Nonviolent Conflict

A different approach to nonviolent conflict.

Read the article and listen to the song on a burgeoning protest movement from my hometown.

Read (or listen, if you like) to the top of page 7 of Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail and record in your notebook how King believes non-violent protest should be undertaken and why it should be undertaken non-violently.

The audio version of the letter can be listened to by watching the YouTube video above. The section we are interested in ends at approximately the 16 minute mark.

Guiding Questions

1. Using a current example of nonviolent protest, explain how it is an example of what is described in the 'strategic logic of nonviolent protest' and the 'rethinking nonviolent conflict' sections of the nonviolent conflict overview.

2. Explain how nonviolence is both an example of negative and positive peace in action.

3. In what ways are Thomas Merton's ideas reflective on Galtung's theory of violence?

4. What do you think of the proposition of abolishing the military? Read the two related articles below and explain your perspective.

5. Aside from Thoreau's approach to civil disobedience, what are other ways citizens can influence their government nonviolently? See if you can come up with at least three examples.

6. Consider strategic and principled nonviolence. Putting the definitions aside, how do the two approaches fundamentally differ?

7. There seems to be more than just the two approaches to pacifism outlined in the briefing - absolute and pragmatic. Explore the various options outlined in this article or this article. If you were drawn to any of the types of pacifism noted in the article you chose to read, which one would it be and why were you drawn to it? If you are not drawn toward any of the approaches, explain why. Be sure to read through to the end of this section first and review the critiques of pacifism that Heywood highlight before you take a position on this question.

8. What is a conscientious objector?

9. What criticism of pacifists does Andrew Heywood highlight?

10. Why is does interpreting Ahimsa as passive resistance seem to do a disservice to the term?

11. Explain what might be meant by the Gandhian suggestion that nonviolence is a different way of fighting?

12. Based on the overview of Chenoweth and Stephan's research, what are at least three reasons why nonviolence could be a more effective approach to conflict and creating change?

Guiding Questions

1. What three approaches to oppression does King outline?

2. What distinction does King draw between passive resistance and nonviolent resistance?

Perhaps the greatest invocation to live in peace together

An excellent introduction to the history of the peace movement

You might be interested in the winner of eight Academy Awards, including best picture: Gandhi - see the trailer above and the full movie here.

Guiding Question:

Why does the author argue that we need to hear the voice of pacifists even in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Guiding Question:

Where do you see pacifism at work the response to the Amish to the shootings? Could you do the same? Aside from the religious or spiritual response, why else might a nonviolence advocate taking the same approach?

Guiding Question:

When does Kai Thaler think violence is the answer? He offers a number of scenarios where it might be the answer. Summarize those in point form.

Guiding Question:

Summarize the three ways in which Chenoweth and Stephan agree with Thaler.

In one or two sentences what is Chenoweth and Stephan's response to Thaler argument that violence is needed because:

1. nonviolence is part of a Western hegemonic discourse that reinforces the legitimacy of state violence while simultaneously encouraging oppressed people to carry the unfair burden of good behavior under crushing conditions.

2. nonviolence protesters need to defend themselves (here they make two separate points).

Guiding Question:

1. How do you think Chenoweth & Stephan would respond to the suggestion this article makes that non-violence is compliance?

This is an opinion piece (meaning it has plenty of bias) on Thaler and Chenoweth & Stephan's work in the context of protests in Hong Kong. It connects their research, as highlighted in the articles above, with the 2019 Hong Kong protests and gives both perspectives a good look.

The key paragraphs note the following:

Some may argue that violent protests could avenge the harm caused by the Hong Kong Police, but evidence suggests that they actually exacerbate the harm towards the violent protesters, especially in light of the fact that an increasing number of them have been severely beaten before being arrested. It is argued that if other factors remain constant, this trend will undermine the morale of the protest movement.

Furthermore, as Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan—the authors of Why Civil Resistance Works—have pointed out, violent protests, which are physically and mentally demanding, are adversarial to maintain broad-based participation. While the protesters are not well-trained to face state violence, most are unlikely to be prepared to take part in violent protests either. If violent protests rule out the possibility of peaceful resistance, then the scale of participation tends to diminish in the long run. Public sympathy towards violent protesters, if any, seldom contributes directly to street fighting. What they are more willing and capable of doing, however, is to convert their sympathy into forms of nonviolent resistance, such as consumer boycotts and voting.