- 相关推荐
名人演讲：打破沉寂
我们都知道，马丁·路德·金是美国的民权运动领袖，他为黑人谋求平等，甚至献出了自己的生命，被誉为是“黑人的麦加”。而与此同时，马丁·路德·金也是一名卓越的反战斗士，他关心的不仅仅是“小我”的权利，而且还有“大我”的和平、自由。如果你一直以来只是把马丁·路德·金看成一个黑人运动领袖，那么下面的这篇演讲相信会让你对他有新的认识——马
ぢ返隆そ鸬奈按笕烁裰档梦颐敲恳桓鲅鍪幼鹁础?br>
本演讲发表于1967年4月4日，是马丁·路德·金在“忧世教士和俗人协会”的一个反越站的集会上的演讲，集会的地点是纽约著名的河边大教堂（riverside
church）。
我之所以跨入此间宏伟的教堂，是因为我的良心让我别无选择。我加入你们的集会，则是因为我对这个聚合我们的组织——“忧世教士和俗人协会”关注越南——的工作和主旨非常认同。我对你们执委会最近的声明深有同感，当我阅读到它的开场白的时候就甚有共鸣：“这是一个‘沉默即是背叛’的时刻。”
i
come
to
this
magnificent
house
of
worship
tonight
because
my
conscience
leaves
me
no
other
choice.
i
join
you
in
this
meeting
because
i
am
in
deepest
agreement
with
the
aims
and
work
of
the
organization
which
has
brought
us
together:
clergy
and
laymen
concerned
about
vietnam.
the
recent
statements
of
your
executive
committee
are
the
sentiments
of
my
own
heart,
and
i
found
myself
in
full
accord
when
i
read
its
opening
lines:
"a
time
comes
when
silence
is
betrayal."
演讲全文：a
time
to
break
silence
by
martin
luther
king,
jr.
i
come
to
this
magnificent
house
of
worship
tonight
because
my
conscience
leaves
me
no
other
choice.
i
join
you
in
this
meeting
because
i
am
in
deepest
agreement
with
the
aims
and
work
of
the
organization
which
has
brought
us
together:
clergy
and
laymen
concerned
about
vietnam.
the
recent
statements
of
your
executive
committee
are
the
sentiments
of
my
own
heart,
and
i
found
myself
in
full
accord
when
i
read
its
opening
lines:
"a
time
comes
when
silence
is
betrayal."
and
that
time
has
come
for
us
in
relation
to
vietnam.
the
truth
of
these
words
is
beyond
doubt,
but
the
mission
to
which
they
call
us
is
a
most
difficult
one.
even
when
pressed
by
the
demands
of
inner
truth,
men
do
not
easily
assume
the
task
of
opposing
their
government's
policy,
especially
in
time
of
war.
nor
does
the
human
spirit
move
without
great
difficulty
against
all
the
apathy
of
conformist
thought
within
one's
own
bosom
and
in
the
surrounding
world.
moreover,
when
the
issues
at
hand
seem
as
perplexed
as
they
often
do
in
the
case
of
this
dreadful
conflict,
we
are
always
on
the
verge
of
being
mesmerized
by
uncertainty;
but
we
must
move
on.
and
some
of
us
who
have
already
begun
to
break
the
silence
of
the
night
have
found
that
the
calling
to
speak
is
often
a
vocation
of
agony,
but
we
must
speak.
we
must
speak
with
all
the
humility
that
is
appropriate
to
our
limited
vision,
but
we
must
speak.
and
we
must
rejoice
as
well,
for
surely
this
is
the
first
time
in
our
nation's
history
that
a
significant
number
of
its
religious
leaders
have
chosen
to
move
beyond
the
prophesying
of
smooth
patriotism
to
the
high
grounds
of
a
firm
dissent
based
upon
the
mandates
of
conscience
and
the
reading
of
history.
perhaps
a
new
spirit
is
rising
among
us.
if
it
is,
let
us
trace
its
movements
and
pray
that
our
own
inner
being
may
be
sensitive
to
its
guidance,
for
we
are
deeply
in
need
of
a
new
way
beyond
the
darkness
that
seems
so
close
around
us.
over
the
past
two
years,
as
i
have
moved
to
break
the
betrayal
of
my
own
silences
and
to
speak
from
the
burnings
of
my
own
heart,
as
i
have
called
for
radical
departures
from
the
destruction
of
vietnam,
many
persons
have
questioned
me
about
the
wisdom
of
my
path.
at
the
heart
of
their
concerns
this
query
has
often
loomed
large
and
loud:
"why
are
you
speaking
about
the
war,
dr.
king?"
"why
are
you
joining
the
voices
of
dissent?"
"peace
and
civil
rights
don't
mix,"
they
say.
"aren't
you
hurting
the
cause
of
your
people,"
they
ask?
and
when
i
hear
them,
though
i
often
understand
the
source
of
their
concern,
i
am
nevertheless
greatly
saddened,
for
such
questions
mean
that
the
inquirers
have
not
really
known
me,
my
commitment
or
my
calling.
indeed,
their
questions
suggest
that
they
do
not
know
the
world
in
which
they
live.
in
the
light
of
such
tragic
misunderstanding,
i
deem
it
of
signal
importance
to
try
to
state
clearly,
and
i
trust
concisely,
why
i
believe
that
the
path
from
dexter
avenue
baptist
church
--
the
church
in
montgomery,
alabama,
where
i
began
my
pastorate
--
leads
clearly
to
this
sanctuary
tonight.
i
come
to
this
platform
tonight
to
make
a
passionate
plea
to
my
beloved
nation.
this
speech
is
not
addressed
to
hanoi
or
to
the
national
liberation
front.
it
is
not
addressed
to
china
or
to
russia.
