Not the same idea of nonviolence

In response to Mr. Ivey's column comparing Mr. Comer's acts of nonviolence to the antiwar demonstration in downtown Greensboro, I can only say this: The two hardly compare.

As a colleague and friend of Mr. Comer, I can honestly attest to the fact that his view of nonviolence is not near to that of Mr. Ivey's. The two columns give your readers two very different opinions of the principle and I hope they see the differences.

Mr. Comer believes that nonviolence is a complete way of living and state of mind, whereas Mr. Ivey clearly admits his belief that nonviolence is only a tactic. Mr. Ivey also sanctions the use of violence in retaliation to violence. This is not the King and Gandhi-inspired principle of nonviolence. It certainly isn't the view of nonviolence through which Gandhi successfully led the movement to rid India of British occupation.

One cannot compare Mr. Comer's acts of nonviolent, civil disobedience to the kind of which Mr. Ivey believes. Mr. Comer has expressed numerous times that nonviolence requires nonviolence in thought, word and deed as was taught by King and Gandhi. The fact that many of the antiwar demonstrators screamed profane and obscene words and remarks at police is an act in direct contradiction to those principles.