short essay on non violence and peace

Essay Curve

Essay on Non Violence – Samples, 10 Lines to 1500 Words

Essay on Non Violence: Non-violence is a powerful tool that has been used throughout history to bring about social change and promote peace. In this essay, we will explore the concept of non-violence and its impact on society. We will discuss the principles of non-violence, its effectiveness in resolving conflicts, and the role it plays in promoting justice and equality. By examining the power of non-violence, we can better understand its importance in creating a more peaceful and harmonious world.

Table of Contents

Non Violence Essay Writing Tips

1. Start by defining what non-violence means to you. This could include the refusal to use physical force to achieve a goal, the promotion of peace and harmony, or the belief in resolving conflicts through peaceful means.

2. Research the history of non-violence and its impact on society. Include examples of famous non-violent movements and leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela.

3. Discuss the principles of non-violence, such as compassion, empathy, and understanding. Explain how these principles can be applied in everyday life to promote peace and harmony.

4. Explore the benefits of non-violence, both on an individual and societal level. This could include reduced conflict, improved relationships, and a more peaceful world.

5. Address the challenges of practicing non-violence in a world that is often filled with violence and aggression. Discuss strategies for overcoming these challenges, such as communication, conflict resolution, and empathy.

6. Provide examples of how non-violence has been used to bring about social change and justice. This could include the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement, and the fight for gender equality.

7. Discuss the role of education in promoting non-violence. Explain how teaching empathy, conflict resolution, and peaceful communication skills can help create a more peaceful society.

8. Offer practical tips for incorporating non-violence into your daily life. This could include practicing active listening, resolving conflicts peacefully, and promoting understanding and empathy in your interactions with others.

9. Conclude your essay by emphasizing the importance of non-violence in creating a more peaceful and harmonious world. Encourage readers to embrace non-violence as a guiding principle in their lives and to work towards building a more peaceful society.

10. Proofread and edit your essay to ensure clarity, coherence, and accuracy. Make sure your arguments are well-supported with evidence and examples, and that your writing is engaging and persuasive.

Essay on Non Violence in 10 Lines – Examples

1. Nonviolence is a philosophy and practice of avoiding physical, verbal, or emotional harm to others. 2. It is based on the belief that violence only begets more violence and does not lead to long-lasting solutions. 3. Nonviolence promotes peaceful conflict resolution through dialogue, negotiation, and compromise. 4. It is often associated with figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. who used nonviolent methods to bring about social change. 5. Nonviolence can be practiced on an individual level in daily interactions with others. 6. It can also be used as a strategy in social movements and protests to resist oppression and injustice. 7. Nonviolence requires courage, patience, and a commitment to empathy and understanding. 8. It is rooted in the belief that all individuals have inherent dignity and worth. 9. Nonviolence is a powerful tool for creating positive change in society and promoting peace and justice. 10. By embracing nonviolence, we can work towards a more compassionate and harmonious world for all.

Sample Essay on Non Violence in 100-180 Words

Non-violence is a powerful tool for bringing about social change and resolving conflicts without resorting to physical force. It is a philosophy that promotes peaceful resistance and the use of non-violent tactics to achieve justice and equality. Non-violence is based on the belief that all human beings have the capacity for empathy and compassion, and that violence only begets more violence.

Non-violence has been used throughout history by individuals such as Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. to bring about significant social and political change. By refusing to engage in violent acts and instead using peaceful protests, civil disobedience, and other non-violent methods, these leaders were able to inspire others to join their cause and create lasting change.

In today’s world, non-violence is more important than ever as we face increasing levels of conflict and division. By embracing non-violence and promoting peaceful solutions to our problems, we can create a more just and harmonious society for all.

Short Essay on Non Violence in 200-500 Words

Non-violence is a principle that has been practiced by many great leaders throughout history, including Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela. It is a philosophy that advocates for resolving conflicts and achieving goals through peaceful means, rather than resorting to violence or aggression.

One of the most famous proponents of non-violence was Mahatma Gandhi, who led India to independence from British rule through non-violent civil disobedience. Gandhi believed that violence only begets more violence, and that true change could only come through peaceful resistance. His philosophy of non-violence, or ahimsa, inspired millions of people around the world to fight for justice and equality without resorting to violence.

Similarly, Martin Luther King Jr. used non-violent tactics to lead the civil rights movement in the United States. King believed in the power of love and forgiveness to overcome hatred and discrimination. He organized peaceful protests, marches, and boycotts to bring attention to the injustices faced by African Americans, and his efforts eventually led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Nelson Mandela also embraced non-violence as a means of achieving social change in South Africa. Despite spending 27 years in prison for his anti-apartheid activities, Mandela never wavered in his commitment to non-violence. After his release from prison, he worked tirelessly to dismantle the apartheid system through peaceful negotiations and reconciliation, eventually becoming the first black president of South Africa.

Non-violence is not just a tactic for achieving political change; it is also a way of life that promotes compassion, empathy, and understanding. By choosing non-violence, individuals can break the cycle of violence and create a more peaceful and harmonious society. Non-violence teaches us to respect the dignity and humanity of all people, even those with whom we disagree.

In today’s world, where conflicts and violence seem to be ever-present, the philosophy of non-violence is more important than ever. By practicing non-violence in our daily lives, we can create a more just and peaceful world for future generations. Whether it is through peaceful protests, acts of kindness, or simply choosing to resolve conflicts through dialogue rather than aggression, each of us has the power to make a difference through non-violence.

In conclusion, non-violence is a powerful tool for social change that has been used by many great leaders throughout history. By embracing non-violence in our own lives, we can work towards a more peaceful and just society for all. As Mahatma Gandhi once said, “An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind.” Let us choose non-violence as a way to heal the wounds of the past and build a brighter future for all.

Essay on Non Violence in 1000-1500 Words

Non-violence is a philosophy and practice that has been embraced by many individuals and movements throughout history as a means of promoting peace, justice, and social change. The concept of non-violence, also known as ahimsa in Sanskrit, was popularized by Mahatma Gandhi during India’s struggle for independence from British colonial rule. Gandhi believed that non-violence was not only a moral imperative, but also an effective strategy for achieving political and social goals.

Non-violence is based on the principle of refraining from using physical force or aggression to achieve one’s objectives. Instead, it advocates for the use of peaceful means such as dialogue, negotiation, civil disobedience, and non-cooperation. Non-violence is rooted in the belief that all human beings are interconnected and that violence only begets more violence, leading to a never-ending cycle of conflict and suffering.

One of the key tenets of non-violence is the idea of active resistance to injustice and oppression. This can take many forms, from peaceful protests and demonstrations to acts of civil disobedience and non-violent resistance. By refusing to participate in systems of violence and oppression, individuals and communities can challenge the status quo and bring about positive social change.

Non-violence has been used as a powerful tool for social and political transformation throughout history. Gandhi’s non-violent resistance movement in India inspired similar movements around the world, including the civil rights movement in the United States led by Martin Luther King Jr. King’s philosophy of non-violence was deeply influenced by Gandhi’s teachings, and he used non-violent tactics such as sit-ins, boycotts, and marches to challenge racial segregation and discrimination.

Non-violence has also been used as a means of resolving conflicts and promoting peace at the international level. Organizations such as the United Nations and the International Red Cross promote non-violent conflict resolution and peacebuilding efforts in regions affected by war and violence. Non-violent peacekeeping missions have been successful in de-escalating tensions and preventing violence in conflict zones around the world.

Non-violence is not only a political strategy, but also a moral and ethical principle that guides individuals in their personal lives. Many religious and spiritual traditions teach the importance of non-violence as a way of living in harmony with others and with the natural world. The concept of ahimsa is central to the teachings of Jainism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, among other faith traditions.

In today’s world, non-violence is more important than ever as we face global challenges such as climate change, poverty, inequality, and political instability. The use of violence as a means of resolving conflicts only exacerbates these problems and leads to further suffering and destruction. By embracing non-violence as a guiding principle, individuals and communities can work together to create a more just, peaceful, and sustainable world for future generations.

Non-violence requires courage, discipline, and a deep commitment to justice and equality. It is not always easy to practice non-violence in the face of injustice and oppression, but the rewards are great. By choosing non-violence as a way of life, individuals can inspire others to do the same and create a ripple effect of positive change in their communities and beyond.

In conclusion, non-violence is a powerful philosophy and practice that has the potential to transform individuals, communities, and societies. By refraining from using violence and instead choosing peaceful means to achieve our goals, we can create a more just, peaceful, and sustainable world for all. As Mahatma Gandhi famously said, “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” Let us all strive to embody the principles of non-violence in our thoughts, words, and actions, and work together to build a more peaceful and just world for future generations.

Related Essays

Essay on A Visit To A Fair – 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Value of Games And Sports – Essay in 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Essay on Importance of Teacher – 100, 200, 500, 1000 Words

Essay on A Visit To A Museum – 100, 200, 500, 1000 Words

Essay on Effect of Social Media On Youth

Essay on Shri Guru Nanak Dev Ji – Short & Long Essay Examples

Essay on Nuclear Family – Short Essay & Long Essay upto 1500 Words

Essay on Anudeep Durishetty – 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Covid 19 Responsive School – Essay in 10 Lines, 100 to 1500 Words

Essay on My Dreamdoctor – Short Essay & Long Essay upto 1500 Words

The Ethics of Nonviolence: Essays by Robert L. Holmes

Robert L. Holmes, The Ethics of Nonviolence: Essays by Robert L. Holmes , Predrag Cicovacki (ed.), Bloomsbury, 2013, 263pp., $34.95 (pbk), ISBN 9781623568054.

Reviewed by Andrew Fiala, California State University, Fresno

This is a collection of essays by Robert L. Holmes, a philosopher known primarily for his extensive body of work on nonviolence and war, including his influential book, On War and Morality (Princeton University Press, 1989). The essays include some of Holmes' early articles on American pragmatism and ethical theory. But its primary focus is later work, including some important material on the philosophy of nonviolence (some of it published previously in journals and books along with some previously unpublished material). The book concludes with a short essay on Holmes' teaching philosophy and an interview with the editor that provides some biographical material about Holmes' education and life.

While the earlier essays on pragmatism and ethical theory may be of interest to academic philosophers, and the later items would be of interest to those who know Holmes as a teacher or colleague, the primary focus of the volume is on the ethics of nonviolence. The essays on this topic are both readable and important. They would be of interest to a broad audience and not merely to academic philosophers. Indeed, these essays should be read and carefully considered by students of peace studies and peace activists.

One significant contribution is Holmes' is analysis of the difference between nonviolentism and pacifism. Indeed, it appears that he coined the term "nonviolentism" in a 1971 essay that is reprinted in this collection (157). According to Holmes, pacifism is a narrow perspective that is merely opposed to war, while nonviolentism is a broader perspective that is opposed in general to violence.

Holmes' account is a fine piece of analytic philosophy that reminds us that conceptual analysis matters. One concrete outcome of his analysis is the idea that one need not be an absolutist to be a pacifist or a nonviolentist. According Holmes, pacifists and nonviolentists get painted into a conceptual corner when they are thought to be absolutists. Absolute nonviolentism is easily overcome by imagined thought experiments in which a minor amount of violence is necessary in order to save a large number of people. Holmes concedes this point, admitting that absolute pacifism is "clearly untenable" (158).

Holmes' admission that pacifism is not appropriate for all conceivable worlds and in any conceivable circumstance may appear to doom his effort to defend nonviolence. And some may object that once Holmes makes this concession, continued discussion of nonviolentism becomes moot. Why bother to discuss nonviolentism when it won't work for the really hard cases?

But in fact, his admission of the limits of absolute moralizing is interesting as a meta-philosophical thesis, as a comment about absolutism in philosophy. And it links to his understanding of nonviolence as a way of life. Holmes connects the idea of nonviolence as a way of life with the tradition of virtue ethics -- and with non-Western sources such as Taoism. Holmes' goal is to describe a way of life in which nonviolence governs all of life, including both thought and deed.

Nonviolence in this maximalist sense does govern all of our life. Once we satisfy its requirements, we may in other respects act as we choose toward others. Even though I have stated it negatively, it has, for all practical purposes, a positive content. It tells us to be nonviolent . (174)

This is somewhat vague. A critic may worry -- as critics of virtue ethics often do -- that this is not very helpful when considering concrete cases. Such a retreat to virtue may not be readily accepted by absolutists who want clarity about moral principles. But Holmes fends of this sort of critique in his theoretical essays. In an essay with the polemical title "The Limited Relevance of Analytical Ethics to the Problems of Bioethics," Holmes aims to show that analytic ethics fails in important ways. In general Holmes holds that moral philosophy is situated in a broader context in which philosophers come to their work with a set of predispositions that are apparent even in the choice of methodology. And he points to a gap between the way philosophers proceed and the way the vast majority of people proceed, when reflecting on moral issues. What most of us want is a way of life and system of virtue -- not merely a decision procedure based on abstract principles.

This leads Holmes to conclude that academic philosophy is not very good at creating moral wisdom. Moral philosophizing attempts to hover free from value claims -- in attempting to be neutral -- and thus can end up being used to support immoral outcomes. A related point is made in Holmes' broader claim about the way that universities are too cozy with the military-industrial complex -- for example in supporting ROTC programs. While his criticism of ROTC was made in the early 1970's, we might note that ROTC still exists on campuses across the country, often free from criticism. It is worth considering whether the values embodied in academic philosophy and the larger academy are nonviolentist in Holmes' sense.

In the metaphilosophical and metaethical concerns of the earlier essays, Holmes clarifies the source of his thinking in American pragmatism (with special emphasis on Dewey). He also discusses the problem of finding a middle path between consequentialist and nonconsequentialist moral theory. And he criticizes philosophers' tendency to rely on imagined thought experiments.

He explains, for example, that most people are simply not absolutists, who hold to principles in the face of all possible counter-examples. He writes that although some philosophers believe that "far-fetched counterexamples" may crushingly refute absolute principles, "the philosopher's refutation of the philosopher's interpretation of the principle becomes conspicuously irrelevant to the issues in which ordinary people find themselves caught up" (57). Holmes' immediate target here is moral reasoning that occurs in applied ethics -- specifically Judith Thomson's widely read 1971 article "In Defense of Abortion." Holmes aims beyond the postulation of absolutist principles and attempted refutations of these by imagined counter-examples.

The imagined examples that are offered to refute pacifism are, for the most part irrelevant to Holmes' endeavor of describing and defending an ethic of nonviolence. He rejects an exclusive focus on "contrived cases, such as that of a solitary Gandhi assuming the lotus position before an attacking Nazi panzer division" (146). Holmes admits that killing could be justified in some rare situations. But such an admission does not help us make moral judgments in the real world of war and militarism. I think he is right about this. But one might worry that Holmes does not offer enough analysis of the concrete and ugly reality of war. For example, there is no discussion of post-traumatic stress disorder or suicide by soldiers or fragging -- let alone an account of war on children, widows, and the social fabric. Indeed, there is little here in terms of descriptions of the ugly reality of war that is often left out by defenders of militarism. Holmes may imagine that we already know that ugly reality. But his argument could be bolstered by more concrete detail.

One significant point Holmes makes is that much of the evil of the world -- and especially the evil of war -- is not deliberately intended. Holmes rejects the doctrine of double effect by noting that an exclusive focus on intention is insufficient. But he points toward a larger problem, which he names "the Paradox of Evil": "the greatest evils in the world are done by basically good people" (209). Truly evil people are usually only able to harm a few others. But the greatest harms are done by large social organizations that use good people to create massive suffering. Holmes suggests that the worst things happen when basically good people end up sacrificing for and supporting political and military systems. One reason for this is that they have been persuaded that nonviolentism is silly -- by those pernicious and fallacious arguments that consist primarily of contrived imagined cases.