nor
is
it
an
attempt
to
overlook
the
ambiguity
of
the
total
situation
and
the
need
for
a
collective
solution
to
the
tragedy
of
vietnam.
neither
is
it
an
attempt
to
make
north
vietnam
or
the
national
liberation
front
paragons
of
virtue,
nor
to
overlook
the
role
they
must
play
in
the
successful
resolution
of
the
problem.
while
they
both
may
have
justifiable
reasons
to
be
suspicious
of
the
good
faith
of
the
united
states,
life
and
history
give
eloquent
testimony
to
the
fact
that
conflicts
are
never
resolved
without
trustful
give
and
take
on
both
sides.
tonight,
however,
i
wish
not
to
speak
with
hanoi
and
the
national
liberation
front,
but
rather
to
my
fellowed
[sic]
americans,
*who,
with
me,
bear
the
greatest
responsibility
in
ending
a
conflict
that
has
exacted
a
heavy
price
on
both
continents.
since
i
am
a
preacher
by
trade,
i
suppose
it
is
not
surprising
that
i
have
seven
major
reasons
for
bringing
vietnam
into
the
field
of
my
moral
vision.*
there
is
at
the
outset
a
very
obvious
and
almost
facile
connection
between
the
war
in
vietnam
and
the
struggle
i,
and
others,
have
been
waging
in
america.
a
few
years
ago
there
was
a
shining
moment
in
that
struggle.
it
seemed
as
if
there
was
a
real
promise
of
hope
for
the
poor
--
both
black
and
white
--
through
the
poverty
program.
there
were
experiments,
hopes,
new
beginnings.
then
came
the
buildup
in
vietnam,
and
i
watched
this
program
broken
and
eviscerated,
as
if
it
were
some
idle
political
plaything
of
a
society
gone
mad
on
war,
and
i
knew
that
america
would
never
invest
the
necessary
funds
or
energies
in
rehabilitation
of
its
poor
so
long
as
adventures
like
vietnam
continued
to
draw
men
and
skills
and
money
like
some
demonic
destructive
suction
tube.
so,
i
was
increasingly
compelled
to
see
the
war
as
an
enemy
of
the
poor
and
to
attack
it
as
such.
perhaps
the
more
tragic
recognition
of
reality
took
place
when
it
became
clear
to
me
that
the
war
was
doing
far
more
than
devastating
the
hopes
of
the
poor
at
home.
it
was
sending
their
sons
and
their
brothers
and
their
husbands
to
fight
and
to
die
in
extraordinarily
high
proportions
relative
to
the
rest
of
the
population.
we
were
taking
the
black
young
men
who
had
been
crippled
by
our
society
and
sending
them
eight
thousand
miles
away
to
guarantee
liberties
in
southeast
asia
which
they
had
not
found
in
southwest
georgia
and
east
harlem.
and
so
we
have
been
repeatedly
faced
with
the
cruel
irony
of
watching
negro
and
white
boys
on
tv
screens
as
they
kill
and
die
together
for
a
nation
that
has
been
unable
to
seat
them
together
in
the
same
schools.
and
so
we
watch
them
in
brutal
solidarity
burning
the
huts
of
a
poor
village,
but
we
realize
that
they
would
hardly
live
on
the
same
block
in
chicago.
i
could
not
be
silent
in
the
face
of
such
cruel
manipulation
of
the
poor.
my
third
reason
moves
to
an
even
deeper
level
of
awareness,
for
it
grows
out
of
my
experience
in
the
ghettoes
of
the
north
over
the
last
three
years
--
especially
the
last
three
summers.
as
i
have
walked
among
the
desperate,
rejected,
and
angry
young
men,
i
have
told
them
that
molotov
cocktails
and
rifles
would
not
solve
their
problems.
i
have
tried
to
offer
them
my
deepest
compassion
while
maintaining
my
conviction
that
social
change
comes
most
meaningfully
through
nonviolent
action.
but
they
ask
--
and
rightly
so
--
what
about
vietnam?
they
ask
if
our
own
nation
wasn't
using
massive
doses
of
violence
to
solve
its
problems,
to
bring
about
the
changes
it
wanted.
their
questions
hit
home,
and
i
knew
that
i
could
never
again
raise
my
voice
against
the
violence
of
the
oppressed
in
the
ghettos
without
having
first
spoken
clearly
to
the
greatest
purveyor
of
violence
in
the
world
today
--
my
own
government.
for
the
sake
of
those
boys,
for
the
sake
of
this
government,
for
the
sake
of
the
hundreds
of
thousands
trembling
under
our
violence,
i
cannot
be
silent.
for
those
who
ask
the
question,
"aren't
you
a
civil
rights
leader?"
and
thereby
mean
to
exclude
me
from
the
movement
for
peace,
i
have
this
further
answer.
in
1957
when
a
group
of
us
formed
the
southern
christian
leadership
conference,
we
chose
as
our
motto:
"to
save
the
soul
of
america."
we
were
convinced
that
we
could
not
limit
our
vision
to
certain
rights
for
black
people,
but
instead
affirmed
the
conviction
that
america
would
never
be
free
or
saved
from
itself
until
the
descendants
of
its
slaves
were
loosed
completely
from
the
shackles
they
still
wear.
in
a
way
we
were
agreeing
with
langston
hughes,
that
black
bard
of
harlem,
who
had
written
earlier:
o,
yes,
i
say
it
plain,
america
never
was
america
to
me,
and
yet
i
swear
this
oath
--
america
will
be!
now,
it
should
be
incandescently
clear
that
no
one
who
has
any
concern
for
the
integrity
and
life
of
america
today
can
ignore
the
present
war.
if
america's
soul
becomes
totally
poisoned,
part
of
the
autopsy
must
read:
vietnam.
it
can
never
be
saved
so
long
as
it
destroys
the
deepest
hopes
of
men
the
world
over.
