I’ll do my duty one day in may…

All of my life,
You’ve heard me say:
“I’ll get to it,
One day in May.”

And every year,
The month goes by;
Then June arrives,
To make us sigh.

Is it because
My progressive brain
Won’t let it go—
It’s wanting change?

So here I sit,
Dejected, too.
Do I dare stand up
For my beliefs?

Robert F. Kennedy’s Greatest Speech: A Tiny Ripple of Hope

“There is,” said an Italian philosopher, “nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.” Yet this is the measure of the task of your generation and the road is strewn with many dangers.

First is the danger of futility; the belief there is nothing one man or one woman can do against the enormous array of the world’s ills – against misery, against ignorance, or injustice and violence. Yet many of the world’s great movements, of thought and action, have flowed from the work of a single man. A young monk began the Protestant reformation, a young general extended an empire from Macedonia to the borders of the earth, and a young woman reclaimed the territory of France. It was a young Italian explorer who discovered the New World, and 32 year old Thomas Jefferson who proclaimed that all men are created equal. “Give me a place to stand,” said Archimedes, “and I will move the world.” These men moved the world, and so can we all. Few will have the greatness to bend history; but each of us can work to change a small portion of the events, and in the total of all these acts will be written the history of this generation. Thousands of Peace Corps volunteers are making a difference in the isolated villages and the city slums of dozens of countries. Thousands of unknown men and women in Europe resisted the occupation of the Nazis and many died, but all added to the ultimate strength and freedom of their countries. It is from numberless diverse acts of courage such as these that the belief that human history is thus shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.

“If Athens shall appear great to you,” said Pericles, “consider then that her glories were purchased by valiant men, and by men who learned their duty.” That is the source of all greatness in all societies, and it is the key to progress in our own time.

The second danger is that of expediency; of those who say that hopes and beliefs must bend before immediate necessities. Of course if we must act effectively we must deal with the world as it is. We must get things done. But if there was one thing that President Kennedy stood for that touched the most profound feeling of young people across the world, it was the belief that idealism, high aspiration and deep convictions are not incompatible with the most practical and efficient of programs – that there is no basic inconsistency between ideals and realistic possibilities – no separation between the deepest desires of heart and of mind and the rational application of human effort to human problems. It is not realistic or hard-headed to solve problems and take action unguided by ultimate moral aims and values, although we all know some who claim that it is so. In my judgement, it is thoughtless folly. For it ignores the realities of human faith and of passion and of belief; forces ultimately more powerful than all the calculations of our economists or of our generals. Of course to adhere to standards, to idealism, to vision in the face of immediate dangers takes great courage and takes self-confidence. But we also know that only those who dare to fail greatly, can ever achieve greatly.

It is this new idealism which is also, I believe, the common heritage of a generation which has learned that while efficiency can lead to the camps at Auschwitz, or the streets of Budapest, only the ideals of humanity and love can climb the hills of the Acropolis.

A third danger is timidity. Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change the world which yields most painfully to change. Aristotle tells us “At the Olympic games it is not the finest or the strongest men who are crowned, but those who enter the lists. . .so too in the life of the honorable and the good it is they who act rightly who win the prize.” I believe that in this generation those with the courage to enter the conflict will find themselves with companions in every corner of the world.

For the fortunate amongst us, the fourth danger is comfort; the temptation to follow the easy and familiar path of personal ambition and financial success so grandly spread before those who have the privilege of an education. But that is not the road history has marked out for us. There is a Chinese curse which says “May he live in interesting times.” Like it or not, we live in interesting times. They are times of danger and uncertainty; but they are also the most creative of any time in the history of mankind. And everyone here will ultimately be judged – will ultimately judge himself – on the effort he has contributed to building a new world society and the extent to which his ideals and goals have shaped that effort. Excerpt from: Day of Affirmation Address, University of Capetown, Capetown, South Africa, June 6, 1966

How fascism begins.

What is (and is not) anti-fascism?

MAGA and Fascism

The Cult of Tradition

Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt wrote an article about fascism (“Fascism Anyone?,” Free Inquiry Magazine, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the 14 identifying characteristics of fascism. [Copyright © 2003, This excerpt is in accordance with the magazine’s policy. Reprinted for Fair Use Only. This article was based upon the article “The Hallmarks of Fascist Regime” By: Skip Stone]

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Obsession with National Security: Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Labor Power is Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
Obsession with Crime and Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Fraudulent Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

In his 1995 essay “Ur-Fascism”, cultural theorist Umberto Eco lists fourteen general properties of fascist ideology. He argues that it is not possible to organize these into a coherent system, but that “it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it”. He uses the term “Ur-fascism” as a generic description of different historical forms of fascism. The fourteen properties are as follows: [Wikipedia contributors. “Definitions of fascism.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 6 Nov. 2021. Web. 13 Nov. 2021.]

