Chapter 10 Action: The Role of the Individual and Organizations
The previous chapters have demonstrated that political change requires attitudinal change on the part of citizens and their religious, educational, and political leaders. Attitudinal change requires education, which requires time, money and energy on the part of both individuals and groups to create a core of well-informed, active citizens who can effectively spread the message for nuclear weapons abolition.
Citizens concerned with human survival must know and practice skills of critical thinking. They must analyze and weigh the motives and evaluate the evidence in the information provided by both nuclear “hawks” and “doves.” It is important to understand the methods and devices of propaganda on all sides of the issue. This can be accomplished best by cultivating the habit of keeping up-to-date on nuclear weapons issues through diverse sources of information, and discussing the issue with others, learning from others’ views and sharing one’s own reasoned opinions. People with shared opinions can form into groups to more effectively reach other people.[1]
I remember the statement of a labor union leader who was meeting with a group of under-paid, over-worked factory workers who were very disgruntled with their conditions of employment. His advice to the group was: "Don't agonize! Organize."
In Columbia, Missouri, those concerned with peace have found that to be excellent advice. For example, first, individuals began to speak out against the decision by the U.S. Air Force to locate 150 Minuteman missiles in our 13 neighboring counties. These individuals joined together in the early 1960s to found the "Committee for Informed Opinion on Nuclear Arms" (CIONA), which unquestionably multiplied research, education, and community action efforts to expose the madness of the military’s strategy. By getting organized and acting collectively, we were able to vastly increase our outreach efforts to call for the cancellation of the 1970 deployment of the Safeguard Anti-ballistic missile system described in chapter five. Acting collectively was also a key factor in our increased efforts in speaking against the deployment of the ABM system in our area.
In the 1980's, thanks to the energetic leadership of a dynamic peace activist, Mark Haim, Columbia made a significant contribution to the nationwide Nuclear Freeze movement. Mark, and other local peace activists, eventually formed the local "Peaceworks of Mid-Missouri" organization, which, stimulated the formation of a coalition of 19 local peace groups (The Columbia Peace Coalition). This coalition now systematically focuses attention on the prevention of nuclear war and other peace, environmental and world order issues. Several of the coalition's members are local chapters of national or world organizations such as: the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, The Fellowship of Reconciliation, Catholic Workers, Veterans for Peace, and Global Action to Prevent War. Each of these groups relates to their national headquarters, and in so doing, provides research information, educational materials, and other resources for local action.
Thus, when individuals or groups say they are frustrated, and don't know what to do to help, it is up to nuclear disarmament educators and activists to offer a checklist containing a comprehensive description of tools and techniques suitable to that individual or group. Without question, there is truly something everyone can do to work for the abolition of nuclear weapons. It is always important to help newcomers to the field understand how many resources are readably available for their use.
In Civics for Democracy: A Journey for Teachers and Students, Katherine Issac outlined numerous techniques for civic participation in a variety of settings in which individuals and groups are working on social issues. "Educating about a particular issue is essential to mobilizing public support,” Issac writes, “and the methods for doing so are limited only by the imagination."[2]
Distributing Information: Leaflets, Flyers, Posters, and Bulletin Boards
One of the most common ways to publicize nuclear disarmament events are leaflets and flyers, which are useful ways to quickly spread information. Posters are more permanent announcements than flyers and help to keep the issue in the public eye. Issac writes that flyers are usually one page with a clear and concise message capable of attracting attention, “Thought should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of flyers by locating them where the maximum number of people will see it.”[3]
While these suggestions appear to be obvious, sometimes organizations prepare leaflets or flyers that are unattractive, bland, confusing, or do not properly locate their target audience. Such materials will do very little to encourage community action for nuclear disarmament. It is also possible that poorly developed publicity materials will contribute to the on-going marginalization process that often depicts nuclear disarmament activists as a fringe element of society. During the 1960s and 1970s tacky, messy publicity pieces expressed contempt for the other slick advertising of the day. For better or worse, such an approach ensures promotional failure today.
Bulletin boards are also effective ways to spread information. A well-designed, well-kept bulletin board is a major source of inter-communication between individuals and groups in a community. To be successfully used, bulletin boards have to be regularly maintained with up-to-date information, and this requires an individual who is the main point of contact, and who is clearly designated and known to be in charge of an organization's bulletin board(s). Otherwise, people will be turned off with overcrowded, outdated information and materials.