so
it
is
that
those
of
us
who
are
yet
determined
that
america
will
be
are
led
down
the
path
of
protest
and
dissent,
working
for
the
health
of
our
land.
as
if
the
weight
of
such
a
commitment
to
the
life
and
health
of
america
were
not
enough,
another
burden
of
responsibility
was
placed
upon
me
in
1954**
[sic];
and
i
cannot
forget
that
the
nobel
prize
for
peace
was
also
a
commission
--
a
commission
to
work
harder
than
i
had
ever
worked
before
for
"the
brotherhood
of
man."
this
is
a
calling
that
takes
me
beyond
national
allegiances,
but
even
if
it
were
not
present
i
would
yet
have
to
live
with
the
meaning
of
my
commitment
to
the
ministry
of
jesus
christ.
to
me
the
relationship
of
this
ministry
to
the
making
of
peace
is
so
obvious
that
i
sometimes
marvel
at
those
who
ask
me
why
i'm
speaking
against
the
war.
could
it
be
that
they
do
not
know
that
the
good
news
was
meant
for
all
men
--
for
communist
and
capitalist,
for
their
children
and
ours,
for
black
and
for
white,
for
revolutionary
and
conservative?
have
they
forgotten
that
my
ministry
is
in
obedience
to
the
one
who
loved
his
enemies
so
fully
that
he
died
for
them?
what
then
can
i
say
to
the
vietcong
or
to
castro
or
to
mao
as
a
faithful
minister
of
this
one?
can
i
threaten
them
with
death
or
must
i
not
share
with
them
my
life?
and
finally,
as
i
try
to
explain
for
you
and
for
myself
the
road
that
leads
from
montgomery
to
this
place
i
would
have
offered
all
that
was
most
valid
if
i
simply
said
that
i
must
be
true
to
my
conviction
that
i
share
with
all
men
the
calling
to
be
a
son
of
the
living
god.
beyond
the
calling
of
race
or
nation
or
creed
is
this
vocation
of
sonship
and
brotherhood,
and
because
i
believe
that
the
father
is
deeply
concerned
especially
for
his
suffering
and
helpless
and
outcast
children,
i
come
tonight
to
speak
for
them.
this
i
believe
to
be
the
privilege
and
the
burden
of
all
of
us
who
deem
ourselves
bound
by
allegiances
and
loyalties
which
are
broader
and
deeper
than
nationalism
and
which
go
beyond
our
nation's
self-defined
goals
and
positions.
we
are
called
to
speak
for
the
weak,
for
the
voiceless,
for
the
victims
of
our
nation
and
for
those
it
calls
"enemy,"
for
no
document
from
human
hands
can
make
these
humans
any
less
our
brothers.
and
as
i
ponder
the
madness
of
vietnam
and
search
within
myself
for
ways
to
understand
and
respond
in
compassion,
my
mind
goes
constantly
to
the
people
of
that
peninsula.
i
speak
now
not
of
the
soldiers
of
each
side,
not
of
the
ideologies
of
the
liberation
front,
not
of
the
junta
in
saigon,
but
simply
of
the
people
who
have
been
living
under
the
curse
of
war
for
almost
three
continuous
decades
now.
i
think
of
them,
too,
because
it
is
clear
to
me
that
there
will
be
no
meaningful
solution
there
until
some
attempt
is
made
to
know
them
and
hear
their
broken
cries.
they
must
see
americans
as
strange
liberators.
the
vietnamese
people
proclaimed
their
own
independence
*in
1954*
--
in
1945
*rather*
--
after
a
combined
french
and
japanese
occupation
and
before
the
communist
revolution
in
china.
they
were
led
by
ho
chi
minh.
even
though
they
quoted
the
american
declaration
of
independence
in
their
own
document
of
freedom,
we
refused
to
recognize
them.
instead,
we
decided
to
support
france
in
its
reconquest
of
her
former
colony.
our
government
felt
then
that
the
vietnamese
people
were
not
ready
for
independence,
and
we
again
fell
victim
to
the
deadly
western
arrogance
that
has
poisoned
the
international
atmosphere
for
so
long.
with
that
tragic
decision
we
rejected
a
revolutionary
government
seeking
self-determination
and
a
government
that
had
been
established
not
by
china
--
for
whom
the
vietnamese
have
no
great
love
--
but
by
clearly
indigenous
forces
that
included
some
communists.
for
the
peasants
this
new
government
meant
real
land
reform,
one
of
the
most
important
needs
in
their
lives.
for
nine
years
following
1945
we
denied
the
people
of
vietnam
the
right
of
independence.
for
nine
years
we
vigorously
supported
the
french
in
their
abortive
effort
to
recolonize
vietnam.
before
the
end
of
the
war
we
were
meeting
eighty
percent
of
the
french
war
costs.
even
before
the
french
were
defeated
at
dien
bien
phu,
they
began
to
despair
of
their
reckless
action,
but
we
did
not.
we
encouraged
them
with
our
huge
financial
and
military
supplies
to
continue
the
war
even
after
they
had
lost
the
will.
soon
we
would
be
paying
almost
the
full
costs
of
this
tragic
attempt
at
recolonization.
after
the
french
were
defeated,
it
looked
as
if
independence
and
land
reform
would
come
again
through
the
geneva
agreement.
but
instead
there
came
the
united
states,
determined
that
ho
should
not
unify
the
temporarily
divided
nation,
and
the
peasants
watched
again
as
we
supported
one
of
the
most
vicious
modern
dictators,
our
chosen
man,
premier
diem.
the
peasants
watched
and
cringed
as
diem
ruthlessly
rooted
out
all
opposition,
supported
their
extortionist
landlords,
and
refused
even
to
discuss
reunification
with
the
north.
