Process
Status Items Output None Questions None Claims None Highlights Done See section below
Document Notes
Interesting argument for and against political violence
Highlights
id874460819
defense of political violence here, but they fall into a few broad categories: historical—we defenders of political violence point to instances wherein some violent actions were central to success, from slave revolts to anti-colonial uprisings to the civil rights movement; taxonomical—we reject categorizations of violence as determined by the violence-monopolizing state and its sovereign, capital, wherein a broken bank window is deemed violent and the mass denial of healthcare to the poor or forced birth are not; and necessity-based—we question whether radical change is possible without some forms of organized violence against the ruling class and its interests.
✏️ Quick and broad defense for political violence.. historical, taxonomical, and necessity-based. 🔗 View Highlight
id874461634
The demand that every denunciation of Israel’s eliminationist violence also carry the speech act “I condemn Hamas!” worked to contain the context in which the genocide was understood. It promoted Israel’s narrative, in which history seemed to start on October 7, 2023, and occluded a focus on 75 years of occupation, displacement, and apartheid. It is not the left’s obligation to agree uncritically with every act of violent resistance, but it is our responsibility to reject frameworks of judgment that sustain conditions of constant, systemic violence.
✏️ Seriously.. not being able to talk about things without having to “condemn hamas” just plays into given narratives, and ignoring the history of systemic violence on part of the occupying force. 🔗 View Highlight
id874461883
The scholars Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan studied hundreds of struggles for political change and found that nonviolent methods were twice as effective as using military force in achieving the desired results. Nonviolent action is also more likely to generate greater democracy and political freedom. Research on political transitions shows that nonviolent campaigns are more likely to result in democratic societies, while violent transitions tend to result in authoritarian regimes. These results tell us that nonviolent action is not only the right thing to do; it is the most effective way of achieving positive change.
✏️ Counter argument that states that violence only leads to more violence and non-violence leads to better-lasting change. 🔗 View Highlight
id874462007
What accounts for the success of nonviolent action? The essential ingredient is mass participation. Case studies indicate that a large following is decisive to the effectiveness of civil resistance campaigns. The single most important factor in achieving success, according to Chenoweth and Stephan, is the scale and range of popular participation.
✏️ So here’s an interesting thing. Non-violence seems to work better and be more successful if you have mass participation. It’s not enough to be one person, but if you have scale and range, you don’t need violence? 🔗 View Highlight
id874462064
Groups that engage in violent and destructive acts are by their nature small and conspiratorial, usually male-dominated, and often require specialized knowledge of weaponry. Nonviolent actions, by contrast, are welcoming to all: Women, children, the elderly, the disabled—everyone can contribute to the cause. Mass nonviolent action prefigures the diverse, inclusive society we seek to create in campaigning for peace and justice.