In addition to bulletin boards that are located in offices and other indoor settings, it is often the case that local communities have outdoor bulletin boards located in downtown areas, parks, and community buildings. Some places of business also have public bulletin boards, as do churches and recreation centers.
In Columbia, the Mid-Missouri Peaceworks organization makes regular weekly postings of flyers and/or posters at various downtown areas. These draw the attention of many citizens who otherwise might not be completely informed of key peace events in the city. The University of Missouri has an office whose staff members put up posters and flyers in all University dormitories, and maintains these bulletin boards in a professional manner. The University's Peace Studies Program often co-sponsors events with the Columbia Peace Coalition, thus providing an excellent publicity resource concerning programs devoted to nuclear disarmament education.
Public Events: Attending and Making Presentations
Without question, town meetings offer an excellent opportunity to extend nuclear disarmament education and action to a variety of individuals and groups in a local community. Such meetings afford an opportunity for interested citizens, including many newcomers to the field, to express personal concerns about the threat of nuclear war. People can explore differing views in a truly democratic way with their fellow citizens.
As mentioned in chapter six, "The Missouri Coalition Opposed to ABM and MIRV" promoted a series of town meetings in 1969-70 to examine the "Safeguard" ant-ballistic missile system. Successful town meetings were held in Warrensburg, Sedalia, Higginsville, Marshall and Columbia, Missouri. Attempts were made to get speakers on both sides of the deployment issue at all of the meetings. The Warrensburg meeting had the services of two Washington, D.C. based U.S. Government scientists who supported the deployment of ABM and MIRV, as well as local experts and activists opposed to the system. It is not always possible to secure experts on both sides of a town meeting issue, but it is very important to attempt to do so.
Care must also be taken to establish meeting ground rules that are fair to individuals of all political persuasions. Additionally, it is important to have a well-trained moderator who can civilly enforce the ground rules. Although a consensus is often impossible to achieve, in the case of our ABM/MIRV efforts, considerable letter writing and other contacts and appeals followed the town meetings to members of the Missouri Congressional delegation.
Town meetings may also involve two or three (at most) local "experts" who present talks with the purpose of stimulating audience participation. Then a skilled group facilitator can work with the audience to elicit their questions, fears, concerns, and suggestions for local actions that can contribute to nuclear weapons abolition. The previously mentioned Mayor's Peace Program and efforts for local nuclear weapons-free zones are natural topics for discussion, as are possible curriculum development efforts and other educational activities.
Peace organizations should utilize the need for local experts and speakers by keeping a bureau of people ready to give speeches or conduct workshops on specific issues.[4] The University of Missouri Peace Studies Program has a speaker's fund which is used to sponsor and co-sponsor guest speakers such as: Ted Turner of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, the late Rear Admiral Eugene Carroll of the Center for Defense Information, Ambassador Jonathan Dean of the Union of Concerned Scientists, writer Jonathan Schell, Dr. Robert Bowman of the Institute for Space and Security Studies, and others from peace and disarmament related organizations. To say the least, such speakers are very helpful in public relations matters connected with our mission of human survival. This is particularly true if local media outlets are appropriately alerted and prepared to cover the speakers.
Several other local groups, like Veterans for Peace, provide speakers and often jointly contribute funds to secure outside speakers. One group in Columbia is the Heartland Chapter of Global Action to Prevent War, which has a speaker's bureau that addresses issues of peace and world order. Members include Steve Starr and John Kultgen, mentioned in chapter eight. I, too, lend my services on the topic: "Confronting Nuclear War: The Role of the Citizen," and related topics.
It is worth repeating again that one does not need to be an “expert” to speak against nuclear weapons. Anyone with a desire to do so and a little preparation can begin presenting talks in the community. Videos can be excellent kick-off tools for town meetings and other public presentations. Some good examples include: The Nuclear Age Peace Foundation's Nuclear Weapons and the Human Future, the CBS 60 Minutes video "The Missiliers," the Center for Defense Information's Military Leaders for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, and Arsenal of Hypocrisy, hosted by Bruce Gagnon of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. At town meetings and similar events, it is also a good idea to have a one-page handout that succinctly states the problem, and also includes suggestions for political action.[5]
In this capacity, I recently met with an adult "Lifelong Learning" group at the University of Missouri, which holds seminars on issues of public concern—especially, issues they believe are ignored or slighted during Congressional or Presidential election campaigns. Several members of the group are retired University faculty, and others are community activists of one kind or other.