the
peasants
watched
as
all
this
was
presided
over
by
united
states'
influence
and
then
by
increasing
numbers
of
united
states
troops
who
came
to
help
quell
the
insurgency
that
diem's
methods
had
aroused.
when
diem
was
overthrown
they
may
have
been
happy,
but
the
long
line
of
military
dictators
seemed
to
offer
no
real
change,
especially
in
terms
of
their
need
for
land
and
peace.
the
only
change
came
from
america,
as
we
increased
our
troop
commitments
in
support
of
governments
which
were
singularly
corrupt,
inept,
and
without
popular
support.
all
the
while
the
people
read
our
leaflets
and
received
the
regular
promises
of
peace
and
democracy
and
land
reform.
now
they
languish
under
our
bombs
and
consider
us,
not
their
fellow
vietnamese,
the
real
enemy.
they
move
sadly
and
apathetically
as
we
herd
them
off
the
land
of
their
fathers
into
concentration
camps
where
minimal
social
needs
are
rarely
met.
they
know
they
must
move
on
or
be
destroyed
by
our
bombs.
so
they
go,
primarily
women
and
children
and
the
aged.
they
watch
as
we
poison
their
water,
as
we
kill
a
million
acres
of
their
crops.
they
must
weep
as
the
bulldozers
roar
through
their
areas
preparing
to
destroy
the
precious
trees.
they
wander
into
the
hospitals
with
at
least
twenty
casualties
from
american
firepower
for
one
vietcong-inflicted
injury.
so
far
we
may
have
killed
a
million
of
them,
mostly
children.
they
wander
into
the
towns
and
see
thousands
of
the
children,
homeless,
without
clothes,
running
in
packs
on
the
streets
like
animals.
they
see
the
children
degraded
by
our
soldiers
as
they
beg
for
food.
they
see
the
children
selling
their
sisters
to
our
soldiers,
soliciting
for
their
mothers.
what
do
the
peasants
think
as
we
ally
ourselves
with
the
landlords
and
as
we
refuse
to
put
any
action
into
our
many
words
concerning
land
reform?
what
do
they
think
as
we
test
out
our
latest
weapons
on
them,
just
as
the
germans
tested
out
new
medicine
and
new
tortures
in
the
concentration
camps
of
europe?
where
are
the
roots
of
the
independent
vietnam
we
claim
to
be
building?
is
it
among
these
voiceless
ones?
we
have
destroyed
their
two
most
cherished
institutions:
the
family
and
the
village.
we
have
destroyed
their
land
and
their
crops.
we
have
cooperated
in
the
crushing
of
the
nation's
only
noncommunist
revolutionary
political
force,
the
unified
buddhist
church.
we
have
supported
the
enemies
of
the
peasants
of
saigon.
we
have
corrupted
their
women
and
children
and
killed
their
men.
now
there
is
little
left
to
build
on,
save
bitterness.
*soon
the
only
solid
physical
foundations
remaining
will
be
found
at
our
military
bases
and
in
the
concrete
of
the
concentration
camps
we
call
"fortified
hamlets."
the
peasants
may
well
wonder
if
we
plan
to
build
our
new
vietnam
on
such
grounds
as
these.
could
we
blame
them
for
such
thoughts?
we
must
speak
for
them
and
raise
the
questions
they
cannot
raise.
these,
too,
are
our
brothers.
perhaps
a
more
difficult
but
no
less
necessary
task
is
to
speak
for
those
who
have
been
designated
as
our
enemies.*
what
of
the
national
liberation
front,
that
strangely
anonymous
group
we
call
"vc"
or
"communists"?
what
must
they
think
of
the
united
states
of
america
when
they
realize
that
we
permitted
the
repression
and
cruelty
of
diem,
which
helped
to
bring
them
into
being
as
a
resistance
group
in
the
south?
what
do
they
think
of
our
condoning
the
violence
which
led
to
their
own
taking
up
of
arms?
how
can
they
believe
in
our
integrity
when
now
we
speak
of
"aggression
from
the
north"
as
if
there
were
nothing
more
essential
to
the
war?
how
can
they
trust
us
when
now
we
charge
them
with
violence
after
the
murderous
reign
of
diem
and
charge
them
with
violence
while
we
pour
every
new
weapon
of
death
into
their
land?
surely
we
must
understand
their
feelings,
even
if
we
do
not
condone
their
actions.
surely
we
must
see
that
the
men
we
supported
pressed
them
to
their
violence.
surely
we
must
see
that
our
own
computerized
plans
of
destruction
simply
dwarf
their
greatest
acts.
how
do
they
judge
us
when
our
officials
know
that
their
membership
is
less
than
twenty-five
percent
communist,
and
yet
insist
on
giving
them
the
blanket
name?
what
must
they
be
thinking
when
they
know
that
we
are
aware
of
their
control
of
major
sections
of
vietnam,
and
yet
we
appear
ready
to
allow
national
elections
in
which
this
highly
organized
political
parallel
government
will
not
have
a
part?
they
ask
how
we
can
speak
of
free
elections
when
the
saigon
press
is
censored
and
controlled
by
the
military
junta.
and
they
are
surely
right
to
wonder
what
kind
of
new
government
we
plan
to
help
form
without
them,
the
only
party
in
real
touch
with
the
peasants.
they
question
our
political
goals
and
they
deny
the
reality
of
a
peace
settlement
from
which
they
will
be
excluded.
their
questions
are
frighteningly
relevant.
is
our
nation
planning
to
build
on
political
myth
again,
and
then
shore
it
up
upon
the
power
of
new
violence?
here
is
the
true
meaning
and
value
of
compassion
and
nonviolence,
when
it
helps
us
to
see
the
enemy's
point
of
view,
to
hear
his
questions,
to
know
his
assessment
of
ourselves.
