At long last I saw The Lady, the film about Aung San Suu Kyi. We watched it as a family here at the wanderer's hut. All of us were completely absorbed, and afterwards we scattered to the four corners of the Internet to find out more about her. Providentially,
wakanomori's alumni magazine had two articles on her (more from that later), which led me eventually to her Freedom from Fear speech (1990).
I gather the first lines are rather well known:
I was interested in the fact that Suu Kyi implicates the oppressed as well as the oppressors. I don't see this as victim blaming; I see it as empowerment (and more importantly as just plain observation of a truth).
The rest of the speech was equally thought provoking. Speaking of the situation in Burma just prior to the uprising that eventually resulted in her house arrest, she wrote,
I loved that: a splinter of glass is tiny, but in its very nature it can cut.
In the absence of the rule of law, she said, it's up to ordinary people to preserve human dignity. America may be miles away from Burma, politically speaking, but the part I've bolded spoke to me:
About cultivating fearlessness, she said
And then this, too, spoke to me:
The concluding line of the speech is as good as the opening one:
Amen!
Apparently Suu Kyi is very modest about herself as an inspirational figure: she hasn't read the biographies written about her or seen the film (says she'd be too embarrassed), and even in talking about her time under house arrest, she is, as John Garth (writing for Oxford Today) puts it, "understated":
Very, very interesting woman.
I gather the first lines are rather well known:
It is not power that corrupts but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it.
I was interested in the fact that Suu Kyi implicates the oppressed as well as the oppressors. I don't see this as victim blaming; I see it as empowerment (and more importantly as just plain observation of a truth).
The rest of the speech was equally thought provoking. Speaking of the situation in Burma just prior to the uprising that eventually resulted in her house arrest, she wrote,
The people of Burma had wearied of a precarious state of passive apprehension where they were 'as water in cupped hands' of the powers that be.
Emerald cool we may be As water in cupped hands But oh that we might be As splinters of glass in cupped hands.
Glass splinters, the smallest with its sharp, glinting power to defend itself against hands that try to crush, could be seen as a vivid symbol of the spark of courage that is an essential attribute of those who would free themselves from the grip of oppression.
I loved that: a splinter of glass is tiny, but in its very nature it can cut.
In the absence of the rule of law, she said, it's up to ordinary people to preserve human dignity. America may be miles away from Burma, politically speaking, but the part I've bolded spoke to me:
Just laws do not merely prevent corruption by meting out impartial punishment to offenders. They also help to create a society in which people can fulfil the basic requirements necessary for the preservation of human dignity without recourse to corrupt practices. Where there are no such laws, the burden of upholding the principles of justice and common decency falls on the ordinary people. It is the cumulative effect of their sustained effort and steady endurance which will change a nation where reason and conscience are warped by fear.
About cultivating fearlessness, she said
Fearlessness may be a gift but perhaps more precious is the courage acquired through endeavour, courage that comes from cultivating the habit of refusing to let fear dictate one's actions
And then this, too, spoke to me:
Within a system which denies the existence of basic human rights, fear tends to be the order of the day. Fear of imprisonment, fear of torture, fear of death, fear of losing friends, family, property or means of livelihood, fear of poverty, fear of isolation, fear of failure. A most insidious form of fear is that which masquerades as common sense or even wisdom, condemning as foolish, reckless, insignificant or futile the small, daily acts of courage which help to preserve man's self-respect and inherent dignity.
The concluding line of the speech is as good as the opening one:
Concepts such as truth, justice and compassion cannot be dismissed as trite when these are often the only bulwarks which stand against ruthless power.
Amen!
Apparently Suu Kyi is very modest about herself as an inspirational figure: she hasn't read the biographies written about her or seen the film (says she'd be too embarrassed), and even in talking about her time under house arrest, she is, as John Garth (writing for Oxford Today) puts it, "understated":
"I like people; I'm fond of my friends," she says. "But I've never had any difficulty staying alone, and that helped me a great deal. So when people talk about my strength I'm a little surprised, because I have not found it particularly trying."
--John Garth, "Portrait of a Lady."
Very, very interesting woman.

Comments
I often think that USians talk strangely about laws.
To me it seems we often talk of them as oppressive, and I do think that here and elsewhere they can be oppressive, but they can also be protective and liberating.
1. Assuming that laws must and should be about morality, when the vast majority of laws have to do with coordinating disparate agents who interact in one (or more) society(ies).
2. Talking as if laws that have been enacted immediately alter the fabric of human behaviour: that things legislated against do not occur and that things mandated by legislation occur.
3. Talking as if the (often strained) possibility of a new or proposed law having undesirable consequences, ever, means that the law is a bad one that should not be enacted. This is often related to your point about the evaluation of laws from their cost side to the neglect of their benefit side. But I think there's also some sort of vague presupposition that There Is The Good Law Which Operates Desirably 100% of the Time Without Cost and Regardless of Human BEhaviour.
4. Obsessive interest in torts and punishments.
5. Attachment of deep moral outrage to property rights systems.
Um.............
Edited at 2013-01-07 03:41 pm (UTC)
"the burden of upholding the principles of justice and common decency falls on the ordinary people. It is the cumulative effect of their sustained effort and steady endurance which will change a nation."
I admire her so much. Talk about stepping up to the plate!