I showed the 20-minute DVD, Nuclear Weapons and the Human Future: What You Can Do to Help, at one of the group’s sessions. A brief statement concerning U.S and Russian nuclear weapons capabilities and possible strategies followed the DVD showing, including the probable Russian targeting of St. Louis, Kansas City, and Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri. At that point, class members were encouraged to ask questions, make personal statements and raise critical points regarding the information that has been previously presented. During that discussion, we talked about several things that local citizens can do to confront the possibility of human extinction by Russian and U.S. nuclear missiles. The discussion also focused, in part, on the DVD segment called, "What Individuals Can Do.” The discussion seemed to go well, and I felt confident that we had adequately covered the basic educational and political activities.
However, several weeks later, I showed the DVD to another group of faculty, students and townspeople at the University's Memorial Student Union. Afterwards, one of the most respected members of the group, a former Ivy League school administrator, said, "Bill, several weeks ago, we had this same DVD at our Lifetime Learning program, and we had essentially the same discussion we have had today. Unfortunately, our other group still feels frustrated because they say they don't really know what they can do to be truly effective in working on the problem of nuclear disarmament."
Needless to say, that response was disappointing. If the presenter is not able to “close the deal,” that is, convince the audience that they, as concerned citizens, can engage in some kind of productive action for nuclear disarmament, then it is obvious that the presenter's efforts have not been successful.
In some settings, "closing the deal" is hindered by the time allotment set aside for presentations in formal classes at civic organizations, faith groups, etc. Sometimes, the speaker is given even less time than originally scheduled. Under these circumstances, it is crucial to use a portion of whatever time is given to presenting solutions to the problem.
For example, I recently spoke to a local civic club where I was promised a full 30 minutes on nuclear weapons, but I ended up with only 17 minutes. As a result, I had time to present only the nuclear weapons problem, and virtually no time to offer solutions and suggestions for activities in which the club members could participate. Thus, I may have done more harm than good with my presentation. Under such conditions, the result is that audiences feel they have been confronted with a horrible problem and now feel frustrated because no short or long-term solutions have been put forth and discussed. This situation can definitely cause people to have feelings of helplessness and hopelessness, or to simply deny and ignore the problem altogether.
Given the problem associated with shorter than planned time allotments, as often occurs, I have found it advisable to have a "Plan B" arrangement for brief public presentations. One is to fashion a brief propositionaire such as:
1. The threat of nuclear war is the overriding health, environmental, and security problem confronting the people of our Planet.
2. Nuclear weapons are themselves, illegal, profoundly immoral and highly expensive.
3. Nuclear Weapons are highly incompatible with human security.
4. Nuclear weapons are subject to accidents, miscalculations and to computer error.
5. The issue of nuclear war does not receive the attention is requires.
6. There are several social and psychological obstacles that hinder education for nuclear disarmament.
7. There is great need for individual and group attention to the problem, including efforts by educators, people of faith and other members of this community.
This propositionaire can be presented within a five-minute timeframe before the showing of a video, or the presenter can move immediately to group questions, answers and dialogue. The first question to the audience might be: "What is your response to the seven propositions which were just offered?" While this approach is less desirable than a full 20-minute talk, it still enables truly interested members of the audience to engage in a discussion of solutions and future community events.
Signature Petitions
Widely circulated signature petitions can do much to raise public consciousness and action for the cause of nuclear disarmament. Circulation can be achieved through person-to-person contacts, distribution of hard copy petitions with signature forms at various public settings, and by on-line circulation. An excellent setting for the use of petitions is at the 300 to 350 air shows at private and military airfields throughout the U.S. each year. Some air shows will likely permit petitioning, others may not.
In 2004, Maureen Doyle attempted to distribute anti-war flyers at the Memorial Day Salute to Veterans Air Show in Columbia, Missouri. At that same event, I attempted to move through the crowd with a "clean energy" petition directed to our local City Council. Maureen was removed from the display area of the air show by local police officers. I was arrested, handcuffed and removed from the premises by other police officers.
With the assistance of highly competent ACLU attorneys, Maureen and I sued Salute to Veterans and the City of Columbia, which was deemed by a Federal District Court Judge to be a co-sponsor of the Columbia Air Show. The judge ruled that leafleting, sign and banner carrying (under certain conditions) and the wearing of protest clothing, buttons, hats, etc. were to be allowed at future shows. However, the judge also ruled that petitioning was not to be allowed. When our adversaries took their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a panel of three judges unanimously upheld the original decision; and when the case was then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the court refused to hear the case.