for
from
his
view
we
may
indeed
see
the
basic
weaknesses
of
our
own
condition,
and
if
we
are
mature,
we
may
learn
and
grow
and
profit
from
the
wisdom
of
the
brothers
who
are
called
the
opposition.
so,
too,
with
hanoi.
in
the
north,
where
our
bombs
now
pummel
the
land,
and
our
mines
endanger
the
waterways,
we
are
met
by
a
deep
but
understandable
mistrust.
to
speak
for
them
is
to
explain
this
lack
of
confidence
in
western
words,
and
especially
their
distrust
of
american
intentions
now.
in
hanoi
are
the
men
who
led
the
nation
to
independence
against
the
japanese
and
the
french,
the
men
who
sought
membership
in
the
french
commonwealth
and
were
betrayed
by
the
weakness
of
paris
and
the
willfulness
of
the
colonial
armies.
it
was
they
who
led
a
second
struggle
against
french
domination
at
tremendous
costs,
and
then
were
persuaded
to
give
up
the
land
they
controlled
between
the
thirteenth
and
seventeenth
parallel
as
a
temporary
measure
at
geneva.
after
1954
they
watched
us
conspire
with
diem
to
prevent
elections
which
could
have
surely
brought
ho
chi
minh
to
power
over
a
united
vietnam,
and
they
realized
they
had
been
betrayed
again.
when
we
ask
why
they
do
not
leap
to
negotiate,
these
things
must
be
remembered.
also,
it
must
be
clear
that
the
leaders
of
hanoi
considered
the
presence
of
american
troops
in
support
of
the
diem
regime
to
have
been
the
initial
military
breach
of
the
geneva
agreement
concerning
foreign
troops.
they
remind
us
that
they
did
not
begin
to
send
troops
in
large
numbers
and
even
supplies
into
the
south
until
american
forces
had
moved
into
the
tens
of
thousands.
hanoi
remembers
how
our
leaders
refused
to
tell
us
the
truth
about
the
earlier
north
vietnamese
overtures
for
peace,
how
the
president
claimed
that
none
existed
when
they
had
clearly
been
made.
ho
chi
minh
has
watched
as
america
has
spoken
of
peace
and
built
up
its
forces,
and
now
he
has
surely
heard
the
increasing
international
rumors
of
american
plans
for
an
invasion
of
the
north.
he
knows
the
bombing
and
shelling
and
mining
we
are
doing
are
part
of
traditional
pre-invasion
strategy.
perhaps
only
his
sense
of
humor
and
of
irony
can
save
him
when
he
hears
the
most
powerful
nation
of
the
world
speaking
of
aggression
as
it
drops
thousands
of
bombs
on
a
poor,
weak
nation
more
than
*eight
hundred,
or
rather,*
eight
thousand
miles
away
from
its
shores.
at
this
point
i
should
make
it
clear
that
while
i
have
tried
in
these
last
few
minutes
to
give
a
voice
to
the
voiceless
in
vietnam
and
to
understand
the
arguments
of
those
who
are
called
"enemy,"
i
am
as
deeply
concerned
about
our
own
troops
there
as
anything
else.
for
it
occurs
to
me
that
what
we
are
submitting
them
to
in
vietnam
is
not
simply
the
brutalizing
process
that
goes
on
in
any
war
where
armies
face
each
other
and
seek
to
destroy.
we
are
adding
cynicism
to
the
process
of
death,
for
they
must
know
after
a
short
period
there
that
none
of
the
things
we
claim
to
be
fighting
for
are
really
involved.
before
long
they
must
know
that
their
government
has
sent
them
into
a
struggle
among
vietnamese,
and
the
more
sophisticated
surely
realize
that
we
are
on
the
side
of
the
wealthy,
and
the
secure,
while
we
create
a
hell
for
the
poor.
somehow
this
madness
must
cease.
we
must
stop
now.
i
speak
as
a
child
of
god
and
brother
to
the
suffering
poor
of
vietnam.
i
speak
for
those
whose
land
is
being
laid
waste,
whose
homes
are
being
destroyed,
whose
culture
is
being
subverted.
i
speak
for
the
poor
of
america
who
are
paying
the
double
price
of
smashed
hopes
at
home,
and
death
and
corruption
in
vietnam.
i
speak
as
a
citizen
of
the
world,
for
the
world
as
it
stands
aghast
at
the
path
we
have
taken.
i
speak
as
one
who
loves
america,
to
the
leaders
of
our
own
nation:
the
great
initiative
in
this
war
is
ours;
the
initiative
to
stop
it
must
be
ours.
this
is
the
message
of
the
great
buddhist
leaders
of
vietnam.
recently
one
of
them
wrote
these
words,
and
i
quote:
each
day
the
war
goes
on
the
hatred
increases
in
the
heart
of
the
vietnamese
and
in
the
hearts
of
those
of
humanitarian
instinct.
the
americans
are
forcing
even
their
friends
into
becoming
their
enemies.
it
is
curious
that
the
americans,
who
calculate
so
carefully
on
the
possibilities
of
military
victory,
do
not
realize
that
in
the
process
they
are
incurring
deep
psychological
and
political
defeat.
the
image
of
america
will
never
again
be
the
image
of
revolution,
freedom,
and
democracy,
but
the
image
of
violence
and
militarism
(unquote).
if
we
continue,
there
will
be
no
doubt
in
my
mind
and
in
the
mind
of
the
world
that
we
have
no
honorable
intentions
in
vietnam.
if
we
do
not
stop
our
war
against
the
people
of
vietnam
immediately,
the
world
will
be
left
with
no
other
alternative
than
to
see
this
as
some
horrible,
clumsy,
and
deadly
game
we
have
decided
to
play.
the
world
now
demands
a
maturity
of
america
that
we
may
not
be
able
to
achieve.
it
demands
that
we
admit
that
we
have
been
wrong
from
the
beginning
of
our
adventure
in
vietnam,
that
we
have
been
detrimental
to
the
life
of
the
vietnamese
people.
the
situation
is
one
in
which
we
must
be
ready
to
turn
sharply
from
our
present
ways.
in
order
to
atone
for
our
sins
and
errors
in
vietnam,
we
should
take
the
initiative
in
bringing
a
halt
to
this
tragic
war.