Rather than dwelling on those contrived cases, Holmes emphasizes that we ought to work to develop plausible alternatives to violence and war. He imagines a nonviolent army or peaceforce, consisting of tens of thousands of trained persons, funded and educated at levels equivalent to that of the military. While it may seem that "nonviolent social defense" (as Holmes prefers to call it) is feckless in a world of military power, Holmes points out that there have been successful cases of nonviolent social transformation in recent history: in the Indian campaign for independence from Britain, in the American Civil Rights movement, in the demise of the Soviet Union, and in the end of apartheid in South Africa. This is all useful as a reminder of the fact that nonviolence can work. But one thing missing here is a concrete analysis of how and why nonviolent social revolutions work.

Holmes does argue that in order to complete the work of creating a "nonviolent American revolution" as he puts it, we ought to leave our violentist/realist assumptions about history behind and acknowledge that nonviolence can work to produce positive social change. For example, Holmes points out that national economies are grounded in value judgments and that we could create a nonviolent national economy, rather than our current militarized economy.

This points toward Holmes' basic optimism and idealism. Holmes suggest that our world is based in thought: "much of the world that most of us live in consists of embodied thought" (233). Injustices such as slavery are grounded upon a set of values and concepts that could be otherwise. One of the problems of the ubiquity of militarism in the United States is the feeling that military power is inevitable and normal. But Holmes points out that things could be different -- that we could imagine the social and political world differently and reconstitute it accordingly.

One significant problem is that we are miseducated about the usefulness of violence. Prevailing historical narratives make it appear that progress is usually made by the use of military power. But Holmes is at pains to point out that war and violence have often not worked. "We know that resort to war and violence for all of recorded history has not worked. It has not secured either peace or justice to the world" (197). While we often hear a story touting the usefulness of violence -- as in the Second World War narrative -- it turns out that in reality war merely prepares the way for future conflict -- as the Second World War gave way to the Cold War.

A further problem is that Holmes thinks that we defer too willingly to the narratives told by those in power and that we are too quick to give our loyalty to the state. Holmes espouses loyalty to the truth -- not loyalty to the state -- and a higher patriotism that is directed beyond borders. "It is from love of one's country, and for humankind generally, that a nonviolent transformation of society must proceed" (232). Running throughout his essays is a sort of anarchism, which Holmes sees in the ideas of those authors he admires: Thoreau, Tolstoy, and Gandhi. Holmes concludes, "the consistent and thoroughgoing nonviolentist, as Tolstoy saw, will be an anarchist" (180). To support this idea, Holmes reminds us that there is nothing permanent or sacred about the system of nation-states. "Nation-states are not part of the nature of things. They certainly are not sacrosanct. If they perpetuate ways of thinking that foster division and enmity among peoples, ways should be sought to transcend them" (120).

The just war tradition and political realism appear to go astray when they turn the state into an end in itself, rather than viewing it as a means to be used to create positive social living. Holmes locates one source of this in Augustine, who compromised so much with state power that he ended up closer to Hobbes than to Jesus -- a line of political realism that Holmes claims is picked up by Reinhold Niebuhr.

This train of thought points toward a critique of the logic of militaristic nation-states, which will tend to grow in power and centralized control. This leads to what Holmes calls the "garrison mentality" and "the garrison state" (114). He maintains that under the guise of a realist interpretation of history we end up assimilating military values, thinking that we can solve both international and domestic problems through the use of military tactics. But the development of the garrison state chained to a permanent war economy is an impending disaster, especially in a democracy. Holmes suggests, "This most likely would not happen by design, but gradually, almost imperceptibly, through prolonged breathing of the air of militarism, deceptively scented by the language of democratic values" (114). But in the long run, the growth of militarism comes at the expense of democracy. These prescient ideas were originally published in 1998, prior to 9/11, the war on terrorism, and recent revelations about the growing extent of security agencies and spying. The perceptive insight of Holmes' remarks reminds us that the perspective of nonviolentism is a valuable one, which helps to provide a critical lens on the world.

In general, this book provides a useful collection of essays on the ethics of nonviolence. Some of the earlier essays can be seen as a bit academic and boring. But, as noted above, the metaphilosophical considerations found in these earlier essays are clearly connected to the more concrete considerations on the ethics and philosophy of nonviolence. If one thing is missing, it is a more extensive practical account of how and why nonviolence works. Holmes mentions that some of the evidence for his claims about the effectiveness of nonviolence can be found in the work of authors such as Gene Sharp. However, there are very few details. Nor is there much in terms of a description of what a nonviolent way of life would look like. Would it be vegetarian? Would it include religion? Would a nonviolentist play violent video games or films? How would nonviolence impact gender relations? Would a nonviolentist with anarchist sympathies such as Holmes retreat to a 21 st century version of Walden Pond? Or would nonviolence lead us to a life of activism and social protest? One hopes that Holmes may take up the practical particulars of a life of nonviolence in future work.

Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Necessities of non-violent approach to conflicts

Non-violence is a form of protest, philosophy and a way of life. The term non-violence refers to the negation of violence. Non-violence is a way of resisting and relates to conflicts and not peace. Many countries have embraced the non-violence approach to conflicts (King 1958, p.24).

Countries accept non-violence as an international means of protest applicable in most conflicts. There had been several non-violence protests in the world. Some of them were successful, while others failed.

However, the most successful and long-term non-violence protests against oppression were the Indian Independent struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi against British colonial government.

The other renowned non-violent protest was the African-America civil rights movement in the United States of America. The movements involved non-violent protests method. Their approach included non-violence philosophies and ideologies.

In contrary, very many non-violent revolutions lasted for a short duration. This shows that non-violence approach by social movements and campaigns are not simply a way of solving any societal conflicts. Non-violence approach to conflict has mechanisms and dynamics aspects as its necessities (Curry 2002, p.34).

Non-violence approach to conflict depends largely on the nature of the conflict referred to and the cultural behaviours of the protesters (King 1986, p.12). The rarity of success of non-violence approach to conflicts is a clear indicator that there is the need for further analysis of both the failure and success of non-violent movements.

The analysis of non-violent movements and campaigns can occur from different perspectives such as the philosophical, religious, ethical, moral and pragmatic points of views. Martin Luther king and Mahatma Gandhi are the two leaders in the world history who successfully led long-term non-violent approach to conflicts.

It is therefore important that we analyze the approach that the two leaders used in relation to non-violence as a means of solving conflicts.

However, other prominent personalities led long-term non-violent movements against oppression such as Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Doris Day, Cesar Chavez, Abdel G. Khan among others (Franzen2010, p.245).

The application of non-violence as a tool by protestors towards their stronger opponents normally upsets the opponent’s tactics of violence. This allows the protesters, who are weaker compared to the opponents, to set the pace of the conflict.

Non-violence acts as a means of dislocating opponents’ psychological and physical balance and strength (Merton & Mattingly1965, p.44). This has proved to be a vital tool to a successful attempt to overthrow the enemy from power. Supporters of non-violence argue that it is more superior to violent approach to conflict.

Non-violence is a perfect tool to eliminate social evils such as racial discrimination in the African-American civil conflict during Martin Luther’s time, oppression by the British colonies in India during Gandhi’s time. Martin Luther king described non-violence as the best world’s alternative to war and destruction of lives and property.

Non-violence approach tends to seek a peaceful resolution to conflict and avoids destruction at all cost. Non-violence contributes to positive change and economic development in a society.

Luther King argued that non-violence was the most potent asset and force that were available to cub oppression of the blacks by white Americans in their struggle to obtain freedom. Mahatma Gandhi referred to the non-violence approach to conflicts as the best philosophical approach to human needs including freedom.

Mahatma Gandhi believed that violent approach to conflict automatically fails to address sensitive issues at stake. The main aim of non-violence is not to destroy, defeat, or humiliate the opponent.

The main aim of non-violence is to embrace the diplomatic approach so that issues at stake are addressed in a sober manner. The major aim of most non-violent activists is to reconcile and create a beloved society and peaceful coexistence of people with different ideologies (Attenborough 1982, p. 85).

The non-violent movement by the civil rights society in the United States was one of the most successful reform movements, not only in the United States of America but also in the world at large.

One of the major necessities of non-violence is its dynamics. Dynamic is the ability of a non-violent protest action or movement to spread to other regions (Forsythe 2000, p.443). Dynamic aspect of non-violence approach to conflict aims at attracting the attention of media and public opinion.

Because of its positive publicity, non-violent movement may draw financial support from donors into the movement or campaigns. If the non-violent protesters do not achieve their aim of mobilizing more people to gain a strong political and financial ground, then the protesters may turn to violence as a desperate attempt to solve the conflict.

For example, political success by civil rights movement in the African-American conflict helped the movement to enjoy a greater legitimacy in 1965.

The success of their non-violent campaigns and protests actions was the decisive factor that enabled the protester in the African-American conflict to negotiate with the federal government of the United States. Another necessity of non-violence is the mechanism of its success.

It is important to note that the survival of a non-violent protest or movement relies on their ability to demonstrate success. Mechanisms of success have a huge psychological influence on the non-violent protesters, media and public opinions, and the longevity of the movement.

For the public and other interested parties to believe in the non-violent movement, the protestors must believe and show the society that it is possible and realistic to succeed in attaining the freedom.

Non-violence would be unnecessary and irresponsible if there was no strong belief that there could be success at the end of the conflict (Carson 2003, p.78).

For any non-violent movement to succeed, the protestors must focus on three major aspects. These include believing in the outcome at the end of the conflict, being able to convince the public to join the movement, and being able to gain both political and financial grounds within the society.

A non-violent movement must advocate and portray to the society that its success is eminent in order to convince more people to join the movement to gain political ground. Once the movement gains the political power, the opponents will have no otherwise but to accept to negotiate terms with the protesters.

Non-violence is the best way of solving conflicts because its aim is not destructive. The property and lives of the protesters are not at risk, as opposed to war and violent way of solving conflicts. Non-violence only affects the psychological mindset of the enemy.

By influencing the public to engage in the movement, the opponents reasoning and power weakens. Non-violent movements have impacts that are more positive to the society compared to violent ways of solving conflicts.

There is assurance concerning the security of community’s resources. There is no reconstruction of infrastructures at the end of the conflict as in the case of violence and civil wars.

Attenborough, R. (1982). The words of Gandhi., Newmarket Press: New York

Carson, C. (2003). Reporting civil rights. Literary Classics of the United States: New York.

Curry, D., Mercer, H., & Mattingly, S. (2002). Prisoners of hope: the story of our captivity and freedom in Afghanistan. Doubleday: New York.

Forsythe, D. P. (2000). The United States and human rights: looking inward and outward. University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln.

Franzen, J. (2010). Freedom. Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York.

King, M. L. (1958). Stride toward freedom: the Montgomery story. Harper: New York.

King, M. L., & Washington, J. M. (1986). A testament of hope: the essential writings of Martin Luther King, Jr.. Harper & Row: San Francisco.

Merton, T. (1965). Gandhi on non-violence. New Directions Pub. Corp: New York.

John Rawl’s Philosophy of Liberalism
Victorian Desalination Project
Gandhism and Its Significance in India and World
Martin Luther King and Malcolm X
P. Ackerman on Nonviolence in “A Force More Powerful”
Social Welfare in Australia
Nation Development Theory
Theory of Andre Gunder Frank
How Is Today’s Capitalism Society Changed by the “New Left?”
The Conceptions of Power and Domination Found in the Works of Karl Marx, Max Weber and Michel Foucault
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, April 11). Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts. https://ivypanda.com/essays/non-violence-approach-to-conflicts/

"Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts." IvyPanda , 11 Apr. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/non-violence-approach-to-conflicts/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts'. 11 April.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts." April 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/non-violence-approach-to-conflicts/.

1. IvyPanda . "Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts." April 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/non-violence-approach-to-conflicts/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts." April 11, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/non-violence-approach-to-conflicts/.

Essay on Importance of Non Violence

Students are often asked to write an essay on Importance of Non Violence in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Importance of Non Violence

Understanding non-violence.

Non-violence is a principle that promotes peace and love, rejecting harm and aggression. It encourages resolving conflicts through dialogue and understanding.

Importance of Non-Violence

Non-violence is crucial for maintaining peace in society. It fosters respect, tolerance, and empathy among individuals.

Non-Violence in Daily Life

Practicing non-violence in daily life means avoiding harm to others, both physically and emotionally. It promotes harmony and understanding.

Non-violence is a powerful tool for peace. It promotes mutual respect and understanding, creating a harmonious society.

250 Words Essay on Importance of Non Violence

Introduction, non-violence: a catalyst for change.

Non-violence acts as a catalyst for change, promoting dialogue and understanding over conflict. It encourages the resolution of disagreements through peaceful means, fostering a culture of respect and tolerance. This approach has proven effective in many historical movements, such as the Indian independence struggle and the American Civil Rights Movement.

The Moral Power of Non-Violence

Non-violence carries a moral power that violence lacks. It appeals to the conscience of the oppressor, making it harder for them to justify their actions. By refusing to resort to violence, the oppressed assert their moral superiority, often winning public sympathy and support.

Non-Violence in the Contemporary World

In today’s interconnected world, the importance of non-violence is more pronounced. With global issues like climate change and social inequality, there is a need for collective action that transcends borders. Non-violence fosters this spirit of global citizenship, encouraging cooperation over conflict.

In conclusion, non-violence is not just a strategy, but a way of life. It promotes understanding, respect, and mutual cooperation, making it a crucial component of a peaceful society. As we navigate an increasingly complex world, the philosophy of non-violence offers a path towards a more harmonious and just future.

500 Words Essay on Importance of Non Violence

Non-violence, a philosophy deeply rooted in many cultures and religions worldwide, has been a significant guiding principle for social and political change. From Mahatma Gandhi’s peaceful resistance against British rule to Martin Luther King Jr.’s civil rights movement, non-violence has shown its power and relevance repeatedly. This essay will explore the importance of non-violence as a tool for conflict resolution, social transformation, and personal development.

Non-violence as a Tool for Conflict Resolution

Non-violence and social transformation.

Non-violence is not just the absence of physical violence; it is also a proactive force for social transformation. It empowers marginalized communities to assert their rights and challenge oppressive systems without resorting to violence. Non-violent protests and civil disobedience movements have been instrumental in bringing about significant social changes, such as ending racial segregation in the United States and dismantling apartheid in South Africa. These movements demonstrate the power of non-violence to effect change on a large scale.

Non-violence and Personal Development

On a personal level, non-violence encourages self-awareness, self-control, and a deep respect for all life. It helps individuals develop a sense of responsibility for their actions and their impact on others. Practicing non-violence can lead to personal growth and spiritual development, as it requires individuals to cultivate empathy, patience, and tolerance. It can also reduce stress and improve mental health by promoting peaceful interactions and relationships.

Challenges and Critiques

In conclusion, non-violence is a powerful tool for conflict resolution, social transformation, and personal development. It promotes dialogue, understanding, and respect, empowering individuals and communities to effect change without resorting to violence. While it may not be the solution to all conflicts, its importance in fostering peaceful and sustainable solutions cannot be overstated. As we navigate an increasingly interconnected and complex world, the principles of non-violence can guide us towards a more peaceful and just society.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

Happy studying!

10 Essential Things to Know about Nonviolent Resistance

Updated: Aug 15, 2022

Richard Sandbrook is professor emeritus of Political Science at the University of Toronto and President of Science for Peace

Contributed fact sheet for the Working Group on Nonviolent Resistance

Two traditions of thinking about nonviolence hold sway.