Thus, peace and disarmament groups around the country can definitely handout flyers at U.S. air shows. While we in Columbia, Missouri are not now allowed to circulate petitions inside our show, we can stand outside the gate and collect as many signatures as possible. This does not mean that other air shows will not allow petitioning amongst their crowds on airport tarmacs. It does mean that if the organizers disallow such petitioning activity, groups can still contact people and ask them to sign petitions as they are approaching the entrance of the show.
Air shows are only one venue for leafleting and petitioning. Any large gatherings such as parades, holiday celebrations and some sports events, are also excellent for widespread distribution of flyers and petitions. Petitions are also very useful with local civic organizations and church groups.
It is a good idea to have a "mini-training" session to assist new petition gatherers in understanding how to successfully approach potential signers, and how to respond when individuals refuse to sign, or are extremely rude in their refusal. One of the most difficult things about petitioning is convincing activists and others to actually collect the signatures. Many folks are hesitant to do so, and some are embarrassed when actually engaged in the petition collection process. Nevertheless, this is a very important activity, and ways to increase the autonomy levels of hesitant petitioners are needed.
Non-violent Direct Action
Direct action includes various kinds of non-violent, collective activity, which involves as many people as possible to pressure opponents, organizations, political leaders, etc., to change their behavior in some way.
"Protests, public demonstrations and marches can be effective on a mass scale or with only a small group of people,” Issac writes. “These types of protests increase public awareness and show public support for an issue.”[6]
One of the largest political demonstrations in U.S. history was to support the citizen campaign for a freeze on nuclear weapon production; 750,000 people gathered in New York City's Central Park in June of 1982. Protests against the second invasion of Iraq had even larger worldwide protests. Often, when a national demonstration occurs in cities like New York or Washington, D.C., local nuclear disarmament organizations hold supporting demonstrations in their own communities throughout the country. Most such demonstrations include a variety of activities, such as speeches, poetry readings, music, "guerilla theatre" etc.
In some cases, demonstrations also provide opportunities for civil disobedience, including demonstrations and sit-ins, at public buildings, parades, nuclear weapons installations, civilian weapons manufacturing plants, military recruiting offices, induction centers, or other military command posts. Those who do so must be prepared to be arrested and face possible jail sentences and fines. Such activity, including prosecution and court appearances can bring substantial attention to nuclear weapons and the threat they pose to human survival.
Issac defines civil disobedience as “the act of refusing to obey an existing law to protest the law or government policies or priorities.”[7] Examples of effective non-violent civil disobedience are India’s success under Gandhi to end British imperialism and the Civil Rights movement in the U.S. When Rosa Parks broke the law by refusing to give her seat on a Montgomery, Alabama bus to a white man, her action triggered a boycott by African-Americans of the town’s buses, which later succeeded in desegregating the public buses there.
An important lesson to learn from the civil rights movement is the success of boycotts. Nothing makes an uninterested party concerned about an issue faster than when they incur a negative financial impact. It was not one woman breaking an unjust law that desegregated the buses; it was the result of an entire community refusing to use a business because of its actions, thereby crippling the business until those actions were changed. In a world of increasing corporate conglomeration, these same actions could be effectively taken against the corporations taking part in nuclear weapons production or delivery.
In contrast to the above notion of civil disobedience, Francis Boyle, Professor of international law at the University of Illinois, states:
Measures of "civil resistance" must be carefully distinguished from acts of "civil disobedience" as traditionally defined. In today's civil resistance cases, [such as those involving nuclear weapons], what we witness are individuals attempting to prevent the ongoing commission of international crimes under well-recognized principles of international law and U.S. domestic law. This phenomenon is different from the classic civil-disobedience cases of the 1950s and 1960s, where African-Americans and their supporters deliberately violated domestic laws for the express purpose of challenging and changing those laws.[8]
By contrast, resisters who climb the fence at a U.S. Minuteman missile site are acting for the express purpose of upholding the rule of international law and the U.S. Constitution. In fact, "Today's civil resisters are the sheriffs," while leaders who threaten the use of nuclear weapons are the outlaws.
Members of the Catholic Worker Communities provide an example of such non-violent direct action when they climbed over the low-level fences surrounding Minuteman silos, such as those located in rural areas of the country. Such activity nearly always results in arrest, prosecution and jail time, but definitely brings the issue to the front pages of local and national news services.
Sometimes, direct action does not generate as much attention as expected. In the early 1970s, my daughter Beth, Professor Donald Granberg, and I mounted the front-end of a promotional fiberglass model of a U.S. Air Force Minuteman missile placed for public relations purposes in the lot of a shopping center in Columbia, Missouri (photo on Home Page). The missile was the exact size of a real Minuteman, except the missile covering was fiberglass rather than its usual material. We struck picture poses emulating "Slim" Pickins in Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. In which, he rode an H-bomb in its downward flight to a military target in the Soviet Union for the beginning of World War III and the destruction of Planet Earth. We expected to either be arrested on the missile or to be contacted by Air Force officials concerning our protest of the Whiteman Air Force Base mission. To our surprise neither occurred, and the missile was soon removed from the shopping center.
We did not generate the kind of publicity hoped for at the time, but we still left our mark. Our picture was published in a one hundred-year pictorial history of The Columbia Daily Tribune. Today, anyone who has never seen a nuclear missile, and who flips through that book, will be reminded of the terrible history of Missouri's role in the Cold War. It is hoped that they can also be reminded that the problem has not gone away.
Individual Action
The emphasis on organizational participation is not to say that individuals, by themselves, cannot make significant contributions to the abolition of nuclear weapons. Some individuals who prefer to work by themselves can, through Internet blogs and other means of communication, make valuable contributions to the dialogue. Today, the blogosphere is an increasingly powerful tool to spread information to a wide audience. In addition, hundreds of organizations do computer searches for well-written opinion pieces on social and political issues. It is not unusual for a writer of such pieces to find his or her article quoted by other parts of the country and the world.
Individuals can make their voices heard directly by contacting government representatives by email or phone. Individuals can also participate in “call in” shows or in some other way “talk back” to the media. They can also sign Internet petitions, such as the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation's world-wide "Appeal to the Next President of the United States," which calls for U.S. leadership for a nuclear weapon-free world. Or, one can make a difference by making financial contributions to on-line organizations conducting research, education, and action aimed at the prevention of nuclear holocaust.
Letters to the editors of newspapers are an important form of “talking back” to media and effectively air different points of view. Issac writes, "Americans read the letters to the editor column more frequently than anything else on the editorial page.”[9] While newspapers do not print every letter received, many papers still accumulate these letters for in-house surveys.
Issac provides the following guidelines to increase the chances that the paper will print your letter:
§ Newspapers will cut a long letter down to 250-350 words, keep it short and on target to avoid editing.
§ Avoid flowery language and unnecessary lead-ins.
§ Make reference to a recent editorial column or news story that prompted your letter.
§ Send an original, neat, handwritten, or preferably typed, letter.[10]
Almost all newspapers provide an e-mail address that can be used to forward e-mails to the editor. Such "Open Column" arrangements usually require the writer to include one's name and an address and phone number, with the understanding that someone at the newspaper will do a phone check to be sure that the letter has been forwarded by the individual whose name accompanies the letter. Once the proper identification has been made, many papers will allow the writer to sign the letter " name withheld" if that is the writer’s preference.
Similar to letters to the editor, most newspapers print opinion articles referred to as Op-eds. The authors of such articles are often syndicated columnists, but some are also local citizens who comment on local, national and world news. It is hoped that individuals throughout the U.S. will write letters to the editor and pen op-ed. pieces to up-date citizens everywhere on the need for de-alerting U.S. nuclear missiles, to abide by the provisions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and to sign and ratify the CTBT. A piece of writing aimed at a local audience often reaches people around the world.
A Call to Action: Something for Everyone
All of the aforementioned techniques for nuclear disarmament education and action offer significant ways for individuals and organizations to contribute to human survival. Without question, there is truly something everyone can do to work for the abolition of nuclear weapons.