*i
would
like
to
suggest
five
concrete
things
that
our
government
should
do
immediately
to
begin
the
long
and
difficult
process
of
extricating
ourselves
from
this
nightmarish
conflict:
number
one:
end
all
bombing
in
north
and
south
vietnam.
number
two:
declare
a
unilateral
cease-fire
in
the
hope
that
such
action
will
create
the
atmosphere
for
negotiation.
three:
take
immediate
steps
to
prevent
other
battlegrounds
in
southeast
asia
by
curtailing
our
military
buildup
in
thailand
and
our
interference
in
laos.
four:
realistically
accept
the
fact
that
the
national
liberation
front
has
substantial
support
in
south
vietnam
and
must
thereby
play
a
role
in
any
meaningful
negotiations
and
any
future
vietnam
government.
five:
*set
a
date
that
we
will
remove
all
foreign
troops
from
vietnam
in
accordance
with
the
1954
geneva
agreement.
part
of
our
ongoing...part
of
our
ongoing
commitment
might
well
express
itself
in
an
offer
to
grant
asylum
to
any
vietnamese
who
fears
for
his
life
under
a
new
regime
which
included
the
liberation
front.
then
we
must
make
what
reparations
we
can
for
the
damage
we
have
done.
we
must
provide
the
medical
aid
that
is
badly
needed,
making
it
available
in
this
country,
if
necessary.
meanwhile...
meanwhile,
we
in
the
churches
and
synagogues
have
a
continuing
task
while
we
urge
our
government
to
disengage
itself
from
a
disgraceful
commitment.
we
must
continue
to
raise
our
voices
and
our
lives
if
our
nation
persists
in
its
perverse
ways
in
vietnam.
we
must
be
prepared
to
match
actions
with
words
by
seeking
out
every
creative
method
of
protest
possible.
*as
we
counsel
young
men
concerning
military
service,
we
must
clarify
for
them
our
nation's
role
in
vietnam
and
challenge
them
with
the
alternative
of
conscientious
objection.
i
am
pleased
to
say
that
this
is
a
path
now
chosen
by
more
than
seventy
students
at
my
own
alma
mater,
morehouse
college,
and
i
recommend
it
to
all
who
find
the
american
course
in
vietnam
a
dishonorable
and
unjust
one.
moreover,
i
would
encourage
all
ministers
of
draft
age
to
give
up
their
ministerial
exemptions
and
seek
status
as
conscientious
objectors.*
these
are
the
times
for
real
choices
and
not
false
ones.
we
are
at
the
moment
when
our
lives
must
be
placed
on
the
line
if
our
nation
is
to
survive
its
own
folly.
every
man
of
humane
convictions
must
decide
on
the
protest
that
best
suits
his
convictions,
but
we
must
all
protest.
now
there
is
something
seductively
tempting
about
stopping
there
and
sending
us
all
off
on
what
in
some
circles
has
become
a
popular
crusade
against
the
war
in
vietnam.
i
say
we
must
enter
that
struggle,
but
i
wish
to
go
on
now
to
say
something
even
more
disturbing.
the
war
in
vietnam
is
but
a
symptom
of
a
far
deeper
malady
within
the
american
spirit,
and
if
we
ignore
this
sobering
reality...and
if
we
ignore
this
sobering
reality,
we
will
find
ourselves
organizing
"clergy
and
laymen
concerned"
committees
for
the
next
generation.
they
will
be
concerned
about
guatemala
and
peru.
they
will
be
concerned
about
thailand
and
cambodia.
they
will
be
concerned
about
mozambique
and
south
africa.
we
will
be
marching
for
these
and
a
dozen
other
names
and
attending
rallies
without
end,
unless
there
is
a
significant
and
profound
change
in
american
life
and
policy.
and
so,
such
thoughts
take
us
beyond
vietnam,
but
not
beyond
our
calling
as
sons
of
the
living
god.
in
1957,
a
sensitive
american
official
overseas
said
that
it
seemed
to
him
that
our
nation
was
on
the
wrong
side
of
a
world
revolution.
during
the
past
ten
years,
we
have
seen
emerge
a
pattern
of
suppression
which
has
now
justified
the
presence
of
u.s.
military
advisors
in
venezuela.
this
need
to
maintain
social
stability
for
our
investments
accounts
for
the
counterrevolutionary
action
of
american
forces
in
guatemala.
it
tells
why
american
helicopters
are
being
used
against
guerrillas
in
cambodia
and
why
american
napalm
and
green
beret
forces
have
already
been
active
against
rebels
in
peru.
it
is
with
such
activity
in
mind
that
the
words
of
the
late
john
f.
kennedy
come
back
to
haunt
us.
five
years
ago
he
said,
"those
who
make
peaceful
revolution
impossible
will
make
violent
revolution
inevitable."
increasingly,
by
choice
or
by
accident,
this
is
the
role
our
nation
has
taken,
the
role
of
those
who
make
peaceful
revolution
impossible
by
refusing
to
give
up
the
privileges
and
the
pleasures
that
come
from
the
immense
profits
of
overseas
investments.
i
am
convinced
that
if
we
are
to
get
on
the
right
side
of
the
world
revolution,
we
as
a
nation
must
undergo
a
radical
revolution
of
values.
we
must
rapidly
begin...we
must
rapidly
begin
the
shift
from
a
thing-oriented
society
to
a
person-oriented
society.
