March for peace Perugia Assisi 1999

The History of the Perugia/Assisi March - Part III

Written by Aldo Capitini in 1960

[...] The Prefect of Perugia had sent a circular to the Town and Province administrations forbidding them to bring the town gonfalons to the "March for Peace".

The Church leaders had ordered the priests not to attend the March, and it had been said in churches that that was a communist or next-to-communist march to avoid: however, when the participants met clergymen, no insults nor whistles were heard. In much the same way, the Prefect had mobilised a large number of police forces at the beginning, in the middle of the March and on the grass: but nothing happened, nothing at all. This, of course, was not because there were those "forces". It was thanks to the participants’ self-discipline, the organisers’ confidence and the enthusiasm and belief that could find their expression in such a simple and clear way, without the awe and inferiority that people experience at conferences. Even young people – and the March was crowded with youngsters – managed to control themselves.
In the morning, the Santa Maria degli Angeli Friars were impressed (that’s what they told a lady) at the arrival of so many "reds": when they saw those working class people visiting the sights inside the monastery, where St. Francis lived, and some of them even attending Mass, they calmed down. None of them was drunk. (...)

The two most touching episodes in the March took place in the well-known great outdoors while the sky was growing dim, when Arturo Carlo Jemolo said that the divine blessing was certainly going to that peace assembly; I asked for two minutes of silence to remember all those who had died in wars or because of the wars, and everybody stood up, some kneeled down and I was told that all the policemen stood to attention. Before the March, I had written an article on the monthly "Umbria d’oggi" (in the issue which was distributed at the March, dated September 30, 1961): "The March is a practical decision that we have taken after thinking and discussing, at the peak of an important moment: it’s a celebration of our commitment and solidarity. It was in Perugia that, seven hundred years ago, the Laudesi religious marches started: at the peak of their religious tension, they marched to show a feeling that came from the people, after having grown in decades of spiritual meditation on St. Francis’ preaching. But our March has something joyful rather than contrite, and it’s open-minded, because it gathers people of different ideas, who have one universal objective in common. We shouldn’t forget that this March is not merely for peace in Umbria, but worldwide, to support dialogue between different blocs, to overcome all hostilities, cold as well as "hot" ones. In this March, the Umbrian population represent a universal concept: the brotherhood of all the people in all continents, and they cry out their call for friendship. All those who have know our region, even for short periods of time, will feel more sympathy towards this land, which highlights such a natural need for peace, while showing that its inhabitants are up to such an important task".


In fact, the March was yet another example (but not the only one) of the mixture of religious and human open-mindedness and need for social change that had emerged in XIII and XIV century Umbria in important movements and struggles. Somebody wrote that "something new" could be felt in the March. I think it’s mostly that social and religious mixture, which is coming back to become wider in our contemporary history. This is how we can look at the profound reasons behind the March, after it took place.

It was an important event, maybe a turning point. Some journalists compared this event to that of July 1960, when an antifascist demonstration "starting from the people" stopped the rise of the Right within the Government. Our March was a demonstration originating from the people, which spurred many others to take place, to isolate paramilitary and reactionary groups. The unity between pacifists and the people offered a method of action that was no longer at risk of violence, and at the same time it started an alliance that couldn’t be any tighter in Italy: the one that supports itself in the name of peace. That’s how a movement started from the inner and fundamental feelings of the Italian people; it’s a movement that is in no way political or class-based. It’s the premise and the connection for any type of struggle and education in Italy to oppose the dogmatic patriotism that was spread by national-military groups as well as the hedonistic bourgeoisie that withdraws from any civil and social struggle to obtain the welfare promised by neocapitalism. The struggle for the defence and development of peace give us precious cohesion elements starting from the people against individualism and conformism; in addition, it suddenly gathers women and families, well before shaping political struggles. By highlighting the overcoming of violent methods and the promotion of open-mindedness and dialogue, not only does it help our democracy, like any other democracy, but it also spurs the existing religions - especially the Catholic one - to put non-violent relationship between all creatures to the fore.

The March showed that pacifism and non-violence are not passive and indolent acceptance of the existing evil, but they are active and pursue their struggle with their own method. It’s a restless method, both in the solidarity and in the refusals that it obtains, in its protests and its overt denunciations. This is one important result of the March, during which we spread three thousand copies of a four-page leaflet about the ideas and the work of the Centre for Non-Violence. I’m not sure that everything is crystal clear, but I’m sure that now there are large groups of Italians who feel that non-violence has a say. The presence of non-violence within the opposition has created an inner ferment, a doubt, a means for self-criticism: the result is that we’ll identify and isolate more and more reactionary groups, together with their cruel and vain efforts throughout the world, their irreligious defence of a wrong society. After the shocking statements regarding the danger of an atomic catastrophe, a non-violent struggle facilitating dialogue is especially urgent: and I think that schools should teach the value and the strategies of the non-violent method. Resisting to war has become a prevailing subject nowadays, complete with theoretical, philosophical and religious reference.