In speaking of the need for an upsurge in nuclear abolition activism and community involvement, Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, has issued "A Call to Action" in which he says:
We have reached a moment in our country's history where it is urgent that people everywhere speak out as president of his or her own life, to protect the peace of the nation and world within and without. We should speak out and caution leaders who generate fear through talk of the endless war or the final conflict. We should appeal to our leaders to consider that their own bellicose thoughts, words and deeds are reshaping consciousness and can have an adverse effect on our nation. Because when one person thinks fight! s/he finds a fight. One faction thinks nuclear! and approaches the abyss. And what of one nation which thinks peace, and seeks peace? […]
As each one of us chooses, so becomes the world. Each of us is architect of the world. Our thoughts, the concepts. Our words, the designs. Our deeds, the bricks and mortar of our daily lives. Which is why we should always take care to regard the power of our thoughts and words, and the commands they send into action through time and space. […]
The splitting of the atom for destructive purposes admits a split consciousness, the compartmentalized thinking of Us vs. Them, the dichotomized thinking, which spawns polarity and leads to war. The proposed use of nuclear weapons, pollutes the psyche with the arrogance of infinite power. It creates delusions of domination of matter and space. It is dehumanizing through its calculations of mass casualties. We must overcome doom-thinkers and sayers who invite a world descending, disintegrating into a nuclear disaster. With a world at risk, we must find the bombs in our own lives and disarm them. We must listen to that quiet inner voice which counsels that the survival of all is achieved through the unity of all. […]
At this moment of peril we must move away from fear's paralysis. This is a call to action to replace expanded war with expanded peace. This is a call for action to place the very survival of this planet on the agenda of all people, everywhere. As citizens of a common planet, we have an obligation to ourselves and our posterity. We must demand that our nation and all nations put down the nuclear sword. […]
When peace is not on the agenda of our political parties or our governments, then it must be the work and the duty of each citizen of the world. This is the time to organize for peace. This is the time for new thinking. This is the time to conceive of peace as not simply being the absence of violence, but the active presence of the capacity for a higher evolution of human awareness. […]
It is practical to work for peace. I speak of peace and diplomacy not just for the sake of peace itself. But, for practical reasons, we must work for peace as a means of achieving permanent security. It is similarly practical to work for total
nuclear disarmament, particularly when nuclear arms do not even come close to addressing the real security problems which confront our nation. […]
We can achieve this practical vision of peace, if we are ready to work for it. People worldwide need to meet with like-minded people, about peace and nuclear disarmament, now. People worldwide need to march and to pray for peace, now. People worldwide need to be connecting with each other on the web, for peace, now. […]
Now is the time to think, speak, write, organize and take action to create peace as a social imperative, as an economic imperative, and as a political imperative. Now is the time to think, speak, write, organize, march, rally, hold vigils and take other nonviolent action to create peace in our cities, in our nation and in the world. And as the hymn says, 'let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me.' […]
This is the work of the human family, of people all over the world demanding that governments and non-governmental actors alike put down their nuclear weapons. This is the work of the human family, responding in the moment of crisis to protect our nation, this planet and all life within it. We can achieve both nuclear disarmament and peace, as we understand that all people of the world are interconnected. We can accomplish this through upholding an holistic vision and being a living testament to a Human Rights Covenant where each person on this planet is entitled to a life where s/he may consciously evolve in mind, body and spirit. […]
Nuclear disarmament and peace are the signposts toward the uplifting path of an even brighter human condition wherein we can through our conscious efforts evolve and reestablish the context of our existence from peril to peace, from revolution to evolution. Think peace. Speak peace. Act peace. Peace.[11]
Notes:
[1] These citizen actions are adapted from The American Citizens Handbook, 6th Ed., National Council for the Social Studies, Hugh Birch-Horace Mann Fund, 1961, p.21.
[2] Issac, K., & Nader, R. (1992). Civics for Democracy: A Journey for Teachers and Students. Washington, D.C.: Essential Books. p.161.
[3] Ibid., p. 161
[4] Ibid, p. 162.
[5] An example is the 10 myths and facts about nuclear weapons included in the appendix.
[6] Issac, K., & Nader, R. (1992). Civics for Democracy: A Journey for Teachers and Students. Washington, D.C.: Essential Books. p.166.
[7] Ibid, p.166
[8] Boyle, F.A. (2008). Protesting Power: War Resistance, and Law. Rowman and Littlefield. pp. 24-25.
[9] as cited in: Issac, K., & Nader, R. (1992). Civics for Democracy: A Journey for Teachers and Students. Washington, D.C.: Essential Books, p. 173.
[10] Ibid, p. 173-174.
[11] Kucinich, D. (2002, April 1). A call to action: Peace and nuclear disarmament. Retrieved from: http://www.counterpunch.org/kucinichdisarm.html
