The Names often Change, but the Game Remains the Same

The Boston Tea Party and Gandhi’s Salt Satyagraha correlated in action and idea.

Ethan Indi
OpEdNews
April 10, 2010

Correlating concepts is one literary tool which unifies stories and ignites sparks in readers. Recognition of correlations in written words and in real life instigates thoughts on metaphors in stories and truths in reality. I think the stunning power of correlations, whether in story or reality, comes from the innate human desire to find truth and such universality might arm one with knowledge to better find it.

It is impossible to say with certainty, but I believe that throughout recorded time the majority of people have been as passive as they are today. It is always the minority who question and speak out on circumstances and conditions often simply to instigate the majority to do so as well. In the United States, people often not only speak out, but act out to bring attention to potential wrongdoing. The individual standing up to the institutionalized authority is a universally practiced act perhaps perfected in the U.S.A.

An example of a correlation in the struggle of individual and institutions arrives from two of the most inspirational and powerful acts, resulting in dismantling of oppressive institutional monopolies. In 1773 The Boston Tea party was thrown. After protests and requests going unheard, boxes of dried plants from Asia were tossed into the harbor. People expressed their dissatisfaction by destroying property of The Company, (as British East India Company was commonly referred to) which had developed a monopoly backed up by and adjoined to state institutions.

People in Asia were slaves in a caste system and people in New England felt they’re rights were being abused in their corner of the pyramid system. The Boston Tea Party called attention to global institutions belittling individuals. It wasn’t the tea that mattered, but the rights of people. In the case of the Boston Tea Party, the monopolizing institutions did not yield, resulting in the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War.

The story of individual struggle against institutional monopolization continued afterward, always with a minority at first questioning conditions, but to the correlation. In 1930 South Asia Gandhi protested. The land of South Asia, formerly Company plantation property, was then controlled by the British. Gandhi and others walked over 200 miles to the seashore to harvest salt and protest British monopolization of the resource. Laws essentially made it illegal for individuals to obtain salt, all salt was British salt. Gandhi arrived to the shore and harvested salt illegally. When he met with the Viceroy to face charges he gave him salt and apparently said it was to remind them of the Boston Tea Party.

The Boston Tea Party and Gandhi’s Salt Satyagraha correlated in action and idea. The idea was to call attention to and diffuse institutional monopolization over the individual. In the case of the Boston Tea Party, tea was tossed to diffuse the oligarchical institutions. Gandhi accomplished the same diffusion and gained the same attention by harvesting salt, the catalyst resource in question. The story of struggle continued of course, but the correlations between the two events are bold and subtle. Individual resistance of a few always instigates the many to question the established monopolization.

Today, where the numbers of the apathetic are basically the same only perhaps more adamantly so, where still only a small minority question the monopolization of the oligarchic institutions in control, the struggle continues. Today the monopolization is often more covert , but the oligarchical collectivization of institutions is constantly apparent. When states and corporations conjoin it is always a benefit to institutions and often a detriment to Individuals.

I appreciate the Boston Tea Party, but feel that people today are perhaps empathizing with the archetypal actions of the Boston Tea Party in a limited capacity. The Big Steep was not about tea. It was a disobedient reaction to institutions utilizing restrictions on resources to control individuals. Today the monopolization is rampant and one could pick and choose from a variety of institutional trespasses to protest and boycott. But where is the correlation? Where is the catalyst?

What resource is the center point of all the suggested and evident monopolization of the present? Oil, would be correct except there is no correlation to complete the story or graspable catalyst. The resource I am referring to is a plant, hence the correlation with the tea at the Big Steep or Boston Tea Party. Hemp and marijuana are the catalyst like the tea of 1773. The illegalization of hemp and marijuana promotes deforestation, as hemp can be used for paper, this alone should be reason enough to make it legal, but this plant is the center point of the oligarchic institutionalization of today, there is more.

Paper is the simplest fruit of this harvest, clothing can be made from its fibers too as well as building materials. The really wonderful thing about hemp is that it can be used as food. Hemp seed is one of the best sources of nutrients for people. The best thing about hemp is that its fibers and oils can be used to be processed into anything that carbon is made into today, except it would be non toxic unlike plastic. But really the best thing about hemp is that it could drastically reduce the need for imported petrol as it is a source of bio-fuel that requires little agricultural attention.

Actually the very best thing about hemp, is that its cousin marijuana has narcotic effects, verified empirically by yours truly. Of course this has enabled institutions to scorn both plants despite their uncontrollable, valuable properties. Marijuana and hemp provide alternative resources for everything from medicine to fuel, or that is they could if restrictions on this resource were lifted. Marijuana and hemp could enable individuals to be less dependent on institutions who seek to essentially monopolize resources.

So if there is a perceived monopolization occurring which one would like to protest, instead of thinking what to throw into the ocean, think of what to grow. Instead of thinking about a tea party think about refusing to obey based on civil disobedience and the inborn right to counter institutional wrong.

The Big Steep was about civil disobedience over institutional monopolization of resources. Today the same protest is required in essence to counter the same institutionalization wherever it occurs. The best way to correlate the story would be to grow hemp and marijuana. I don’t mean to sound crass or frivolous, but perhaps we need a weed party.

Source: OpEdNews