Principled nonviolence: Adherents decide to use nonviolent means on ethical grounds. In the Gandhian approach, nonviolence is a way of living a moral life.

Pragmatic nonviolence : Activists, seeking to win rights, freedom, or justice, choose to use nonviolent techniques because they are more effective than violent means in achieving these goals. Gene Sharp is a major proponent of this approach.

However, in practice, principled proponents, such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King, proved to be adept at pragmatically using nonviolent methods, Equally, some pragmatists, in their hearts, are pacifists as well as hard-headed realists.

2. Nonviolent resistance (NVR), from the pragmatic viewpoint, is a form of political struggle.

Unarmed civilians employ coordinated and unconventional methods to deter or defend against usurpers and foreign aggressors or to overturn injustices, though without causing or threatening bodily harm to their opponents. Examples of nonviolent methods include demonstrations, protests, strikes, stay-at-homes, boycotts, street theatre, derision of authorities, rebellious graffiti and other communications, shunning of collaborators, building alternative institutions, and many more.

3. NVR is not a doctrine of passive resistance or acceptance of weakness.

It is not passive, but active, demanding coordinated and unconventional struggle.

Far from evincing weakness, NVR demands immense courage of resisters, who are aware their resistance may lead to injury, imprisonment, torture, or even death. NVR is thus not for the weak-hearted. It is a strategy only for those with the determination to persist in the face of repression.

4. The aim of NVR is to build support and undermine the pillars of the opponent’s power.

NVR movements succeed by building up a large and diverse following of activists, winning over passive supporters, and precipitating demoralization and defections among the pillars of the established order (the police, army, bureaucrats, insiders).

5. NVR is stunningly effective in comparison to violent campaigns.

Erica Chenoworth, who has undertaken path-breaking research, discovers that, of the 627 revolutionary campaigns waged worldwide between 1900 and 2019, more than half of the nonviolent campaigns succeeded in achieving their goals, whereas only about a quarter of the violent ones succeeded. Nonviolent struggles are twice as effective as violent struggles. Yet the influence of the military-industrial complex, the widespread glorification of violence in popular culture and the equating of masculinity with domination obscure the superiority of nonviolence as a political stratagem.

6. The leverage of NVR stems from the dependence of rulers on the consent of significant sectors of the population (Gene Sharp).

Rulers cannot rule if bureaucrats obstruct, armed forces and police hold back, people shirk work and ignore laws and regulations, and foreign powers desert. Rulers do not need the support of entire populations; the Nazis could destroy Jews, Roma, the mentally and physically disabled, socialists and union leaders, so long as the ethnic Germans acquiesced to their rule. Hence, the task of nonviolent resisters is fourfold: -to build a large and diverse movement -to attract the loyalty of passive supporters -to encourage the defection of pillars of the regime -to build support in the international community.

7. The effectiveness of NVR depends on many factors.

Organization: to attract the support of a large and diverse group of supporters.

prior coalition building ensures a core of committed activists

as unity is critical, the coalition needs both clear, unifying goals, and processes to resolve internal disputes

leadership is needed, but it must be decentralized, to make it difficult for rulers to decapitate resistance by arresting its top leaders.

Training in nonviolent methods: an effective movement must be able to shift tactics as circumstances change. Noncooperation with the regime is one of the most effective set of methods in the playbook, but these methods require coordinated action.

Strategic and tactical agility : protests and demonstrations are only the public face of nonviolent action; effective movements employ the full panoply of strategies, depending on the degree of repression by the rulers. The resisters win when they attract the support of passive supporters and precipitate mass defections among the pillars of the established order.

Nonviolent discipline. Rulers respond to NVR by neutralizing the leaders of the opposition, undermining the movement’s unity, and fomenting a violent response on the part of protesters. If the last tactic works, the government can then justify violent repression. It can portray the resisters as a terrorist threat. The resisters can succeed only if it is clear to everyone who is the major threat, namely a ruthless and violent governing elite. Thus, destruction of property (such as the destruction of bridges as enemy forces advance) is permissible, so long as it entails no loss of life or injury. Collaborators of the regime can be shunned, but not assassinated. Such nonviolent discipline is difficult to maintain. It runs counter to one’s inclination to respond to violence with violence. The need for discipline underlines the importance of training.

8. NVR can be employed to deter and defeat foreign aggressors, as well as to prevent or overthrow dictatorships and establish rights and justice.

Civilian-based defence, in the words of Gene Sharp in his book of that name (1990) is “a policy [whereby] the whole population and the society’s institutions become the fighting forces. Their weaponry consists of a vast variety of forms of psychological, economic, social, and political resistance and counter-attack. This policy aims to deter attacks and to defend against them by preparations to make the society unrulable by would-be tyrants and aggressors. The trained population and the society’s institutions would be prepared to deny attackers their objectives and to make consolidation of political control impossible. These aims would be achieved by applying massive and selective noncooperation and defiance. In addition, where possible, the defending country would aim to create maximum international problems for the attackers and to subvert the reliability of their troops and functionaries.” History holds many examples of civilian defence, including in Denmark and Norway during Nazi occupation and in Czechoslovakia following the 1968 “Prague Spring,” when a Warsaw Pact army sought to reimpose rigid Soviet-style Communism.

9. NVR became less effective in the period since 2010.

Although nonviolent campaigns worldwide reached unprecedented numbers prior to the 2020 pandemic, their success rate fell. Erica Chenoworth in her 2021 book Civil Resistance provides the statistics. (However, nonviolent resistance remained more effective than violent campaigns.) Chenoworth also offers some tentative reasons for this comparative decline. She highlights “smart repression” by governments and strategic errors on the part of resistance movements. Each is a major subject, and each demands attention if NVR is not to repeat the errors of the past. Restrictions accompanying the pandemic (2020-2022) dampened NVR by rendering mass gatherings illegal and/or dangerous.

10. “Smart repression” needs to be better understood and counteracted.

Nonviolent movements’ strength depends on maintaining unity among a diverse following, sustaining nonviolent discipline, and demonstrating versatility in nonviolent methods. Determined rulers will undermine the movement’s unity, provoke violent responses, and neutralize the leadership. Digital means of communication have assisted NVR movements in mobilizing large numbers of protesters and in spreading their messages via social media. But there is a dark side to digital technology . It allows governments to enhance surveillance of dissidents, identify leaders, and sow discord through misinformation campaigns. The effectiveness of the next phase of NVR depends both on neutralizing smart resistance and returning to the fundamentals of nonviolence: organization, training, nonviolent discipline, and the versatile use of the full panoply of nonviolent techniques.

Nonviolence and Civil Society
General Commentary

What is Nonviolent Peacemaking?

This is among the most frequent questions we are asked at the Center for Peacemaking. Even a simple examination of nonviolence quickly reveals its depth and multidimensionality. The following overview is an introduction to some of the foundations of nonviolence.

Understanding Violence; Achieving Peace

Active nonviolence: a third way, nonviolence: motivations and goals, nonviolence: types of application, breaking the cycle of violence; building lasting peace.

In its most basic form, nonviolence is refusing to use violence. It is important, though, to recognize that violence manifests in many forms. Different approaches to peacemaking and nonviolence respond to the different types of violence.

Types of Violence

There are many forms of violence. The most visible is physical violence , which usually manifests as physical harm to someone. Psychological violence can manifest as an independent event (lies, manipulation, or threats) or as an aftereffect of other physical or psychological harm (psychological damage, distress, or trauma). This form of violence targets the mind and soul.

Another important distinction is the relationship between violence and influence. Negative influence occurs in the form of punishment for doing something the influencer considers wrong. Positive influence occurs as a reward for doing something the influencer considers right. In this sense, positive influence can be used to coerce others into committing violence.

Each of these types of violence play out on three different levels personal, structural and cultural.

Direct Violence

Direct violence , also called personal violence, is initiated by an identifiable actor and serves to threaten the life, basic needs, or well-being of another person or group. Direct violence is usually easy to identify, which may make it easier to address.

Structural and Cultural Violence

Structural violence is not initiated by a specific actor, but instead imposed by a structure. For example, an unjust legal system can enforce disproportionately violent punishment for minor infractions or ethically questionable laws.

Likewise, cultural violence manifests in ways that blend with social and cultural norms. Structural and cultural violence intend to maintain an unequal distribution of power or resources and results in unequal life chances. This is also known as social injustice.

Because these forms of violence are usually indirect and perceived as socially or culturally acceptable, they can be harder to identify and address. Examples include discrimination, exploitation, or marginalization based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, class, religion, or language.

Types of Peace

From the intrapersonal (inner peace) to the interpersonal (outer peace), and spanning from ancient religions and civilizations to modern societies and governments, peace is an often discussed, rarely defined word. Peace studies has popularized the framework of negative and positive peace.

Negative Peace

Negative peace is simply the absence of direct violence and war. While this is desirable, it still comes short of achieving social justice, or an equitable distribution of power and resources.

Positive Peace

Positive peace , on the other hand, is the absence of structural and cultural violence. Thus, positive peace is evident in the presence of social justice, harmony, equity and dignity.

Considering both definitions, the aim of 'peace' is two-fold: the absence of direct violence and the presence of social justice.

Widespread recognition of the fight-or-flight response has popularized passivity (flight) and violent opposition (fight) as the two responses to a threat. However, there is another way to respond: active nonviolence.

The flight response , though not violent, avoids addressing the threat. Flight thus can appear as submission, passivity, withdrawal, or surrender. The fight response meets violence with violence and can appear as direct retaliation, revenge, armed revolt, or violent rebellion.

The way of active nonviolence (creative engagement) is a third way to respond. Contrary to images of passivity the word “nonviolence” may conjure, nonviolence is an active response that directly addresses the threat and has the power to transform opponents into allies. Active nonviolence can appear as noncooperation, intervention, self-suffering, protest and the creation of alternative systems.

Furthermore, active nonviolence requires creativity, discipline, courage and strength. Creativity and discipline are required to channel anger over injustice toward the creation of opportunities that disrupt cycles of violence and constructively engage adversaries. Courage and strength are required to control one’s fear and persevere while confronting injustice. It is because of these attributes that Gandhi called nonviolence the weapon of the strong and violence the weapon of the weak.

As Mahatma Gandhi said, “Nonviolence is the greatest and the activist force in the world. It is a force which is more positive than electricity and more powerful than even ether.”

Nonviolence is a strategic application of tactics to achieve goals. Individuals and campaigns that utilize nonviolence can be segmented into two groups: principled and pragmatic. The difference is in their goals and motivations.

Principled Nonviolence

Principled nonviolence , also known as Gandhian or Kingian nonviolence, is often associated with a moral, ethical, or religious motivation or commitment. Its goal is to transform relationships, societies and adversaries through nonviolent direct action so individuals are not oppressed or exploited. The power concern is to build “power with others” to shape society.

Ensuring continuity between means and ends is a key component of principled nonviolence. This requires that nonviolent means be used to achieve nonviolent ends. For instance, it includes a willingness to endure rather than inflict suffering and seeks to transform rather than defeat adversaries. Principled nonviolence derives its strength from its consistency—nonviolence is viewed as a way of life.

Examples of principled nonviolence campaigns include the U.S. Civil Rights Movement, the Satyagraha movements in India, the United Farm Workers movement in American farm fields and the Peace People movement in Northern Ireland.

Tactical Nonviolence

Tactical nonviolence , also known as pragmatic nonviolence, is utilitarian in nature. Its goal is to accomplish specific objectives and to defeat adversaries through nonviolent direct action. Its power concern is to gain “power over others” and is expressed in more adversarial terms. Gene Sharp, a leading advocate of tactical nonviolence, defines it as “a technique of socio-political action for applying power in a conflict without the use of violence.”

Tactical nonviolence views physical violence as ineffective or impractical. Nonviolence is preferred so long as it is effective and practical—it is not seen as a lifestyle. Thus, it has a lower barrier to entry. However, because it also has a lower barrier to exit, some may abandon their commitment to nonviolence once they gain significant political power.

Examples of tactical nonviolence campaigns include the First Palestinian Intifada uprising against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, the student-led Otpor! movement to overthrow Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia, and the Orange Revolution in response to corruption, voter intimidation, and electoral fraud in Ukraine.

Below are three classifications of nonviolent action. Emerging research demonstrates the effectiveness of nonviolence in each of these situations.

Civil Resistance

Civil resistance includes nonviolent protest and persuasion, noncooperation with oppressive social, economic and political systems, as well as the creation of parallel institutions of government. Civil resistance may lead to peacemaking —bringing parties of a conflict into negotiated agreement—or result in overthrowing a regime or overturning oppressive laws and policies.

In their groundbreaking book, Why Civil Resistance Works: the Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan find that nonviolent campaigns worldwide were two times more successful than campaigns using violent methods. They collected data from 1900-2006 on all major nonviolent and violent campaigns aiming to overthrow a government or expel an occupying power. They argue that the moral, physical, informational and commitment barriers to participation are much lower for nonviolent resistance than for violent insurgency. Thus, nonviolent campaigns are more likely to gather mass participation or garner mass appeal.

Civil Defense

Civil defense includes building, protecting and preserving democratic structures from invasion, coup d’etat, natural disasters, or other threats. Civil defense largely encompasses the area of peacebuilding —developing tools to change unjust structures, systems and policies; as well as to resolve tensions, disagreements and conflicts without resorting to violence. Examples of civil defense or peacebuilding programs include agriculture and natural resource management, water and sanitation programs, as well as access to education, health and social service programs.

For example, Catholic Relief Services has integrated civil defense and peacebuilding approaches into water projects in southern Honduras, where conflict over water is pervasive. Strengthening local capacities in this way can contribute to improved social outcomes.

Civilian Protection

Unarmed Civilian Protection (UCP), is the practice of deploying teams of trained, unarmed civilians before, during, or after violent conflict. The goals of UCP include to prevent or reduce violence, to provide direct physical protection to civilian populations under threat and to strengthen or build resilient local peace infrastructures. UCP is considered a form of peacekeeping .

Most UCP practitioners are nonpartisan and engage in dialogue with all parties of a conflict. Key methodologies of UCP include relationship building, proactive engagement, monitoring and capacity development. These methods have been put into place to successfully train civilians as ceasefire monitors, facilitate dialogue between adversaries, and to educate civilians in their own protection, especially women and children.

Nonviolent Peaceforce is an example of UCP with presence in South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Colombia, Guatemala, the Philippines and Indonesia.

There are many tools available to address violence: mediation, negotiation, alternative dispute resolution, circle processes, restorative justice, truth and reconciliation commissions, peace accords, transitional justice, etc.

Jean Paul Lederach's differentiation of conflict resolution and conflict transformation present a useful framework to understand the difference between breaking the cycle of violence and building lasting peace.

Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution is focused on the need to de-escalate a conflict or to end something that is not desired. It strives to achieve short-term agreements and solutions to specific incidents of violence. Thus, its goal aligns with negative peace.

Conflict Transformation

Conflict transformation is focused on the need to pursue constructive change—to build something that is desired in the place of something that is destructive. It is a mid- to long-term approach of increasing local capacity to effectively resolve incidents of conflict and generate solutions that address structural and cultural causes of conflict. Thus, its goal aligns with positive peace.

For example, recurring "isolated incidents" are usually symptoms of structural or cultural violence. Handling each incident independently (conflict resolution) may address the specific incidents but fails to address the root cause(s). Conflict transformation intentionally engages the complex history of long-term conflicts and asks questions such as what are patterns that generate this?

Sources and additional reading:

“The Meanings of Peace.” Peace & Conflict Studies , by David P. Barash and Charles Webel, SAGE Publications, Inc., 2018, pp. 3–12.