when
machines
and
computers,
profit
motives
and
property
rights,
are
considered
more
important
than
people,
the
giant
triplets
of
racism,
extreme
materialism,
and
militarism
are
incapable
of
being
conquered.
a
true
revolution
of
values
will
soon
cause
us
to
question
the
fairness
and
justice
of
many
of
our
past
and
present
policies.
on
the
one
hand,
we
are
called
to
play
the
good
samaritan
on
life's
roadside,
but
that
will
be
only
an
initial
act.
one
day
we
must
come
to
see
that
the
whole
jericho
road
must
be
transformed
so
that
men
and
women
will
not
be
constantly
beaten
and
robbed
as
they
make
their
journey
on
life's
highway.
true
compassion
is
more
than
flinging
a
coin
to
a
beggar.
it
comes
to
see
that
an
edifice
which
produces
beggars
needs
restructuring.
a
true
revolution
of
values
will
soon
look
uneasily
on
the
glaring
contrast
of
poverty
and
wealth.
with
righteous
indignation,
it
will
look
across
the
seas
and
see
individual
capitalists
of
the
west
investing
huge
sums
of
money
in
asia,
africa,
and
south
america,
only
to
take
the
profits
out
with
no
concern
for
the
social
betterment
of
the
countries,
and
say,
"this
is
not
just."
it
will
look
at
our
alliance
with
the
landed
gentry
of
south
america
and
say,
"this
is
not
just."
the
western
arrogance
of
feeling
that
it
has
everything
to
teach
others
and
nothing
to
learn
from
them
is
not
just.
a
true
revolution
of
values
will
lay
hand
on
the
world
order
and
say
of
war,
"this
way
of
settling
differences
is
not
just."
this
business
of
burning
human
beings
with
napalm,
of
filling
our
nation's
homes
with
orphans
and
widows,
of
injecting
poisonous
drugs
of
hate
into
the
veins
of
peoples
normally
humane,
of
sending
men
home
from
dark
and
bloody
battlefields
physically
handicapped
and
psychologically
deranged,
cannot
be
reconciled
with
wisdom,
justice,
and
love.
a
nation
that
continues
year
after
year
to
spend
more
money
on
military
defense
than
on
programs
of
social
uplift
is
approaching
spiritual
death.
america,
the
richest
and
most
powerful
nation
in
the
world,
can
well
lead
the
way
in
this
revolution
of
values.
there
is
nothing
except
a
tragic
death
wish
to
prevent
us
from
reordering
our
priorities
so
that
the
pursuit
of
peace
will
take
precedence
over
the
pursuit
of
war.
there
is
nothing
to
keep
us
from
molding
a
recalcitrant
status
quo
with
bruised
hands
until
we
have
fashioned
it
into
a
brotherhood.
*this
kind
of
positive
revolution
of
values
is
our
best
defense
against
communism.
war
is
not
the
answer.
communism
will
never
be
defeated
by
the
use
of
atomic
bombs
or
nuclear
weapons.
let
us
not
join
those
who
shout
war
and,
through
their
misguided
passions,
urge
the
united
states
to
relinquish
its
participation
in
the
united
nations.*
these
are
days
which
demand
wise
restraint
and
calm
reasonableness.
*we
must
not
engage
in
a
negative
anticommunism,
but
rather
in
a
positive
thrust
for
democracy,
realizing
that
our
greatest
defense
against
communism
is
to
take
offensive
action
in
behalf
of
justice.
we
must
with
positive
action
seek
to
remove
those
conditions
of
poverty,
insecurity,
and
injustice,
which
are
the
fertile
soil
in
which
the
seed
of
communism
grows
and
develops.*
these
are
revolutionary
times.
all
over
the
globe
men
are
revolting
against
old
systems
of
exploitation
and
oppression,
and
out
of
the
wounds
of
a
frail
world,
new
systems
of
justice
and
equality
are
being
born.
the
shirtless
and
barefoot
people
of
the
land
are
rising
up
as
never
before.
the
people
who
sat
in
darkness
have
seen
a
great
light.
we
in
the
west
must
support
these
revolutions.
it
is
a
sad
fact
that
because
of
comfort,
complacency,
a
morbid
fear
of
communism,
and
our
proneness
to
adjust
to
injustice,
the
western
nations
that
initiated
so
much
of
the
revolutionary
spirit
of
the
modern
world
have
now
become
the
arch
antirevolutionaries.
this
has
driven
many
to
feel
that
only
marxism
has
a
revolutionary
spirit.
therefore,
communism
is
a
judgment
against
our
failure
to
make
democracy
real
and
follow
through
on
the
revolutions
that
we
initiated.
our
only
hope
today
lies
in
our
ability
to
recapture
the
revolutionary
spirit
and
go
out
into
a
sometimes
hostile
world
declaring
eternal
hostility
to
poverty,
racism,
and
militarism.
with
this
powerful
commitment
we
shall
boldly
challenge
the
status
quo
and
unjust
mores,
and
thereby
speed
the
day
when
"every
valley
shall
be
exalted,
and
every
mountain
and
hill
shall
be
made
low,
and
the
crooked
shall
be
made
straight,
and
the
rough
places
plain."
a
genuine
revolution
of
values
means
in
the
final
analysis
that
our
loyalties
must
become
ecumenical
rather
than
sectional.
every
nation
must
now
develop
an
overriding
loyalty
to
mankind
as
a
whole
in
order
to
preserve
the
best
in
their
individual
societies.
this
call
for
a
worldwide
fellowship
that
lifts
neighborly
concern
beyond
one's
tribe,
race,
class,
and
nation
is
in
reality
a
call
for
an
all-embracing
and
unconditional
love
for
all
mankind.
