Section one provides an overview of key definitions and a theoretical review of the ideas of power and resistance. Section two identifies examples in which non-violent resistance has challenged state power, focussing on the significance of mass mobilisation and varied representation. Section three examines how non-violent movements are able to harness the power of varied representation in order to maximise points of leverage associated with the military and the economy.
Finally, section four concludes by explicitly summarizing why non-violent approaches represent an effective strategy under certain circumstances. There exists an enormous variety of definitions for non-violent or civil resistance. It would be impossible to list them all within the scope of this essay. However, for the purposes of the argument, this paper defines non-violent resistance as:. For this paper, effective will be understood as having an effect on the state be it positive or negative rather than being successful.
Better understanding of the relationship between power and resistance is important as it sheds light on how the individuals who organise non-violent resistance movements comprehend the type of power they are up against. He argues that power is not just something you can take, but that society in fact lends itself to a certain way of thinking — that sustained coercion from the state can only take place under the guise of voluntary acceptance [3]. Foucault built on the ideas of Gramsci and argued as well that power is not just a visible manifestation of the state but also society itself.
Some of his work moves away from a state-centric approach, which sees power as an instrument of coercion, towards an understanding of power as accepted forms of knowledge, without agency or structure [5]. Therefore, if we are to understand resistance movements as mirroring the institutions of power they seek to oppose, and understand power as ubiquitous and all encompassing [6] , then in order to have an effect on the state, resistance movements must also be universal and representative of a population.
Individuals need to rethink power and its sources in any given society or polity. Here, the advantage of non-violent or civil resistance movements is that they are highly participatory and thus encourage the active participation of large numbers within a society. In seeking to explain why non-violent resistance can have a greater effect on a state than violent resistance, Chenoweth and Stephan focus on the advantage that non-violent campaigns have over violent ones, in terms of mobilisation.
Mobilisation, according to Schock, refers to the process of acquiring resources, people, and support for a campaign [9]. Non-violent movements are able to mobilise large numbers of people because they lower the barriers to participation and provide a greater number of opportunities for everyday citizens to get involved.
Rather than being reserved for young men, or those in the military forces, civil resistance allows the participation of people with different levels of physical ability including the elderly, people with disabilities, women and children [10].
Non-violent resistance moves beyond barriers of a physical or informational nature and offers individuals with varying levels of commitment or risk tolerance greater opportunities to get involved [11].
Furthermore, being non-violent in nature, these movements are also able to mobilise entire populations without addressing the issue of moral barriers [12]. She points out that individuals will rarely decide to go against a regime unilaterally. In terms of having an effect on the state, the more people you have involved, the more costly it becomes for opponents to maintain the status quo.
This can result in governments meeting some of the demands of the resistance movement or, as is perhaps more common, it leads to loyalty shifts amongst former supporters of the regime which subsequently tips the balance of power away from authoritarian rulers [15].
In Egypt and Tunisia for example, as opposition to the regime spread amongst more and more people in the community, different social classes and sub-groups began to resist also, including professional organisations, labour movements, human rights activists, bloggers, nationalists, and Islamists [16]. Kuran believes that regime change is unlikely to occur unless political opposition to a regime reaches a critical level [18].
When the opposition reaches this critical level, non-violent resistance movements are able to undermine the power of the state by taking away their legitimacy and withdrawing support from key groups within society upon which the state depends.
Interestingly, it becomes a question not only of mass participation, but also of varied participation. Although volume is important, there must also be active participation from a wide range of different societal groups; men and women, factory workers and farmers, rich and poor, young and old, atheists and religionists.
Sharp was one of the first scholars to argue that real and lasting liberation requires significant changes to the power relationships within society, not simply a replacement of personnel [20]. This entry is part of the following collection Martin Luther King, Jr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Montgomery Bus Boycott. Related Events King begins freshman year at Morehouse. King hears Mordecai Johnson preach on Gandhi.
Montgomery bus boycott begins. Bayard Rustin visits Montgomery. King discusses nonviolence with Bayard Rustin. Glenn Smiley interviews King in Montgomery. King's "Pilgrimage to Nonviolence" published in Christian Century. Related Entries Albany Movement. Even limited strikes are very effective. There were limited and general strikes in Tunisia and Egypt during their uprisings and they were critical. WCFIA: A general strike seems like a personally costly way to protest, especially if you just stop working or stop buying things.
Why are they effective? One good example of that comes from South Africa. The anti-apartheid movement organized a total boycott of white businesses, which meant that black community members were still going to work and getting a paycheck from white businesses but were not buying their products.
Several months of that and the white business elites were in total crisis. They demanded that the apartheid government do something to alleviate the economic strain. Botha resigned. The reason I bring the case up is because organizers in the black townships had to prepare for the long term by making sure that there were plenty of food and necessities internally to get people by, and that there were provisions for things like Christmas gifts and holidays.
In the U. Could you imagine if Things would be totally different in this country. But none of these outcomes would likely have improved if the revolutions had been violent. In fact, in most countries where violent revolution has succeeded, the new regimes have been at least as brutal as their predecessors — as anyone who has lived in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, the Afghan civil war, or the Cuban Revolution could tell you. The nature of the struggle can often give us a good idea of what the country will be like after the new regime takes shape.
And few people want to live in a country where power is seized and maintained by force alone. Erica Chenoweth is the Berthold Beitz professor in human rights and international affairs at Harvard University. Shusha was the key to the recent war between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Now Baku wants to turn the fabled fortress town into a resort.
Think Again Think Again: Nonviolent Resistance Resisting the temptation to take up arms against a dictator isn't just the moral thing to do -- it's also the most effective way to win. By Erica Chenoweth. August 24, , PM. Tag: Economics. What in the World? November 12, , PM. Trending 1. A Blueprint for Peace in Ethiopia. Blame Brussels.
Latest Analysis. Or are they? The Month in World Photos. Argument Adem K. Argument Andrew Connelly. Analysis Jeffrey Wilson. South Asia Brief Michael Kugelman.
0コメント