Chenoweth, Erica, and Maria J. Stephan. Why Civil Resistance Works: the Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict . Columbia University Press, 2013.

(Editor), Ellen Furnari, and For Peace Work and Nonviolent Conflict Transformation, Institute. Wielding Nonviolence in the Midst of Violence Case Studies of Good Practices in Unarmed Civilian Protection . Books on Demand, 2016.

Galtung, Johan. “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research.” Journal of Peace Research , vol. 6, no. 3, 1969, pp. 167–191.

Lederach, John Paul. The Little Book of Conflict Transformation: Clear Articulation of the Guiding Principles by a Pioneer in the Field . Good Books, 2003.

Case Studies of Unarmed Civilian Protection . Nonviolent Peaceforce, 2015, Case Studies of Unarmed Civilian Protection , www.nonviolentpeaceforce.org/images/publications/UCP_Case_Studies___vFinal_8-4-15.pdf.

Paffenholz, Thania. Civil Society & Peacebuilding . VIVA Books, 2011.

Sharp, Gene. The Politics of Nonviolent Action . Boston: Porter Sargent, 1973

Wink, Walter. Jesus and Nonviolence: a Third Way . Fortress, 2003..

What is nonviolent peacemaking?
Peacemaking jobs and careers
Peace research areas

Information for

Signature initiatives.

Peace Works
Scaling Wellness in Milwaukee
Promoting Assets, Reducing Crime
Interreligious peacemaking

The Center on social media

Problem with this webpage?

Report an accessibility problem . To report another problem, please contact [email protected] .

Marquette University Center for Peacemaking 1616 W. Wells St. Milwaukee, WI 53233 Phone: (414) 288-8444

Campus contacts
Search marquette.edu

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

International Day of Peace

21 september.

un.org/peaceday

Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him. -Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Nonviolence is both a principle and a practice. The principle of nonviolence affirms the active use of non-coercive and non-aggressive means to create a more peaceful context. It is based on the assumption that justice will eventually prevail, that choices should be made from a place of love rather than hate, that the hurtful action, not the person, should be subdued and that voluntary suffering has value as an important facet of life.

In practice, nonviolence involves ACTIVELY peaceful behavior in the midst of conflict, becoming an example of consideration to those around us and breaking the destructive cycle of retaliation when we believe we have been wronged. It also means awareness of our own inner violence, and eliminating its negative effects upon our own intentions. Applying these principles of non-violence can reduce conflict, anger and violence on personal, local, national and global levels.

Nonviolence has come to be recognized as a powerful strategy for students, communities, disenfranchised groups and whole societies in addressing and transforming conditions. During the 20th century, the successful social movements of Gandhi in India and Martin Luther King, Jr. in the United States led to the public’s realization of completely new dimensions of nonviolent conflict resolution.

For more about the influence of Gandhi on Reverend King’s philosophy of nonviolence, CLICK HERE

WHAT CAN YOU DO: NONVIOLENCE

– Engage students in one of Stanford U’s Lesson Plans about Dr.King

– Check out the National Education Association Site with lessons for K-12 related to nonviolence, civil rights, etc. CLICK HERE

– Review and discuss one or more of the Mainstreaming Nonviolence tools of Pace de Bene: CLICK HERE

– Learn about Martin Luther King Jr.’s Principles of nonviolence and steps to social change : CLICK HERE . (For more info, go to the King Center Website ).

– Learn about Gandhian Principles of Nonviolence: CLICK HERE

– Use one or more of the SEASON OF NONVIOLENCE ideas

– Take the CAMPAIGN NONVIOLENCE Pledge: CLICK HERE

– Review the Principles of conflict transformation offered by the Global Coalition of conflict Transformation: CLICK HERE For more info, CLICK HERE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5HIN0TVoWA Segment of the “I Have A Dream” Speech Focusing on Nonviolence

MLK: A Call to Conscience – PBS 1-hour episode examining Martin Luther King, Jr.’s stand against the Vietnam War and the influence of his legacy today – CLICK HERE .

Engage in the FREE online Nonviolence class: CLICK HERE Gandhi & King: The Power of Non-Violent Action

Arun Gandhi on the Meaning of Peace & Nonviolence

A Force More Powerful

Living Nonviolence Blog

Mahatma Gandhi–The Courage of Nonviolence

Seasons for NonViolence

Waging NonViolence

US ORGANIZATIONS:

The Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence

The King Center

Pace e Bene (Peace and All Good) – Campaign Nonviolence

Positive Peace Warrior Network

Get Involved
Culture Of Peace
Children and Youth
Colleges and Universities
Nonviolence
Service/Humanitarian Action
Social Justice
Spirituality/Faith
Environment
Intercultural and Global

WORK EXPERIENCE

Jason Manrique
May 27, 2021
13 min read

Introduction to Nonviolence

Updated: Jan 12, 2022

By Jason Manrique (April, 2020)

Introduction

Nonviolent Movements

International Nonviolent Struggle

Nonviolence in Academia and in the 21st Century

Nonviolence: an introduction.

Nonviolent activism over the course of the 20th century helped influence the world and century in a positive direction. There now is an effective option to fight back against injustice and oppression around the world without having to cause more pain and conflict. These days, nonviolence has an academic catalog full of examples, theory and scholars who help guide those in search of learning more on the subject of nonviolent philosophy. But first, What is Nonviolence?

A simple definition for nonviolence can be that it is the use of peaceful means, not by force, to bring about social change. However, this is a very simple and broad definition of what nonviolence is or can be. There are different aspects of the nonviolent philosophy that require their own meaning:

Nonviolent Communication for example is about expressing and hearing needs nonviolently resulting in mutual understanding and agreements between cooperating groups.

Nonviolent Conflict Resolution and Mediation are where special measures and techniques are employed to resolve conflicts that previously had been found to be irretractable. Mediation is where these techniques are employed by a neutral third party.

Nonviolent Noncooperation can be defined as when one group applies symbolic methods to disrupt daily processes of life in order to bring awareness to society of injustices or inequities.

Nonviolent Resistance is when oppositional measures are taken in different forms of protest to provoke and expose unacceptable actions and thus embarrass and shame the group doing the actions in the eyes of the public and the international community.

Examples of these forms of nonviolence will be provided later in this article.

Notable Nonviolent Movements: Early 20th Century

Nonviolent movements were active throughout the 20th century, helping shape society into what it is today.

Early on, it was the Women's Suffrage movement in the United States during the early 1900’s. One of the most notable events to come from that movement was the Suffrage Parade of 1913. The reason why is because this parade marked the first large march to take place in Washington D.C, where women from all over the country came together and marched for the right to vote. President Woodrow At the time, Wilson was going to have his inaugural address. This event helped ignite the suffragist movement and continue to hold Wilson’s administration accountable culminating in the passage of the 19th Amendment.

Meanwhile, around the same time in another part of the world, a young Mahatma Gandhi was preparing one of his first large-scale acts of civil disobedience against the British Empire. The 1920 Non-Cooperation movement was Gandhi’s example of what nonviolent noncooperation can look like when being implemented in real life. The movement had participants resign from positions en masse (election workers, teachers, courts, other administrative positions) and threaten to not pay taxes as well. While the non-cooperation movement ended in 1922, it marked the first time where civil disobedience came from all parts of Indian society instead of just an educated middle class, signifying that the independence movement was gaining popular support.

Nonviolence During the Civil Rights Era

The success of India's independence movement due in large part to Gandhi’s nonviolent philosophy helped inspire an upcoming generation of activists around the world that it is possible to fight back against oppressors without using violence. This would be seen best in the tactics and philosophies of activists during the American Civil Rights Era of the 1950s-1960s. The most significant example of this would have to be the civil rights work of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who directly cited Gandhi as an inspiration and applied Gandhi’s methods of nonviolence to what King was trying to accomplish working toward abolishing the discriminatory Jim Crow laws in the American South. For example, King played a pivotal role in the Montgomery Bus Boycott as President of the Montgomery Improvement Association, preached nonviolence even after threats and attempts on his life were made, met with students of Gandhi, and delivered his iconic “I have a dream” speech at the 1963 March on Washington. MLK’s nonviolent philosophy remains one of his most notable characteristics in the eyes of the American public. Another lesser-known activist of the era is James Lawson. Lawson, similar to King, also came from a Christian upbringing revolving around nonviolence. It was his work in India where he directly learned about Gandhi's philosophy of nonviolence, Satyagraha, and then even had Dr. King urge him to move to the South and help teach people the nonviolent activism he had learned in India from Gandhi’s students. Lawson's teachings would prove to be very important and impactful during the Civil Rights Era, being a mentor and teacher to notable young activists such as Diane Nash and John Lewis, who themselves would go on to lead the sit-in movement throughout the South.

In the West, there was another similar struggle going on in the western part of the country during this time. Racism, corruption, and poor working conditions were common amongst farm workers in the western United States (workers who were often Mexican or Filipino immigrants). The man who would directly challenge the oppressive system rose from those ranks was Cesar Chavez. Chavez, very much like Martin Luther King was inspired by his religious upbringing (MLK with the Baptist church and Chavez with the Catholic church) and the work of Gandhi. A notable difference in Chavez’s experience is that he was also inspired by the Civil Rights movement that had been going on in the South at almost the exact same time he was fighting for labor rights in the west. A very crucial moment came in 1965 when the union he created joined a grape strike that was soon elevated to national notoriety due to the nonviolent tactics Chavez helped lead. Things such as asking for strike members to commit to nonviolence, long marches, and even a hunger strike by Chavez to protest the talks of committing acts of violence within the striking worker's ranks. Cesar’s work was recognized by notable Civil Rights figures such as Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, receiving a letter of praise and solidarity from King at one point. Chavez and the grape workers won in 1970 when their union was officially recognized.

International Nonviolent Struggles

While the work of nonviolent activists such as Cesar Chavez, Martin Luther King, and James Lawson and so many others during the American Civil Rights Era brought groundbreaking change, there were (and are) still ongoing struggles in other parts of the world.

Halfway across the world from America, the indigenous Africans of South Africa were in the midst of an ongoing struggle that would last much longer than the Civil Rights Era in America. The Apartheid regime in South Africa was a brutal system set in place by the white minority-controlled government beginning in the late 1940s. The country where Gandhi had first learned and implemented his early nonviolent philosophy was now the setting for another struggle. There were different forms of opposition used against the apartheid regime, from nonviolent ones to armed resistance. 1952 was when anti-apartheid activists implemented their first wide-scale act of nonviolent resistance. Disobeying the laws of apartheid by meeting in massive groups at locations such as train stations, post offices bus stops, schools, this would be known as the National Defiance Campaign. Thousands of people were arrested and membership for the African National Congress (ANC) political party skyrocketed.

Unfortunately, the campaign was met by harsh retaliation by the apartheid government and no concessions were made. However, nonviolence was still the main tool used by the South Africans throughout that period. Others actions were taken such as bus boycotts, demonstrations, and even burning passes. International pressure from the United Nations also dealt significant blows to the apartheid regime with arms embargoes on South Africa (Security Council Resolution 181, 182) , condemnation from the Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly to name some examples.

It was during the 1970s and 1980s where different methods of civil disobedience were taken as a result of the oppression by the South African government. By that point, many activist leaders who were imprisoned were being released and at the same time, labor strikes were rising which helped show anti-apartheid activists that they can sabotage the inner workings of the Apartheid system using labor power. Mass work strikes, school boycotts, funerals for murdered activists were the new actions being used. These tactics served as a leverage system in that government officials and employers were worried about having a shortage of skilled workers in the near future and/or not having labor leaders/activists to negotiate with during labor disputes.

Economic boycotts had also become popular where practically the entire community does not go to work or shop at local businesses, hurting the white-owned businesses and other employers. As a result of the constant boycotts and other actions by the anti-apartheid activists, mixed with the international condemnation and sanctions brought by the UK and USA, the South African government slowly began making concessions by the mid to late 1980s and in 1994 a new constitution along with a non-white majority in government marked an end to Apartheid in South Africa.

Similar to South Africa, the struggle for the Palestineans in the Middle East has been a long one full of oppression from the Israeli side no matter what form of resistance is used against the Israeli government. Nonviolence has been prevalent in Palestinian resistance even before the issue of Israeli occupation. During the late 1930s, resistance to the British empire by Palestinians consisted of protests, strikes, and diplomatic petitions. Several decades after the formation of Israel (1948) a movement began where large portions of the Palestinian population acted in civil disobedience against the Israeli government. This event would come to be known as the First Intifada (1987).

During the Intifada, the people took nonviolent actions in large groups. Examples of these actions include: staging sit-ins, blocking roads, burning tires, having large demonstrations. The IDF (Israeli Defense Force) even classified over 95% of the activities as nonviolent. It was during the First Intifada when a champion for nonviolence would emerge within the Palestinian community. Mubarak Awad, a Palestinian Christian who had studied notable figures in the field of nonviolence (MLK, Gandhi, Gene Sharp) became a major organizer during the Intifada. Awad translated into Arabic the work of those thinkers and wrote and distributed pamphlets in Arabic on the subject of nonviolent non-cooperation and nonviolent theory all over the West Bank. Mubarak’s actions got him put on notice by the Israeli authorities and eventually resulted in his deportation. He helped promote nonviolent actions that would be in direct opposition to Israeli control of Palestinians. Planting olive trees in potential sites for new Israeli settlements, flying the Palestinian flag, directly opposing curfews, not presenting IDs, were just some of the actions Mubarak Awad helped promote. Unfortunately, unlike Apartheid in South Africa, the Palestinian struggle has lasted for much longer. To this day, the Palestineans continue to be subject to the oppressive, illegal policies of the Israeli government. The Intifada was able to make some progress in terms of having all sides of this conflict come together and attempt to really negotiate a deal for the first time.

Even though Israel has forbidden his return to Palestine, Mubarak Awad continues to advocate for nonviolence in Palestine and wherever in the world there is a similar struggle for civil and human rights through his organization that he has started in the U.S.A. in Washington, D.C., called Nonviolence International. It is interesting to note that his nephew, Sami Awad has continued his efforts in Palestine through the Holy Land Trust based in Bethlehem.

Today, there exists a vast academic field in nonviolence based on theory and the experiences/ analysis of notable events that occurred during the 20th Century. Researchers and scholars during the 20th century helped create the academic field of nonviolence to compliment the direct work being performed in real life settings. One of the best known and influential scholars on nonviolence is Gene Sharp. Sharp was an American political scientist who protested the Korean War by not participating in the draft and spending time in prison.

It was afterwards, when he went to go and study in Oslo, that Sharp got very involved in studying nonviolence (specifically how teachers in Norway resisted against fascist education). Sharp went on to receive a Doctorate from Oxford University and in 1973, published a three volume work called “ The Politics of Nonviolent Action ”. It was in one of these volumes where he wrote 198 Methods of Nonviolent Actions, a groundbreaking work that is still referenced to this day and only recently has been updated for modern times. (Nonviolence International will be publishing a book on over 300 methods in 2021). Gene listed and wrote in detail 198 different ways people can perform nonviolent acts. Sharp is also credited for moving the work of Gandhi outside of religion and ethics courses and into political science and sociology departments. Institutes and other organizations are now active in promoting the theory of nonviolent philosophy. His writings are still used as training for nonviolent activists around the world even after his passing in 2018 and were cited in movements around the world over several decades.

Here is a short list of the organizations working to promote nonviolence worldwide.

Following Sharp’s inspiring example, other activists have gone on to create other institutes to promote the nonviolent philosophy for the younger generations. One example is the James Lawson Institute . This institute was created by Civil Rights activist James Lawson in collaboration with the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC) as a way for American activists and organizers to learn nonviolent disobedience. James Lawson personally was a major force in the American Civil Rights movement who worked personally with Dr. King.

The Center for Nonviolent Communications was created by psychologist Marshall Rosenberg and specializes specifically in nonviolent communications as a way to improve communications resulting in improved relationships, project planning and problem-solving. According to Rosenberg, nonviolent communications emphasizes a very positive view of human nature, and that an authentic human connection can overcome almost all problems, conflicts and obstacles. Thus, in essence, human behavior is based on common needs, and thus only optimized nonviolent communications are needed to make the most of the best that humanity has to give and thus overcome conflict and obstacles, and establish true human relations and intimacy. Thus Rosenberg’s organization teaches techniques and philosophy for optimizing communications that he pioneered for realizing the full potential of human relationship and life.

Another organization created by a nonviolent activist is Nonviolence International (or NVI). This international non-profit organization was founded by Mubarak Awad in the late 1980’s as a way to promote nonviolence around the world and to continue spreading the nonviolent philosophy he taught protesters in Palestine and to others willing to learn about nonviolence. Granted special consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council (Eco-Soc), NVI works with other Nonprofits and Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO) within UN Civil Society in such events as NGO-CSW and the HLPF. The NVI website contains many resources such as webinar series, training manuals, position papers, videos and backgrounders on UN-related events. One notable project from Nonviolence is an updated version of Gene Sharps 198 Methods of Nonviolent Actions by CEO Michael Beer. An academic in the field of nonviolence himself, Beer has trained many activists around the world (Tibet, USA, Thailand, etc.) on the practice of nonviolence. This book and online database exceeds the original 198 to over 300 nonviolent tactics as a result of Michael Beer’s extensive research which adds modern tactics better suited for this day and age.

The Martin Luther King jr. Research and Education Institute at Stanford University is where Martin Luther King’s nonviolent philosophy is provided open and free to the public for research and education. With the blessings of King’s wife, Coretta King, the institute holds the King Papers, being digitized into an online database years in the making (still not complete) this collection is a project with the goal of collecting all of MLKs writings (published and unpublished) in one database, and making it freely available to all to inspire and guide future social improvement and human rights work. Thus, many primary sources on MLK speeches, sermons and other writings are now freely available to the public.

Started by the Gandhi-King Foundation located in Hyderabad, India, and now based at the MLK Research and Education Institute in Stanford University, is the Gandhi-King Global Initiative . Beginning in October 2019 (the 150th anniversary of Gandhi's birthday), a large international conference was held to commemorate the event and served as the first big event of the global initiative. The purpose of the Gandhi-King Global Initiative is to create an international network of activists who aspire to continue advocating for nonviolence and international collaboration. Currently including almost 100 members in the global network, including family members of Gandhi, King, Chavez, Mandela, and staff of Awad’s organization, GKGI strives to utilize the latest in online and communications technology to encourage communications, cooperation and collaboration amongst it’s members and others to create online and in the world events (before and after the COVID-19 pandemic of course) promoting peace, justice, equality and nonviolence and celebrate diversity.

The Albert Einstein Institution was founded by nonviolent scholar Gene Sharp in 1983. The institution operated out of Gene’s home in East Boston, as a way to focus on “pragmatic nonviolent struggle”. Much of Gene Sharps publications, which includes 20 books, are available at the Einstein Institutes website. Sharp picked Einstein as the name given that he had come into contact with Einstein himself early in his life and in his career as an advocate of nonviolence. Sharp was arrested when he protested the Korean War draft and wrote a letter to Einstein - and the physicist agreed and responded back to Sharp in support of his antiwar stance. The institution holds workshops, consultations, conferences and more.

The International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (or ICNC) is a non-profit, educational foundation that provides resources on civil resistance for people around the world and from different backgrounds. Since its formation in 2002, scholars, activists, NGOs, policy analysts are among the groups welcomed to use the ICNC for learning more on nonviolence since 2002. Grants for researchers are also provided by the center as well. As mentioned earlier, the James Lawson Institute was formed in part thanks to the ICNC. From a resource library full of articles, to films and translated writings, the ICNC serves as an international library of nonviolence.

The nonviolence movements that went on during the 20th century laid the groundwork for the modern academic and organized field seen today. People who participated in different movements like Mubarak Awad in Palestine and James Lawson in the United States went on to set up institutes and organizations to continue promoting the nonviolence they learned. Thus their organizations publish works based on nonviolence and teach activists the same nonviolent tactics they learned during their time as activists in the streets of Palestine and America. Gandhi’s work in South Africa and successful campaign for Indian independence inspired Martin Luther King, Lawson and Cesar Chavez to implement that nonviolent philosophy in America. Thanks to Gene Sharp, the writings and actions of Gandhi were exposed to a much larger academic audience in America. That led to countless American students (to this day) learning about one of the best nonviolent campaigns and practitioners, ensuring Gandhi’s philosophy lives on in the minds of generations to come. Sharp's own work has been cited in countries around the world as a tool for combatting oppressive regimes. The Suffrage Parade, the first large, peaceful organized protest in D.C was planned by women challenging the incoming president to give them equal rights.Since then, countless other groups have taken action to march nonviolently across the capital as an open symbol of nonviolent civil disobedience. Today, younger generations can look back at these historic movements and continue the fundamental mission of using nonviolence to tackle injustice. In some cases being taught by the same activists from that period or the students/colleagues of those activists. All the institutes, resource websites and nonprofits aligned with nonviolence have ensured that the work of all those activists in the 20th century can also serve as a knowledge hub for those seeking a way of learning more on the nonviolent philosophy.

NonviolenceNY Publications

"Nonviolence and Racial Justice"

Author: King, Martin Luther, Jr.

Date: February 6, 1957

Location: Chicago, Ill.

Genre: Published Article

Topic: Nonviolence

On 26 November 1956 King submitted an article on nonviolence to Christian Century , a liberal weekly religious magazine. In his cover letter to editor Harold Fey, King noted that “it has just been within the last few days that I have been able to take a little time off to do some much needed writing. If you find it possible to publish this article, please feel free to make any suggestions concerning the content.” He added that the journal’s “sympathetic treatment” of the bus boycott had been of “inestimable value.” 1 On 31 January Fey thanked King for the “excellent” article, and he featured it as the main essay in an issue devoted to race relations. 2 Drawing from his many speeches on the topic, King provides here a concise summary of his views regarding nonviolent resistance to segregation. 3

It is commonly observed that the crisis in race relations dominates the arena of American life. This crisis has been precipitated by two factors: the determined resistance of reactionary elements in the south to the Supreme Court’s momentous decision outlawing segregation in the public schools, and the radical change in the Negro’s evaluation of himself. While southern legislative halls ring with open defiance through “interposition” and “nullification,” while a modern version of the Ku Klux KIan has arisen in the form of “respectable” white citizens’ councils, a revolutionary change has taken place in the Negro’s conception of his own nature and destiny. Once he thought of himself as an inferior and patiently accepted injustice and exploitation. Those days are gone.

The first Negroes landed on the shores of this nation in 1619, one year ahead of the Pilgrim Fathers. They were brought here from Africa and, unlike the Pilgrims, they were brought against their will, as slaves. Throughout the era of slavery the Negro was treated in inhuman fashion. He was considered a thing to be used, not a person to be respected. He was merely a depersonalized cog in a vast plantation machine. The famous Dred Scott decision of 1857 well illustrates his status during slavery. In this decision the Supreme Court of the United States said, in substance, that the Negro is not a citizen of the United States; he is merely property subject to the dictates of his owner.

After his emancipation in 1863, the Negro still confronted oppression and inequality. It is true that for a time, while the army of occupation remained in the south and Reconstruction ruled, he had a brief period of eminence and political power. But he was quickly overwhelmed by the white majority. Then in 1896, through the Plessy v. Ferguson decision, a new kind of slavery came into being. In this decision the Supreme Court of the nation established the doctrine of “separate but equal” as the law of the land. Very soon it was discovered that the concrete result of this doctrine was strict enforcement of the “separate,” without the slightest intention to abide by the “equal.” So the Plessy doctrine ended up plunging the Negro into the abyss of exploitation where he experienced the bleakness of nagging injustice.

A Peace That Was No Peace

Living under these conditions, many Negroes lost faith in themselves. They came to feel that perhaps they were less than human. So long as the Negro maintained this subservient attitude and accepted the “place” assigned him, a sort of racial peace existed. But it was an uneasy peace in which the Negro was forced patiently to submit to insult, injustice and exploitation. It was a negative peace. True peace is not merely the absence of some negative force—tension, confusion or war; it is the presence of some positive force—justice, good will and brotherhood.

Then circumstances made it necessary for the Negro to travel more. From the rural plantation he migrated to the urban industrial community. His economic life began gradually to rise, his crippling illiteracy gradually to decline. A myriad of factors came together to cause the Negro to take a new look at himself. Individually and as a group, he began to re-evaluate himself. And so he came to feel that he was somebody. His religion revealed to him that God loves all his children and that the important thing about a man is “not his specificity but his fundamentum,” not the texture of his hair or the color of his skin but the quality of his soul.

This new self-respect and sense of dignity on the part of the Negro undermined the south’s negative peace, since the white man refused to accept the change. The tension we are witnessing in race relations today can be explained in part by this revolutionary change in the Negro’s evaluation of himself and his determination to struggle and sacrifice until the walls of segregation have been finally crushed by the battering rams of justice.

Quest for Freedom Everywhere

The determination of Negro Americans to win freedom from every form of oppression springs from the same profound longing for freedom that motivates oppressed peoples all over the world. The rhythmic beat of deep discontent in Africa and Asia is at bottom a quest for freedom and human dignity on the part of people who have long been victims of colonialism. The struggle for freedom on the part of oppressed people in general and of the American Negro in particular has developed slowly and is not going to end suddenly. Privileged groups rarely give up their privileges without strong resistance. But when oppressed people rise up against oppression there is no stopping point short of full freedom. Realism compels us to admit that the struggle will continue until freedom is a reality for all the oppressed peoples of the world.

Hence the basic question which confronts the world’s oppressed is: How is the struggle against the forces of injustice to be waged? There are two possible answers. One is resort to the all too prevalent method of physical violence and corroding hatred. The danger of this method is its futility. Violence solves no social problems; it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Through the vistas of time a voice still cries to every potential Peter, “Put up your sword!" 4 The shores of history are white with the bleached bones of nations and communities that failed to follow this command. If the American Negro and other victims of oppression succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle for justice, unborn generations will live in a desolate night of bitterness, and their chief legacy will be an endless reign of chaos.

Alternative to Violence

The alternative to violence is nonviolent resistance. This method was made famous in our generation by Mohandas K. Gandhi, who used it to free India from the domination of the British empire. Five points can be made concerning nonviolence as a method in bringing about better racial conditions.

First, this is not a method for cowards; it does resist. The nonviolent resister is just as strongly opposed to the evil against which he protests as is the person who uses violence. His method is passive or nonaggressive in the sense that he is not physically aggressive toward his opponent. But his mind and emotions are always active, constantly seeking to persuade the opponent that he is mistaken. This method is passive physically but strongly active spiritually; it is nonaggressive physically but dynamically aggressive spiritually.

A second point is that nonviolent resistance does not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent, but to win his friendship and understanding. The nonviolent resister must often express his protest through noncooperation or boycotts, but he realizes that noncooperation and boycotts are not ends themselves; they are merely means to awaken a sense of moral shame in the opponent. The end is redemption and reconciliation. The aftermath of nonviolence is the creation of the beloved community, while the aftermath of violence is tragic bitterness.

A third characteristic of this method is that the attack is directed against forces of evil rather than against persons who are caught in those forces. It is evil we are seeking to defeat, not the persons victimized by evil. Those of us who struggle against racial injustice must come to see that the basic tension is not between races. As I like to say to the people in Montgomery, Alabama: “The tension in this city is not between white people and Negro people. The tension is at bottom between justice and injustice, between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. And if there is a victory it will be a victory not merely for 50,000 Negroes, but a victory for justice and the forces of light. We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may happen to be injust.”

A fourth point that must be brought out concerning nonviolent resistance is that it avoids not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. At the center of nonviolence stands the principle of love. In struggling for human dignity the oppressed people of the world must not allow themselves to become bitter or indulge in hate campaigns. To retaliate with hate and bitterness would do nothing but intensify the hate in the world. Along the way of life, someone must have sense enough and morality enough to cut off the chain of hate. This can be done only by projecting the ethics of love to the center of our lives.

The Meaning of ‘Love’

In speaking of love at this point, we are not referring to some sentimental emotion. It would be nonsense to urge men to love their oppressors in an affectionate sense. “Love” in this connection means understanding good will. There are three words for love in the Greek New Testament. 5 First, there is eros . In Platonic philosophy eros meant the yearning of the soul for the realm of the divine. It has come now to mean a sort of aesthetic or romantic love. Second, there is philia . It meant intimate affectionateness between friends. Philia denotes a sort of reciprocal love: the person loves because he is loved. When we speak of loving those who oppose us we refer to neither eros nor philia ; we speak of a love which is expressed in the Greek word agape . Agape means nothing sentimental or basically affectionate; it means understanding, redeeming good will for all men, an overflowing love which seeks nothing in return. It is the love of God working in the lives of men. When we love on the agape level we love men not because we like them, not because their attitudes and ways appeal to us, but because God loves them. Here we rise to the position of loving the person who does the evil deed while hating the deed he does. 6

Finally, the method of nonviolence is based on the conviction that the universe is on the side of justice. It is this deep faith in the future that causes the nonviolent resister to accept suffering without retaliation. He knows that in his struggle for justice he has cosmic companionship. This belief that God is on the side of truth and justice comes down to us from the long tradition of our Christian faith. There is something at the very center of our faith which reminds us that Good Friday may reign for a day, but ultimately it must give way to the triumphant beat of the Easter drums. Evil may so shape events that Caesar will occupy a palace and Christ a cross, but one day that same Christ will rise up and split history into A.D. and B.C., so that even the life of Caesar must be dated by his name. So in Montgomery we can walk and never get weary, because we know that there will be a great camp meeting in the promised land of freedom and justice. 7

This, in brief, is the method of nonviolent resistance. It is a method that challenges all people struggling for justice and freedom. God grant that we wage the struggle with dignity and discipline. May all who suffer oppression in this world reject the self-defeating method of retaliatory violence and choose the method that seeks to redeem. Through using this method wisely and courageously we will emerge from the bleak and desolate midnight of man’s inhumanity to man into the bright daybreak of freedom and justice.

1. For Christian Century articles supportive of the boycott see Harold Fey, “Negro Ministers Arrested,” 7 March 1956, pp. 294-295; “National Council Commends Montgomery Ministers,” 14 March 1956, p. 325; and “Segregation on Intrastate Buses Ruled Illegal,” 28 November 1956, p. 1379.

2. King’s draft of the article has not been located; the extent of Fey’s editing of it is therefore unknown. The previous September, Bayard Rustin had sent King a memorandum on the Christian duty to oppose segregation and urged him to send “something similar” to Christian Century (Rustin to King, 26 September 1956, in Papers 3:381-382).

3. In a 26 November 1957 letter to Dolores Gentile of King’s literary agency, Fey agreed to reassign the article’s copyright to allow King use of the material for his book on the bus boycott, Stride Toward Freedom . Much of the article’s substance, especially King’s discussion of the “Alternative to Violence” appeared in the book (see Stride , pp. 102-107). Note also the parallels between this article and King’s 27 June 1958 speech, “Nonviolence and Racial Justice,” delivered at the AFSC general conference in Cape May, New Jersey; it was published in the 26 July 1958 issue of Friends Journal .

4. John 18:11.

5. While the Greek language has three words for love, eros does not appear in the Greek New Testament.

6. Cf. Fosdick, On Being Fit to Live With: Sermons on Post-war Christianity (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1946), pp. 16-17.

7. In a similar discussion in Stride Toward Freedom , King included an additional element of nonviolence: “The nonviolent resister is willing to accept violence if necessary, but never to inflict it. He does not seek to dodge jail. . . . Suffering, the nonviolent resister realizes, has tremendous educational and transforming possibilities” (p. 103).

Source: Christian Century 74 (6 February 1957): 165-167.

COMPASS Manual for Human Rights Education with Young people

Peace and violence.

Violence: concepts and examples

What is violence.

Violence is a complex concept. Violence is often understood as the use or threat of force that can result in injury, harm, deprivation or even death. It may be physical, verbal or psychological. The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines violence as "intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation". 1 This definition emphasises intentionality, and broadens the concept to include acts resulting from power relationships.

8 million light weapons are produced each year. 2 bullets are produced each year for every person on the planet. 2 out of 3 people killed by armed violence die in countries "at peace". 10 people are injured for every person killed by armed violence. Estimates from www.controlarms.org

An expanded understanding of violence includes not only direct "behavioural" violence, but also structural violence, which is often unconscious. Structural violence results from unjust and inequitable social and economic structures and manifesting itself in for example, poverty and deprivation of all kinds.

Forms of violence can be categorised in many ways. One such classification includes:

direct violence, e.g. physical or behavioural violence such as war, bullying, domestic violence, exclusion or torture
structural violence, e.g. poverty and deprivation of basic resources and access to rights; oppressive systems that enslave, intimidate, and abuse dissenters as well as the poor, powerless and marginalised
cultural violence, e.g. the devaluing and destruction of particular human identities and ways of life, the violence of sexism, ethnocentrism, racism and colonial ideologies, and other forms of moral exclusion that rationalise aggression, domination, inequity, and oppression.

Question: Are direct, structural and/or cultural violence present in your community? How?

Today's human rights violations are the causes of tomorrow's conflicts. Mary Robinson

Violence in the world

Each year, more than 1.6 million people worldwide lose their lives to violence. For every person who dies as a result of violence, many more are injured and suffer from a range of physical, sexual, reproductive and mental health problems. Violence places a massive burden on national economies in health care, law enforcement and lost productivity. World Health Organisation 2

Structural and cultural forms of violence are often deeply impregnated in societies to the point of being perceived as inherent. This type of violence lasts longer, thus eventually having similar consequences as direct violence, or, in some cases, even leading to the oppressed using direct violence as a response. Lower education opportunities in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, limited access to leisure for foreigners, harmful working conditions in certain fields of work, and so on, are acts of structural and cultural violence which have a direct influence on people's access to their rights. Yet these forms of violence are rarely recognised as violations of human rights. What follows are some examples about different forms of violence worldwide. These are not the only ones. More information about the effects of armed conflicts can be found in War and Terrorism and in various other sections of this manual.

Military spending, arms trade and violence

The production and trade in arms and weapons is undoubtedly one of the greatest threats to peace, not least because of the economic, financial and social dimensions of arms production. The production and export of arms is often encouraged on economic grounds with little con- sideration to the impact on peace and security. World military spending is steadily increasing; in 2014 the world spent an estimated €1776 billion on the military. The database of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute3 shows in 2014 the USA (€610 billion) as the biggest military spender, followed by China (€216 billion) and then three European countries, Russia ($84 billion) the United Kingdom ($60 billion) and France (€62 billion). Europe as a whole spent $386 billion.

Data from the Overseas Development Institute (www.odi.org ) shows that we could deliver free primary and secondary education in all the poor countries around the world for $32 billion per year, this is less than a single week's global military spending.

Question: How much does your country of residence spend on arms production and purchases annually?

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that at least 740,000 women, men, young people and children are killed each year by armed violence; most of those affected live in poverty. The majority of armed killings occur outside of wars, although armed conflicts continue to generate a high number of deaths. Moreover, a huge number of people are injured by armed violence and face long-term suffering because of it. According to Amnesty International, about 60% of human rights violations documented by the organisation have involved the use of small arms and light weapons. 4

Controlling Arms Trade Control Arms is a global civil society alliance campaigning for an international legally-binding treaty that will stop the transfer of arms and ammunition. The campaign emphasises that domestic regulations have failed to adapt to increasing globalisation of the arms trade since different parts of weapons are produced in different places and transferred to other countries to be assembled. Control Arms is calling for a "bulletproof" Arms Trade Treaty that would hold governments accountable for illegal arms transfers. www.controlarms.org

A form of inter-personal violence, bullying is one of the forms of violence that affects young people and is often not considered as a form of violence. Bullying refers to aggressive behaviour which is repeated and intends to hurt someone. It can take the form of physical, psychological or verbal aggression. It can take place in any situation where human beings interact, be it at school, at the workplace or any other social place. Bullying can be direct, confronting a person face-to-face, or indirect by spreading rumours or harming someone over the Internet, for example. Although it is difficult to have clear statistics, research shows that bullying is an increasing problem. Victims often do not dare to speak out, and it is therefore extremely difficult to identify and support victims of bullying.

Is corporal punishment legitimate?

Corporal punishment is the most widespread form of violence against children and is a violation of their human rights. In the past, some argued that smacking was a harmless form of punishment which enabled parents to educate their children, whereas others considered it a violent form of physical punishment. The Council of Europe campaign Raise Your Hand Against Smacking provoked strong debates in Member States, and took a human rights stand against this practice.

Gender-based violence

More information about gender and gender-based violence, can be found in the section on Gender, in chapter 5, and in the manual Gender Matters, www.coe.int/compass

While male-dominated societies often justify small arms possession through the alleged need to protect vulnerable women, women actually face greater danger of violence when their families and communities are armed. Barbara Frey 6

Gender-based violence is one of the most frequent forms of structural and cultural violence. It is present in every society and its consequences affect virtually all human beings. According to the UNFPA, gender-based violence "both reflects and reinforces inequities between men and women and compromises the health, dignity, security and autonomy of its victims. It encompasses a wide range of human rights violations, including sexual abuse of children, rape, domestic violence, sexual assault and harassment, trafficking of women and girls and several harmful traditional practices. Any one of these abuses can leave deep psychological scars, damage the health of women and girls in general, including their reproductive and sexual health, and in some instances, results in death" 5 . Gender-based violence does not have to be physical. In fact, young people suffer much verbal violence, especially targeted at LGBT (young) people and girls.

Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and to strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels. Article 1 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders

In situations of conflict, women become particularly vulnerable and new forms of violence against women emerge. These can range from mass rape to forced sexual assaults, forced pregnancy, or sexual slavery. The polarisation of gender roles during armed conflicts is increased, women thus being seen as objects of war and territories to be conquered.

Violence Against Human Rights Defenders

Useful information for human rights defenders: www.frontlinedefenders.org/ www.amnesty.org/en/human-rights-defenders www.ohchr.org http://www.civilrightsdefenders.org

Investigating, reporting human rights violations and educating people about human rights and campaigning for justice can be dangerous work. Human rights defenders are people who individually, or with others, promote and protect human rights through peaceful and non-violent means. Because of their work, human rights defenders can be subjected to different types of violence, including beatings, arbitrary arrest or execution, torture, death threats, harassment and defamation, or restrictions on their freedom of expression, and association. In 2000, the United Nations established a Special Rapporteur whose main mission is to support implementation of the 1998 Declaration on human rights defenders. The "protection" of human rights defenders includes protecting the defenders themselves and the right to defend human rights. The Special Rapporteur seeks, receives, examines and responds to information on the situation of human rights defenders, promotes the effective implementation of the Declaration and recommends strategies to protect human rights defenders. 7

Question: How free and safe is it to report or denounce human rights abuse and violations in your country?

If you look at them [conflicts] and remove the superficial levels of religion and politics, quite often it is a question of trying to access resources, trying to control those resources, and trying to decide how those resources will be shared. Wangari Maathai

The fight for resources

The possession of or control over natural resources such as water, arable land, mineral oil, metals, natural gas, and so on, have often fuelled violent conflicts throughout history. The depletion of certain resources and the shortage of others, such as water or arable land, is expected to become more widespread due to growth of consumption and climate change. This may create more regional or international tensions, potentially leading to violent conflicts.

Question: How is your country part of the competition for scarce resources?

Peace, human security and human rights

War and violence inevitably result in the denial of human rights. Building a culture of human rights is a pre-condition to achieving a state of peace. Sustainable, lasting peace and security can only be attained when all human rights are fulfilled. Building and maintaining a culture of peace is a shared challenge for humankind.

What is peace?

A culture of peace will be achieved when citizens of the world understand global problems, have the skills to resolve conflicts and struggle for justice non-violently, live by international standards of human rights and equity, appreciate cultural diversity, and respect the Earth and each other. Such learning can only be achieved with systematic education for peace. Global Campaign for Peace Education of the Hague Appeal for Peace

FIAN is an international human rights organisation that has advocated for the realisation of the right to food. www.fian.org

The above campaign statement offers a broader understanding of peace: peace means not only the lack of violent conflicts, but also the presence of justice and equity, as well as respect for human rights and for the Earth. Johan Galtung, a recognised Norwegian scholar and researcher, defined two aspects of peace. Negative peace means that there is no war, no violent conflict between states or within states. Positive peace means no war or violent conflict combined with a situation where there is equity, justice and development. The absence of war by itself does not guarantee that people do not suffer psychological violence, repression, injustice and a lack of access to their rights. Therefore, peace cannot be defined only by negative peace.

The concept of peace also has an important cultural dimension. Traditionally, for many people in the "western world", peace is generally understood to be an outside condition., while in other cultures, peace also has to do with inner peace (peace in our minds or hearts). In the Maya tradition, for example, peace refers to the concept of welfare; it is linked to the idea of a perfect balance between the different areas of our lives. Peace, therefore, is to be seen as both internal and external processes which affect us.

Human security

A concept closely related to peace and violence is human security, which recognises the interrelation between violence and deprivation of all kinds. It concerns the protection of individuals and communities from both the direct threat of physical violence and the indirect threats that result from poverty and other forms of social, economic or political inequalities, as well as natural disasters and disease. A country may not be under threat of external attack or internal conflict but still be insecure if, for example, it lacks the capacity to maintain the rule of law, if large populations are displaced by famine or decimated by disease or if its people lack the basic necessities of survival and access to their human rights.

Human security furthers human rights because it addresses situations that gravely threaten human rights and supports the development of systems that give people the building blocks of survival, dignity and essential freedoms: freedom from want, freedom from fear and freedom to take action on one's own behalf. It uses two general strategies to accomplish this: protection and empowerment. Protection shields people from direct dangers, but also seeks to develop norms, processes and institutions that maintain security. Empowerment enables people to develop their potential and become full participants in decision making. Protection and empowerment are mutually reinforcing, and both are required.

Question: How does insecurity affect the young people with whom you work?

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the UN in 2015 recognise the important role of security for development. SDG 16, sometimes shortened to “Peace and Justice” is to “promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”. There are 10 targets, for instance 16.1 to reduce all forms of violence, 16.2 end abuse and all forms of violence against and torture of children. The full list of targets is in the further information section of the activity, “How much do we need?”.

The linkages between SDG 16 and human rights are:

Right to life, liberty and security of the person [UDHR art. 3; ICCPR arts. 6(1), 9(1);
ICPED art. 1] including freedom from torture [UDHR art. 5; ICCPR art. 7; CAT art. 2; CRC art. 37(a)]
Protection of children from all forms of violence, abuse or exploitation [CRC arts. 19, 37(a)), including trafficking (CRC arts. 34-36; CRC–OP1)]
Right to access to justice and due process [UDHR arts. 8, 10; ICCPR arts. 2(3), 14-15; CEDAW art. 2(c)]
Right to legal personality [UDHR art. 6; ICCPR art. 16; CRPD art. 12]
Right to participate in public affairs [UDHR art. 21; ICCPR art. 25]
Right to access to information [UDHR art. 19; ICCPR art. 19(1)] (www.ohchr.org)

Peace as a human right

Peace is a way of living together so that all members of society can accomplish their human rights. It is as an essential element to the realisation of all human rights. Peace is a product of human rights: the more a society promotes, protects and fulfils the human rights of its people, the greater its chances for curbing violence and resolving conflicts peacefully. However, peace is also increasingly being recognised as a human right itself, as an emerging human right or part of the so-called solidarity rights.

Non-violence is the supreme law of life. Indian proverb

All peoples shall have the right to national and international peace and security. African Charter on Human and People's Rights, Article 23

The connection between international human rights and the right to peace is very strong, notably because the absence of peace leads to so many violations of human rights. The UDHR recognises, for example, the right to security and freedom (Article 3); prohibits torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 5), and calls for an international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in the declaration can be fully realised (Article 28). The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits propaganda for war as well as "advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence" (Article 20). The right to peace is also codified in some regional documents such as the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and the Asian Human Rights Charter. The creation of the Council of Europe was itself based on the conviction that "the pursuit of peace based upon justice and international co-operation is vital for the preservation of human society and civilisation".

The right to peace in UN Human Rights Council "The Human Rights Council … 1. Reaffirms that the peoples of our planet have a sacred right to peace; 2. Also reaffirms that the preservation of the right of peoples to peace and the promotion of its implementation constitute a fundamental obliga- tion of all States; 3. Stresses the importance of peace for the promotion and protection of all human rights for all; 4. Also stresses that the deep fault line that divides human society between the rich and the poor and the ever-increasing gap between the de- veloped world and the developing world pose a major threat to global prosperity, peace, human rights, security and stability; 5. Further stresses that peace and security, development and human rights are the pillars of the United Nations system and the foundations for collective security and well-being; …" 11

The opposite of violence isn't non-violence, it's power. When one has moral power, power of conviction, the power to do good, one doesn't need violence. 9 Nelsa Libertad Curbelo 10

Human security is a child who did not die, a disease that did not spread, a job that was not cut, an ethnic tension that did not explode in violence, a dissident who was not silenced. Human security is not a concern with weapons – it is a concern with human life and dignity. Human Development Report, 1994

The Santiago Declaration on the Human Right to Peace, adopted in 2010 by The International Congress on the Human Right to Peace, is one of the most elaborate documents on peace as a human right. The declaration recognises individuals, groups, peoples and all humankind as holders of the "inalienable right to a just, sustainable and lasting peace" (Art. 1) and "States, individually, jointly or as part of multilateral organisations", as the principal duty holders of the human right to peace". The declaration also calls for the right to education "on and for peace and all other human rights" as a component of the right to peace because "education and socialization for peace is a condition sine qua non for unlearning war and building identities disentangled from violence". The right to human security and the right to live in a safe and healthy environment, "including freedom from fear and from want" are also put forward as elements of "positive peace". Other dimensions of the right to peace are the right to disobedience and conscientious objection, the right to resist and oppose oppression and the right to disarmament. The declaration also devotes a specific article to the rights of victims, including their right to seek justice and a breakdown of the obligations entailed in the human right to peace.

Question: In practice, what does the human right to peace mean for you?

Legitimate (state) violence

Not all violence is illegal or illegitimate. Violent acts are sometimes necessary in order to protect the human rights of other people. I may have to use violence for self-defence; I expect a policeman to use, in extreme cases, some kind of violence to protect me or my family from violence from other people. My human right to security implies that the state and its agents protect me from violence. A human rights framework implies that violent actions by state or public agents is justified (and sometimes required), provided that it is organised and enacted within a human rights framework, including respect for the rights of the victim.

All persons have a right to peace so that they can fully develop all their capacities, physical, intellectual, moral and spiritual, without being the target of any kind of violence. Asian Human Rights Charter, 1998, paragraph 4.1

This raises questions about the primacy of some human rights over others: the right to life is a clear human right, and still in many cases, human beings are being punished violently or killed, as a consequence of their acts. Examples from throughout history illustrate how civil movements have brought about change and better access to people's human rights. However, peaceful movements are often suppressed by violent police or army action. Repressing people's right to freedom of expression and association. The "Arab Spring" movements initiated in 2011 showed how youth in Tunisia, Egypt and other Arab countries gathered and peacefully reclaimed their human rights, but were violently attacked and put into detention by state armed forces, many losing their lives.

Question: When is armed intervention by policy justified?

Starvation is the characteristic of some people not having enough to eat. It is not the characteristic of there not being enough to eat. Amartya Sen

From a human rights perspective, the deprivation of the liberty of a person as a consequence of a criminal offence does not take away their inherent humanity. This is why the measures taken by the state against people who have acted violently against others must not be arbitrary, must respect their inherent dignity, and must protect these persons against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. One of the aims of detention is the social rehabilitation of prisoners.

I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. Ghandi

The rule of law and protection of human rights and freedoms are crucial safeguards for an effective and just criminal justice system. Yet, while protecting the innocent 12 , custody and imprisonment are often also, unfortunately, the places where human rights violations appear. According to human rights standards, in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child, specific rehabilitation mechanisms must be put in place for young offenders, such as "laws, procedures, authorities and institutions specifically applicable to children alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law" (Art. 40). This, however, is not always the case. According to Penal Reform International, the way authorities deal with young offenders can often lead to long-term physical and psychological ill-health. For example, exposure to violent behaviour in detention and separation from families and community may undermine the idea of rehabilitation and push them further into criminal activities. Based on the UNICEF estimates, today there are more than one million children in detention worldwide.

Question: Can imprisonment be an effective way to rehabilitate and educate children and young people who have committed a criminal offence?

Death penalty

The death penalty is forbidden by the European Convention on Human Rights as well as in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Protocol 1). Outlawing the death penalty does not justify human rights violations. It is also based on the belief that violence cannot be fought with more violence. The outlawing of the death penalty is also a statement about the infallibility of justice: history shows that judicial mistakes are always possible and that there is the risk that the wrong person may be executed. However, the outlawing of the death penalty is also a testament to the belief of the right to life and dignity - and to a fair trial.

Penal Reform International is an international non-governmental organisation working on penal and criminal justice reform worldwide. www.penalreform.org

In 2011, 1,923 people in 63 countries were known to have been sentenced to death and 676 executions were known to have been carried out in 20 countries. However, the 676 figure does not include the perhaps thousands of people that Amnesty International estimates have been executed in China. 13 Belarus is the only country in Europe that in 2012 still carried out executions. According to Amnesty International, prisoners on death row in Belarus are told that they will be executed only minutes before the sentence is carried out. They are executed by a shot to the back of the head. The family members are informed only after execution, and the place of burial is kept in secret.

Young people and a culture of peace

Conflict transformation, reconciliation, peace education, and remembrance are part of the actions that carry the hope for a life free from violence and for a culture of peace. We have to learn from the past and make efforts to avoid the reoccurrence of terrible events against humanity which previous generations lived through. There are still local wars and armed conflicts in some places of the world. It is comforting to know that we are not defenceless and that we have tools to eliminate violence. Young people play an important role in this change.

Only societies based on democracy, the rule of law and human rights can provide sustainable long-term stability and peace. Thorbjørn Jagland, Secretary General of the Council of Europe

The Council of Europe works to promote social justice, and to avoid the escalation of violent conflicts and prevent wars and terrorist activities. The organisation encourages political leaders and civil society to build and nourish a culture of peace instead of a culture of violence and it raises awareness of the cost of violence, the perspectives of a peaceful future, the importance of democracy and democratic skills, as well as promoting humanism, human dignity, freedom and solidarity.

The Council of Europe's youth sector has over 40 years of experience in working on intercultural learning, conflict transformation and human rights education. The adoption by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe of the White Paper on Intercultural Dialogue "Living Together as Equals in Dignity", confirmed the political relevance of these approaches, and emphasised the need for dialogue between cultures for the development and safeguarding of peaceful societies.

Meet your own prejudice! Instead of talking about it, simply meet it. The Living Library Organiser's Guide 14

The 7th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Youth (Budapest, 2005) was devoted to youth policy responses to violence. In the final declaration, the ministers agreed, amongst others, on the importance of taking stock of all forms of violence and of their impact on people, on the need to develop violence-prevention strategies and to recognise young people as actors in violence prevention, "whilst raising their sense of responsibility and actively promoting their participation and co-operation" in this domain. The declaration also recognises human rights education as containing an essential dimension of violence prevention. The ministerial conference was the culmination of a project against violence in daily life which resulted in various educational instruments and initiatives to prevent and address violence, such as the manual for Living Library organisers.

As peace ambassadors we should become the eyes and ears of the Coun-cil of Europe in our countries and in Europe. Zlata Kharitonova, participant in Youth Peace Ambassadors

The youth sector of the Council of Europe has also initiated and supported youth-led projects addressing conflict and promoting peace education. The Youth Peace Camp has been running since 2004, and brings together young people from different conflicting areas to engage in dialogue on the understanding that they share common values and experiences, often very painful ones. The programme helps youth leaders to recognise and address prejudice, combating aggressive and exclusive forms of nationalism, and implementing intercultural learning and human rights education. For some of the participants this is the first time in their lives that they have talked face-to-face with young people from "the other side". The camp is now held annually at the European Youth Centre and occasionally in member states.

Multiplying peace education After the Youth Peace Camp 2011, six Israeli and Palestinian participants decided to keep meeting on the cease fire or so-called "green line". Every month other young people from both sides join the afternoon meeting, which includes discussions, sharing personal stories and having fun. As a joint group they engage in community work on both sides of the line, each time in a different community on a different side, always in a community affected somehow by the ongoing conflict.

The Youth Peace Ambassadors project, initiated in 2011, engages youth leaders in specific grassroots level peace education projects with young people, aiming at transforming conflict situations in their realities. The project is built on a network of specifically trained young people who strengthen the presence and promote the values of the Council of Europe in conflict-affected areas and communities.

Undoing Hate In the last two years, the streets of Prijepolje, a multicultural town in Serbia, became surrounded by "wrong" graffiti, filled with hate speech towards foreigners and people with different religions (Muslim and Orthodox). Most of the graffiti is written by boys from 2 different hooligan groups. My project brings together 10 boys, aged 14 – 18, from both a hooligan group and ethnic/religious minorities, who will redecorate the town by using graffiti to undo the hate graffiti which was put up in various places. While doing so, a peace-building documentary will be filmed. This project should help to create a strong basis for peace building, mutual understanding and tolerance. Edo Sadikovic, JUMP organisation, Serbia (Youth Peace Ambassador's project)

Networks for peace

The following are some examples to consider the variety, seriousness and creativity of peace builders and human rights defenders.

Combatants for Peace – is a movement which was started jointly by Palestinians and Israelis who have taken an active part in the cycle of violence and now fight for peace.

Search for Common Ground implements conflict-transformation programmes.

Responding to Conflict provides training for conflict transformation. Inspiring examples of and study notes for conducting training can be found on their website.

The Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict is a global network seeking a new international consensus on moving from reaction to prevention of violent conflict.

The United Network of Young Peacebuilders is a network of youth-led organisations working towards establishing peaceful societies.

1 World report on violence and health, WHO 2002, Geneva p 5: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2002/9241545615.pdf 2 www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/en/ 3 Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI): www.sipri.se 4 http://controlarms.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/killer_facts_en.pdf 5 www.unfpa.org/gender/violence.htm 6 Progress report of Barbara Frey, UN Special Rapporteur, "Prevention of human rights violations committed with small arms and light weapons", UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2004/37, 21 June 2004, para 50 7 Source: www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/SRHRDefenders/ 8 Evans, A., Resource scarcity, fair shares and development, WWF / Oxfam, Discussion paper, 2011 9 From the film Barrio De Paz 10 Nelsa Libertad Curbelo is a former nun and street gang mediator in Ecuador 11 UN General Asembly, 15 July 2011, Document A/HRC/RES/1/7/16 of the Human Rights Council 12 Based on the UK criminal Justice systems aims, see: http://ybtj.justice.gov.uk/ 13 Amnesty International death penalty statistics 14 Don't judge a book by its cover – the Living Library Organiser's Guide, Abergel R. et al, Council of Europe Publishing, 2005

Image2: Theme 'Peace and Violence' by Pancho

Download Compass

Violence: Concepts and examples
12 February Red Hand Day
21 March International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
15 May International Day of Conscientious Objection
29 May International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers
4 June International Day of Innocent Children Victims of Aggression
26 June United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture
6 August Hiroshima Day
21 September International Day of Peace
2 October International Day of Non-Violence
10 October World Day Against the Death Penalty
24-30 October Disarmament Week
9 November International Day Against Fascism and Antisemitism
11 November International Day of Science and Peace
25 November International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women
2 December International Day for the Abolition of Slavery

Search the United Nations

UN Observances

The “Non-Violence” (or “Knotted Gun”) sculpture.

Let us remember Gandhi’s wise counsel: “Our ability to reach unity in diversity will be the beauty and the test of our civilization.” Let us heed his words today and re-commit ourselves to this essential purpose. UN Secretary-General António Guterres

Say No to Violence

The International Day of Non-Violence is observed on 2 October, the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian independence movement and pioneer of the philosophy and strategy of non-violence.

According to General Assembly resolution A/RES/61/271 of 15 June 2007, which established the commemoration, the International Day is an occasion to "disseminate the message of non-violence, including through education and public awareness". The resolution reaffirms "the universal relevance of the principle of non-violence" and the desire "to secure a culture of peace, tolerance, understanding and non-violence".

Introducing the resolution in the General Assembly on behalf of 140 co-sponsors, India’s Minister of State for External Affairs, Mr. Anand Sharma, said that the wide and diverse sponsorship of the resolution was a reflection of the universal respect for Mahatma Gandhi and of the enduring relevance of his philosophy. Quoting the late leader’s own words, he said: "Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man".

International Day of Non-Violence: UN Stamp

Gandhi and the struggle for non-violence

The name of Mahatma Gandhi transcends the bounds of race, religion and nation-states, and has emerged as the prophetic voice of the twenty-first century. The world remembers Gandhi not just for his passionate adherence to the practice of non-violence and supreme humanism, but as the benchmark against which we test men and women in public life, political ideas and government policies, and the hopes and wishes of our shared planet.

The life and leadership of Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhi, who helped lead India to independence, has been the inspiration for non-violent movements for civil rights and social change across the world. Throughout his life, Gandhi remained committed to his belief in non-violence even under oppressive conditions and in the face of seemingly insurmountable challenges.

The theory behind his actions, which included encouraging massive civil disobedience to British law as with the historic Salt March of 1930, was that "just means lead to just ends"; that is, it is irrational to try to use violence to achieve a peaceful society. He believed that Indians must not use violence or hatred in their fight for freedom from colonialism.

Definition of Non-Violence

The principle of non-violence — also known as non-violent resistance — rejects the use of physical violence in order to achieve social or political change. Often described as "the politics of ordinary people", this form of social struggle has been adopted by mass populations all over the world in campaigns for social justice.

Professor Gene Sharp , a leading scholar on non-violent resistance, uses the following definition in his publication, The Politics of Nonviolent Action :

"Nonviolent action is a technique by which people who reject passivity and submission, and who see struggle as essential, can wage their conflict without violence. Nonviolent action is not an attempt to avoid or ignore conflict. It is one response to the problem of how to act effectively in politics, especially how to wield powers effectively."

While non-violence is frequently used as a synonym for pacifism, since the mid-twentieth century the term non-violence has been adopted by many movements for social change which do not focus on opposition to war.

One key tenet of the theory of non-violence is that the power of rulers depends on the consent of the population, and non-violence therefore seeks to undermine such power through withdrawal of the consent and cooperation of the populace.

There are three main categories of non-violence action:

protest and persuasion, including marches and vigils;
non-cooperation; and
non-violent intervention, such as blockades and occupations.

Mahatma Gandhi Quotes

Poverty is the worst form of violence.
Non-violence is a weapon of the strong.
Non-violence and truth are inseparable and presuppose one another.
We may never be strong enough to be entirely nonviolent in thought, word and deed. But we must keep nonviolence as our goal and make strong progress towards it.

Relevance of Mahatma Gandhi in the Contemporary World

Key Documents

General Assembly Resolution on International Day of Non-Violence (A/RES/61/271)
International Decade for a Culture of Peace and Non-violence for the Children of the World (2001–2010)
Declaration on the Right of People to Peace
Declaration and Programme of Action on a Culture of Peace
General Assembly resolutions on non-violence

Related Websites

United Nations Peacekeeping
United Nations and the Nobel Peace Prize
UN Messengers of Peace

Culture of Peace and Non-violence

Sustainable Development Goals
GANDHI SMRITI AND DARSHAN SAMITI

Related Observances

International Day of Sport for Development and Peace （6 April）
International Day of Living Together in Peace （16 May）
World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development （21 May）
International Day of Peace （21 September）
International Day for Tolerance （16 November）
International Human Solidarity Day （20 December）
World Interfaith Harmony Week （1-7 February）
International Decade for the Rapprochement of Cultures (2013-2022)

Establishing a culture of peace and sustainable development are at the heart of UNESCO’s mandate. Training and research in sustainable development are among the priorities, as well as human rights education, skills for peaceful relations, good governance, Holocaust remembrance, the prevention of conflict and peace building.

#KindnessMatters

The # KindnessMatters campaign was launched on the International Day of Non-Violence in 2018 and so far more than 5 million acts of kindness have been performed across the world! #KindnessMatters Campaign aims to mobilize young people to carry out transformative acts of kindness to tackle the SDGs and create a positive culture of kindness.

an abstract illustration of people engaged in an event

Why do we mark International Days?

International days and weeks are occasions to educate the public on issues of concern, to mobilize political will and resources to address global problems, and to celebrate and reinforce achievements of humanity. The existence of international days predates the establishment of the United Nations, but the UN has embraced them as a powerful advocacy tool. We also mark other UN observances .

December 2, 2021

Peace Is More Than War’s Absence, and New Research Explains How to Build It

A new project measures ways to promote positive social relations among groups

By Peter T. Coleman , Allegra Chen-Carrel & Vincent Hans Michael Stueber

PeopleImages/Getty Images

Today, the misery of war is all too striking in places such as Syria, Yemen, Tigray, Myanmar and Ukraine. It can come as a surprise to learn that there are scores of sustainably peaceful societies around the world, ranging from indigenous people in the Xingu River Basin in Brazil to countries in the European Union. Learning from these societies, and identifying key drivers of harmony, is a vital process that can help promote world peace.

Unfortunately, our current ability to find these peaceful mechanisms is woefully inadequate. The Global Peace Index (GPI) and its complement the Positive Peace Index (PPI) rank 163 nations annually and are currently the leading measures of peacefulness. The GPI, launched in 2007 by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), was designed to measure negative peace , or the absence of violence, destructive conflict, and war. But peace is more than not fighting. The PPI, launched in 2009, was supposed to recognize this and track positive peace , or the promotion of peacefulness through positive interactions like civility, cooperation and care.

