Non-violent action: What is it good for?

Many of my friends and colleagues poo-poo the idea that non-violent direct action is effective or plausible in many oppressive or dangerous situations. Not so.

Non-violent alternatives to war exist, and in fact are very successful.  Some of the 20th century’s harshest oppressors were removed through nonviolent conflicts.

Currently, groups are using civil resistance to obtain rights in nations such as Azerbaijan, Belarus, Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Honduras, Iran, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe, and other places. In places such as Tibet, West Papua, Western Sahara and the Palestinian Territories, groups are fighting nonviolently for self-determination. You can learn more from an excellent website here:

In connection to my previous article,  alternatives to war in Afghanistan and Iraq were then, and are now, plentiful, workable, well-founded and well-researched. I perhaps wrongly assumed that these were common knowledge, and so did not focus on them in my article.

Examples can be found here for Afghanistan:
(Chomsky’s and Dodge’s are two of my favourites)

And here for Iraq:
(The seattlepi is nice quick intro)


~ by humblemonkey on June 22, 2010.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: