Talk:Nonviolence

Pacifism vs Passivity

I'm not sure I agree with the notion that pacifism and passivity are synonymous. Pacifism is about antiviolence, how does that equate to being passive? How is that different from nonviolence? Sonofathens (talk) 23:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

This article seems clear to me in saying that nonviolence is different form passivity.

The best forms of nonviolence -- nonviolent direct action -- expose hypocrisy or stupidity in existing policies. With Gandhi's Salt March, he set out to deliberately break British law that forbade Indians from making salt. He marched 240 miles in 24 days, 10 miles per day, telling people along the way that he planned to make salt in violation of British law. By the time he was arrested 53 days later, millions of Indians were making salt illegally or buying illegal salt.

Seventeen years later, the British could no longer govern India. They quit. A few thousand had been killed in the interim, but no where nearly as many as would have been killed with violent resistance, which may not have succeeded. See Wikiversity:Effective defense and sources cited therein. DavidMCEddy (talk) 00:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Guevara, Trotsky, Frantz Fanon, and Bose on nonviolence

Hello, User:178.223.205.58 If it's "well known" that Guevara, Trotsky, Frantz Fanon, and Bose considered and rejected nonviolence, then it should not be difficult for you to provide reference(s). Please do NOT remove the {{citation needed|date=June 2023}} flag without providing such references. Wikipedia invites almost anyone to change almost anything, writing from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, citing credible sources.

I spent a couple of hours yesterday looking without success for sources to support claims I remembered having seen before and thought should be obvious. I've spent days in many other projects similarly searching for evidence that I never found or found only with substantial effort. If all this is so "well known" to you, then the needed reference(s) should be easy for you to find. My person experience with such searches is that the evidence too often eludes me. Please help educate me and others similarly uninformed and discontinue Wikipedia:Edit warring. The world needs your wisdom but not your vandalism. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 12:08, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hm strange as there is many about that people and can be added even more, about those in question, their stances on violence and rejection of nonviolence are well known and any denial of it would be pretty funny.

About Bose for example this,Trotsky this, Fanon this(by Sartre), Guevara.178.223.205.58 (talk) 23:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for these references. Your reference for Bose what you said, as does the Wikipedia article on him. I will add your reference to his name in that "Criticism" section.

However, I find no mention of either Gandhi or nonviolence in the references you've cited or other material I've seen on Frantz Fanon, Trotsky and Che. Trotsky was assassinated in 1940, so it's plausible to believe that he never explicitly considered nonviolence as potentially useful. Fanon died in 1961 shortly after his Wretched of the Earth appeared. The first section of that book is entitled "On violence", but a search for "Gandhi" and "nonviolence" in that book yielded nothing.

The documentation on Che that I've seen says that he was a fervent advocate of violence, but I don't find mention either of Gandhi or nonviolence in either the article you cited or in the Wikipedia article on him.

I therefore plan to limit that list of "fervent critics of nonviolence" only to Bose. From what little I know, one could legitimately ask if any of Trotsky, Fanon, and Guevara ever bothered to seriously consider the possibility that nonviolence might actually be effective.

One might add Malcolm X to that list, but I won't do it myself. He and King were clearly contemporaries, and Malcolm explicitly criticized some of King's nonviolent tactics. And Malcolm's thoughts on race clearly changed after his trip to Mecca in 1964-April. They may not have changed regarding nonviolence, but I'll leave that to others.

My own view matches the research of Chenoweth and Stephan mentioned in this article. For example, the African-Americans of the 1960s and 1970s with the most violent rhetoric like the Black Panthers were demonized in the media and gunned down by law enforcement, gangland style with no discussion in the media that I've seen suggesting that violated the rights to due process, etc., enshrined in the US Bill of Rights. It's relatively easy for people with power to demonize apostles of violence and then kill them without bothering with trial by jury, etc.

Acceptable? Thanks for the references. DavidMCEddy (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

References

Fourth paragraph of lead section

It’s sloppy and may need deletion or a rewrite into three or four sentences. Needs to be appropriately sourced. 2600:100C:B037:E65A:D07:3D09:CF56:D1D3 (talk) 04:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)