“The Cult of Tradition“, characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by Tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement.
“The Rejection of modernism“, which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system.
“The Cult of Action for Action’s Sake“, which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.
“Disagreement Is Treason” – Fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.
“Fear of Difference“, which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.
“Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class“, fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.
“Obsession with a Plot” and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society (such as the German elite’s ‘fear’ of the 1930s Jewish populace’s businesses and well-doings; see also antisemitism). Eco also cites Pat Robertson’s book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.
Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as “at the same time too strong and too weak.” On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.
“Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy” because “Life is Permanent Warfare” – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.
“Contempt for the Weak“, which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate Leader who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.
“Everybody is Educated to Become a Hero“, which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, “the Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.”
“Machismo“, which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold “both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
“Selective Populism” – The People, conceived monolithically, have a Common Will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the Leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of “no longer representing the Voice of the People.”
“Newspeak” – Fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.

Why Did Some Support a Fascist for President?

What’s Trump Really After?

“The blame did not lay on evil men, for evil men always do evil things. The real damage is done by those millions who want to ‘survive.’ The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honor, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, mate small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe from what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.” By: Sophia Magdalena Scholl was a “woke” 21 year old German student and AntiFa political activist, active within the White Rose non-violent resistance group in Nazi Germany.

“The exercise of freedom will always create rebels, because that’s the origin of revolutions. We can’t have a sedentary society, just like we can’t have a perfect union. If you don’t want conflict in your family, church and state, you want fascism, and if that’s what you want, you don’t want democracy.” By: A. Freeman

“The ideal subject of [autoritarian] rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between true and false no longer exists.” By: Hannah Arendt

Analysis of the Poem: The Defense of Civil Rights and Resistance of the Autocratic Narrative

The poem vividly captures a personal and emotional struggle with inertia and the fear of taking action, echoing broader themes of civil rights and resistance against oppressive or autocratic governments. Through its reflective tone and contemplative language, the poet explores the universal dilemma faced by individuals and marginalized groups when confronting systemic injustice and the challenge of standing up for one’s beliefs.

Themes of Hesitation and Internal Conflict

The recurring motif of delay—”I’ll get to it, one day in May”—symbolizes the tendency of individuals and communities to postpone activism or resistance, often due to fear, uncertainty, or complacency. This postponement echoes historical patterns where oppressed groups defer action, hoping for better circumstances or fearing repercussions. The poem’s depiction of the passing months—”And every year, the month goes by”—emphasizes the cyclical nature of such procrastination, which can result in missed opportunities for change.

The lines “Is it because / My progressive brain / Won’t let it go— / It’s wanting change?” suggest an internal conflict between awareness and paralysis. The speaker’s “progressive brain” signifies a conscience awakened to injustice, yet still hindered by fear or doubt. This mirrors the internal struggles faced by civil rights activists who grapple with the risks of defying authority—particularly in autocratic regimes where dissent may be met with harsh punishment.

Resisting Autocratic Power and the Courage to Act

The poem culminates in a moment of introspection: “So here I sit, / Dejected, too. / Do I dare stand up / For my beliefs?” This pivotal question encapsulates the tension between conformity and resistance. It reflects the courage required to challenge unjust authority—an act that can be fraught with danger in autocratic societies where speaking out can threaten one’s safety or freedom.

The subsequent lines, “I cannot lie— / My case is weak. / But hope still pleads, / For me to try!” underscore the importance of hope and moral conviction as motivators for resistance. Despite feelings of inadequacy or fear, the speaker recognizes that hope persists, urging action. Historically, many civil rights movements have thrived on this very hope—an acknowledgment that even small acts of defiance can ignite significant change.

Symbolism and Broader Implications

The poem’s subtle symbolism—months passing, the desire for change, the internal debate—serves as a metaphor for societal struggles against oppressive regimes. The recurring theme of time reflects the urgency of resisting injustice before opportunities for meaningful change are lost. The call to “try” resonates with the necessity of individual and collective courage in the face of authoritarianism.

Overall, the poem eloquently portrays the internal battle between complacency and activism, a struggle that is central to civil rights movements worldwide. It reminds us that resistance often begins with personal reflection and that hope, even when faint, is a vital catalyst for action. In the context of resisting autocratic governments, the poem underscores the importance of overcoming fear, embracing moral conviction, and daring to stand up for justice—a message as relevant today as it has been throughout history.