this
oft
misunderstood,
this
oft
misinterpreted
concept,
so
readily
dismissed
by
the
nietzsches
of
the
world
as
a
weak
and
cowardly
force,
has
now
become
an
absolute
necessity
for
the
survival
of
man.
when
i
speak
of
love
i
am
not
speaking
of
some
sentimental
and
weak
response.
i
am
not
speaking
of
that
force
which
is
just
emotional
bosh.
i
am
speaking
of
that
force
which
all
of
the
great
religions
have
seen
as
the
supreme
unifying
principle
of
life.
love
is
somehow
the
key
that
unlocks
the
door
which
leads
to
ultimate
reality.
this
hindu-muslim-christian-jewish-buddhist
belief
about
ultimate
reality
is
beautifully
summed
up
in
the
first
epistle
of
saint
john:
"let
us
love
one
another,
for
love
is
god.
and
every
one
that
loveth
is
born
of
god
and
knoweth
god.
he
that
loveth
not
knoweth
not
god,
for
god
is
love."
"if
we
love
one
another,
god
dwelleth
in
us
and
his
love
is
perfected
in
us."
let
us
hope
that
this
spirit
will
become
the
order
of
the
day.
we
can
no
longer
afford
to
worship
the
god
of
hate
or
bow
before
the
altar
of
retaliation.
the
oceans
of
history
are
made
turbulent
by
the
ever-rising
tides
of
hate.
and
history
is
cluttered
with
the
wreckage
of
nations
and
individuals
that
pursued
this
self-defeating
path
of
hate.
as
arnold
toynbee
says:
"love
is
the
ultimate
force
that
makes
for
the
saving
choice
of
life
and
good
against
the
damning
choice
of
death
and
evil.
therefore
the
first
hope
in
our
inventory
must
be
the
hope
that
love
is
going
to
have
the
last
word"
(unquote).
we
are
now
faced
with
the
fact,
my
friends,
that
tomorrow
is
today.
we
are
confronted
with
the
fierce
urgency
of
now.
in
this
unfolding
conundrum
of
life
and
history,
there
is
such
a
thing
as
being
too
late.
procrastination
is
still
the
thief
of
time.
life
often
leaves
us
standing
bare,
naked,
and
dejected
with
a
lost
opportunity.
the
tide
in
the
affairs
of
men
does
not
remain
at
flood
--
it
ebbs.
we
may
cry
out
desperately
for
time
to
pause
in
her
passage,
but
time
is
adamant
to
every
plea
and
rushes
on.
over
the
bleached
bones
and
jumbled
residues
of
numerous
civilizations
are
written
the
pathetic
words,
"too
late."
there
is
an
invisible
book
of
life
that
faithfully
records
our
vigilance
or
our
neglect.
omar
khayyam
is
right:
"the
moving
finger
writes,
and
having
writ
moves
on."
we
still
have
a
choice
today:
nonviolent
coexistence
or
violent
coannihilation.
we
must
move
past
indecision
to
action.
we
must
find
new
ways
to
speak
for
peace
in
vietnam
and
justice
throughout
the
developing
world,
a
world
that
borders
on
our
doors.
if
we
do
not
act,
we
shall
surely
be
dragged
down
the
long,
dark,
and
shameful
corridors
of
time
reserved
for
those
who
possess
power
without
compassion,
might
without
morality,
and
strength
without
sight.
now
let
us
begin.
now
let
us
rededicate
ourselves
to
the
long
and
bitter,
but
beautiful,
struggle
for
a
new
world.
this
is
the
calling
of
the
sons
of
god,
and
our
brothers
wait
eagerly
for
our
response.
shall
we
say
the
odds
are
too
great?
shall
we
tell
them
the
struggle
is
too
hard?
will
our
message
be
that
the
forces
of
american
life
militate
against
their
arrival
as
full
men,
and
we
send
our
deepest
regrets?
or
will
there
be
another
message
--
of
longing,
of
hope,
of
solidarity
with
their
yearnings,
of
commitment
to
their
cause,
whatever
the
cost?
the
choice
is
ours,
and
though
we
might
prefer
it
otherwise,
we
must
choose
in
this
crucial
moment
of
human
history.
as
that
noble
bard
of
yesterday,
james
russell
lowell,
eloquently
stated:
once
to
every
man
and
nation
comes
a
moment
to
decide,
in
the
strife
of
truth
and
falsehood,
for
the
good
or
evil
side;
some
great
cause,
god's
new
messiah
offering
each
the
bloom
or
blight,
and
the
choice
goes
by
forever
'twixt
that
darkness
and
that
light.
though
the
cause
of
evil
prosper,
yet
'tis
truth
alone
is
strong
though
her
portions
be
the
scaffold,
and
upon
the
throne
be
wrong
yet
that
scaffold
sways
the
future,
and
behind
the
dim
unknown
standeth
god
within
the
shadow,
keeping
watch
above
his
own.
and
if
we
will
only
make
the
right
choice,
we
will
be
able
to
transform
this
pending
cosmic
elegy
into
a
creative
psalm
of
peace.
if
we
will
make
the
right
choice,
we
will
be
able
to
transform
the
jangling
discords
of
our
world
into
a
beautiful
symphony
of
brotherhood.
if
we
will
but
make
the
right
choice,
we
will
be
able
to
speed
up
the
day,
all
over
america
and
all
over
the
world,
when
justice
will
roll
down
like
waters,
and
righteousness
like
a
mighty
stream.
【名人演讲：打破沉寂】相关文章：
打破沉寂的号角--《寂静的春天》04-27
沉寂04-30
沉寂的作文09-07
沉寂与升腾09-10
沉寂散文08-12
论民歌的沉寂04-27
作文 沉寂 喧嚣05-06
IPO:沉寂的背后04-27
初三的沉寂作文11-06
告别月夜的沉寂作文09-12