonviolent act of political solidarity. Ironically, the very same week a group of West Bank settlers entered a Palestinian village ?ring guns, wound- ing several Palestinians and murdering one teenage girl. Israeli civil libertarians report that at least seventeen cases of settler-caused Palestinian deaths have been documented but not prosecuted, and dozens of Pales- tinians wounded. According to the Israeli newspaper Ha?aretz, right-wing Jewish settlers in the West Bank ?are organizing by the hundreds to perpetrate acts of vengeance against Arab villages, and are prepared, for the ?rst time, to physically harm army of?cers who seek to prevent them from carrying out their illegal actions.? One theory holds that Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin has decided that he must stop the escalation of settler vigilante actions that increasingly have the ap- pearance of random pogroms against Palestinians?but to cover his tracks and not appear too partisan he has decided to crack down on the left as well. Another theory holds that the new level of repression against the Israeli peace movement was inevitable?once a government starts to quash civil liberties, the boundaries de?ning tom the early months of the intifada, groups of EDITORIAL 13