Yet the PPI still has many serious drawbacks. To begin with, it continues to emphasize negative peace, despite its name. The components of the PPI were selected and are weighted based on existing national indicators that showed the “strongest correlation with the GPI,” suggesting they are in effect mostly an extension of the GPI. For example, the PPI currently includes measures of factors such as group grievances, dissemination of false information, hostility to foreigners, and bribes.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The index also lacks an empirical understanding of positive peace. The PPI report claims that it focuses on “positive aspects that create the conditions for a society to flourish.” However, there is little indication of how these aspects were derived (other than their relationships with the GPI). For example, access to the internet is currently a heavily weighted indicator in the PPI. But peace existed long before the internet, so is the number of people who can go online really a valid measure of harmony?

The PPI has a strong probusiness bias, too. Its 2021 report posits that positive peace “is a cross-cutting facilitator of progress, making it easier for businesses to sell.” A prior analysis of the PPI found that almost half the indicators were directly related to the idea of a “Peace Industry,” with less of a focus on factors found to be central to positive peace such as gender inclusiveness, equity and harmony between identity groups.

A big problem is that the index is limited to a top-down, national-level approach. The PPI’s reliance on national-level metrics masks critical differences in community-level peacefulness within nations, and these provide a much more nuanced picture of societal peace . Aggregating peace data at the national level, such as focusing on overall levels of inequality rather than on disparities along specific group divides, can hide negative repercussions of the status quo for minority communities.

To fix these deficiencies, we and our colleagues have been developing an alternative approach under the umbrella of the Sustaining Peace Project . Our effort has various components , and these can provide a way to solve the problems in the current indices. Here are some of the elements:

Evidence-based factors that measure positive and negative peace. The peace project began with a comprehensive review of the empirical studies on peaceful societies, which resulted in identifying 72 variables associated with sustaining peace. Next, we conducted an analysis of ethnographic and case study data comparing “peace systems,” or clusters of societies that maintain peace with one another, with nonpeace systems. This allowed us to identify and measure a set of eight core drivers of peace. These include the prevalence of an overarching social identity among neighboring groups and societies; their interconnections such as through trade or intermarriage; the degree to which they are interdependent upon one another in terms of ecological, economic or security concerns; the extent to which their norms and core values support peace or war; the role that rituals, symbols and ceremonies play in either uniting or dividing societies; the degree to which superordinate institutions exist that span neighboring communities; whether intergroup mechanisms for conflict management and resolution exist; and the presence of political leadership for peace versus war.

A core theory of sustaining peace . We have also worked with a broad group of peace, conflict and sustainability scholars to conceptualize how these many variables operate as a complex system by mapping their relationships in a causal loop diagram and then mathematically modeling their core dynamics This has allowed us to gain a comprehensive understanding of how different constellations of factors can combine to affect the probabilities of sustaining peace.

Bottom-up and top-down assessments . Currently, the Sustaining Peace Project is applying techniques such as natural language processing and machine learning to study markers of peace and conflict speech in the news media. Our preliminary research suggests that linguistic features may be able to distinguish between more and less peaceful societies. These methods offer the potential for new metrics that can be used for more granular analyses than national surveys.

We have also been working with local researchers from peaceful societies to conduct interviews and focus groups to better understand the in situ dynamics they believe contribute to sustaining peace in their communities. For example in Mauritius , a highly multiethnic society that is today one of the most peaceful nations in Africa, we learned of the particular importance of factors like formally addressing legacies of slavery and indentured servitude, taboos against proselytizing outsiders about one’s religion, and conscious efforts by journalists to avoid divisive and inflammatory language in their reporting.

Today, global indices drive funding and program decisions that impact countless lives, making it critical to accurately measure what contributes to socially just, safe and thriving societies. These indices are widely reported in news outlets around the globe, and heads of state often reference them for their own purposes. For example, in 2017 , Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, though he and his country were mired in corruption allegations, referenced his country’s positive increase on the GPI by stating, “Receiving such high praise from an institute that once named this country the most violent in the world is extremely significant.” Although a 2019 report on funding for peace-related projects shows an encouraging shift towards supporting positive peace and building resilient societies, many of these projects are really more about preventing harm, such as grants for bolstering national security and enhancing the rule of law.

The Sustaining Peace Project, in contrast, includes metrics for both positive and negative peace, is enhanced by local community expertise, and is conceptually coherent and based on empirical findings. It encourages policy makers and researchers to refocus attention and resources on initiatives that actually promote harmony, social health and positive reciprocity between groups. It moves away from indices that rank entire countries and instead focuses on identifying factors that, through their interaction, bolster or reduce the likelihood of sustaining peace. It is a holistic perspective.

Tracking peacefulness across the globe is a highly challenging endeavor. But there is great potential in cooperation between peaceful communities, researchers and policy makers to produce better methods and metrics. Measuring peace is simply too important to get only half-right.

Gyan IQ .com

About “Gyan IQ” Website.
Gyan IQ – An Educational website for the students of classes 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 12. English Essay, Hindi Essay, Moral Stories, Punjabi Essay etc.
Privacy Policy
Punjabi Essay on Various Topics, Current Issues, latest Topics, ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਨਿਬੰਧ, Social issues for Students.
Search for:
About “Gyan IQ” Website.
Moral Story
English Poems
General Knowledge
Punjabi Essay
हिन्दी निबन्ध

Essay on “Non-Violence” for Students and Children, Best English Essay, Paragraph, Speech for Class 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12

Non-violence, violence leads to destruction.

Violence brings nothing but destruction. If the nations come out with heavy artillery against each other then the State, which gets more destruction is said to be the loser and that which faces lesser destruction is declared the winner. How strange are the criteria to judge the loser and the winner! It is probably based on the premise that man is primarily born to destroy or get destroyed with no other aim in life.

Mahatma Gandhi who always followed the path of non-, violence proved that even the biggest problems can be solved without resorting to violence He also proved that there are some other weapons that are more effective than bombs and bullets and the most effective among them are truth and nonviolence.

Nehru’s view – Man’s history

About Gandhiji, J.L. Nehru wrote: “Gandhiji was essentially a man of religion, a Hindu to innermost depths of his being, and yet his conception of religion had nothing to do with any dogma, custom or ritual. It was basically concerned with his firm belief in the moral law, which he calls the Law of Truth or love. Truth and non-violence appear to him to be the same thing, and he uses these words almost interchangeably.”

Of course, man’s history through centuries has been a history of bloodshed. There is hardly a page in the entire history of mankind when man lived completely in peace and free from war and turmoil.

Nuclear weapons

With the advent of the Atom bomb, the man began to realize that now there might be no war, since, being afraid of the nuclear holocaust, a state may not venture to start a war against its adversary. No doubt, after World War II there have been no major wars like World War II itself. But we had the Korean War, the Congo War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Indo-China and Indo-Pak Wars, the Cuba crisis, the American operation against Iraq, and then Afghanistan.

Peace – Our goal and Nuclear energy for peaceful purposes

Then, have we really come nearer to the goal of total peace? Have we really gained from the invention of the Atom bomb? It cannot be denied that the nuclear power when used for peaceful purposes is of immense power to man, particularly in the matter of production of energy and curing of several critical ailments and deformities in the human body. That is truly the nonviolent harnessing of the demon of the atom. But what should we say in a nutshell, about nuclear weapons?

Stocks of nuclear weapons and terrorism

At present, a number of countries are having stocks of nuclear weapons which are a danger to the very existence of man.

The world has been coming closer and closer to a nuclear catastrophe. That is the violent aspect of the same atom.

Though terrorism in one form or the other is said to be as old as man, yet in the modern age, its ugly shape has sent a shudder through the frame of even the mightiest nations.

Let us follow Gandhiji

Now, we can say, with confidence that the way of nonviolence as shown by Gandhiji can be the only way out for mankind if it intends to save itself from extinction. Gandhiji brought the mightiest empire in history to its knees through his ways of non-violence. Then why not follow Gandhiji’s philosophy of non-violence in letter and spirit? If mankind remains adamant in not following the way shown by Gandhiji, certainly, the doomsday is going to become a reality rather sooner than later.

About gyaniq

Latest Posts

Useful Tags

GK SCIENTIST

Essay on Non-Violence

Non-Violence:

Fools mock at non-violence, wise men admire it, while great men practise it. “Non-violence”, said, Mahatma Gandhi, “is the weapon of the strong”. Under Gandhiji’s leadership, India won her freedom through the unique weapon of non-violence. Non-violence is the force of love. Believe it or not, love is a weapon stronger than the atom bomb.

Non-violence is an old doctrine. In the East as well as West non-violence as an article of faith, or philosophy of life, has been practised from time immemorial. The middle ages, for whatever reason, have been unusually violent. The last, two centuries, namely, 18th and 19th, have been periods of aggressive wars and unashamed imperialism. In the din and bustle of selfish wranglings, a man had nearly forgotten himself; he had come very dangerously near believing in the superiority of material and dark forces. Suddenly, as if it were the will of God, a man arose out of the mist and darkness of confusion, braved his frail, puny figure against the demon of tyranny and physical pride. He fought over fifty years, battled and struggled, and finally proved the triumph of spirit over matter. That man was Mahatma Gandhi, who harked back mankind to the call of reason and courageous faith.

What is non-violence? Volumes may be written on it. Volumes have been written. The principle enshrined in the preachings of Zoroaster, Mahavir, Buddha, Jesus, Nanak, etc. has been re-stated by Mahatma Gandhi. It was in South Africa that the great seer experimented with the truth. It was he who had first revolted against the British racial pride and maltreatment of the Indians. He exposed himself to great risk of life, took upon himself, calmly and spiritedly, all indignities to awaken the conscience and good faith. Non-violence, therefore, according to him who is the greatest philosopher of non-violence is Ahimsa, that is, showing of good-will and love to an antagonist while protesting in spirit against his unjust, violent or immoral act. It was tested once again at Noakhali and finally in the prayer ground of Delhi where a mad man’s three bullets, at last, brought his mortal body low, but not the immortal spirit.

Many people do not seem to know the exact meaning of the word ‘non-violence’. They are confused.

It is true that the barest sense in which it is used is the showing of regard for others physical well-being or safety. Avoidance of physical force or avoidance of inflicting pain, torture or death on others is the first article of non-violence. The other aspect of it is of greater significance. That aspect implies an attitude of life in which a man is asked to be morally self-conscious and to be ready to undergo any trial or hardship for the sake of truth. Considered in this sense, non-violence is the creed of moral courage- the courage that rational man must bring to bear in his dealings with his kind, calm, stoic courage in which he must resist the evil of his adversary, without doing him physical violence. Obviously, non-violence is fundamentally based on the spirituality of man…..and deeply grounded in the belief that given a suitable opportunity, the conscience of man which is good and moral, is bound to prevail.

Is non-violence the creed of the strong? or is it a shrewd cover over the coward to avoid the risks of physical hardship? In his experiment with truth at Noakhali, when the fire and dust of communal hatred had clouded human judgement, Mahatma Gandhi braved his puny, frail figure through ranks of hostile, mad men to teach them that non-violence was not the religion of the coward but of the strong and the morally determined. Lest someone should make his faith for shrewd cowardice, he once went so far to say that it is any day better to go down fighting bravely against evil rather than tamely to submit to it under the cover of Ahimsa. When women’s honour and chastity were in danger at the hands of ruffians, the Mahatma’s formula of non-violence suddenly changed its front, and out it went from tame, passive self-surrendered to spirited and violent self-defence. Non-violence then, as understood by its greatest preacher of modern times, is not passive and cowardly self-surrender, but spirited and determined resistance to evil in utter good faith. Non-violence had its greatest apostle in Christ and Buddha. Buddha propagated a faith that gave to the world a great religion and a great emperor (Ashoka).

Christ died on the cross so that proud Pharisees might learn that in the spirit of men there is no distinction. “Could it be possible,” asks Dr Rajendra Prasad, “that nation knowing full well the destructive potentialities of the atom bomb, would still continue to spend billions on the manufacture of the bombs? The sages of our land for this reason emphatically declared that self-conquest is the supreme triumph of man. More than 2,000 years ago the great emperor Ashoka renounced all conquest except the Dharma Vijay. Mahatma Gandhi has been again giving this message to the people of India and the world. Dazzled by the glitter of modern civilization, deafened by the maddening noise of the modern machine, we miss the music of the moral law”.

Is non-violence synonymous with moral courage? Yes, It is equivalent to moral courage, plus something more. “This something more is what makes the creed of non-violence practical, creative and active. Gandhian non-violence is a Hebraic attitude of life. It seeks to leave the world a little better than what we found it. It seeks to interfere in the affairs of others, in the interests of truth and justice. It is no mere passive or stoic moral courage- but the active, driving force of a spirit to seek redress of moral grievances”.

“My non-violence,” says Mahatma Gandhi, “does not admit of running away from danger, and leaving near and dear ones unprotected. Between violence and cowardly flight, I can only prefer violence to cowardice. Non-violence is the summit of braver”. It is the brave man’s courage to defy without injuring the other, Or better still, as Dr B. C. Roy puts it, “A non-violent man gives patient hearing to his opponent, reasons with him respectfully, and if need be combats enemies by non-violent resistance. In dealing with men, particularly those of different cult or way of thinking, he does not injure them, but endures injury himself, serves them without fear of unnaturalness, and turns the non-violent non-cooperation technique to success”.

Rightly said Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Gandhiji’s greatest disciple, “This war and the events preceding it has impressed upon me more than ever the futility of violence”. In the hour of the gravest provocation when the Eastern Pakistan affairs were wearing out the last supports of India’s patience when the hisses of an impending war between the two states were fast mounting on to a dangerous climax, Pandit Nehru, on the eve of the Nehru-Liaquat Agreement, advised calm and sober reason on both sides and rightly summed up the basic philosophy of India’s non-violent creed, which, far from being one of cowardly compromise, was founded on moral courage and faith in truth and justice. He said, “If we now adopt a policy of war, we will not only go back on all for which we have stood during the past 30 years but would also lower our prestige. No sensible man can, therefore talk of dragging his country into war. But if in spite of us, it id forced on us, we will fight. That is why we maintain an army and an air force”.




	– NIOS

Essay on The Problem of Brain Drain In India

Essay on “Is Religion a Blessing or a Curse”

Essay on The Korean War

Essay on Five Things I Love

A Visit to a Zoo Short Essay

Essay on “If I were the Prime Minister of India”

Essay on How I Spent My Summer Vacation

Essay on Advantages and Disadvantages of Living in a Hostel

Comments (no), leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Nonviolent Resistance, Social Justice, and Positive Peace

Living reference work entry
First Online: 22 July 2021
Cite this living reference work entry

Jonathan Pinckney 5

122 Accesses

1 Citations

9 Altmetric

How does nonviolent resistance connect to positive peace? To achieve positive peace, it requires fundamental shifts in existing unjust power relationships. Yet these shifts are rare if ever granted without the exercise of some coercive force on the part of those oppressed by such unjust power relationships. While some have previously argued that this reality requires the exercise of revolutionary violence to achieve positive peace, numerous examples and over a century of data shows that violent revolutions, even when successful, typically fail to bring about a more socially just political order. Nonviolent resistance, defined as the application of political force outside normal politics and without the use of violence, provides an alternative avenue for the oppressed to exercise coercive force that has a greater track record of success than violence, and that more frequently leads to more socially just political orders. Thus, nonviolent resistance provides a crucial ingredient for any society to move toward positive peace.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

The Constant Mediation of Resentment and Retaliation

Challenging Violence: Toward a Twenty-First Century, Science-Based “Constructive Programme”

Ackerman, P., & DuVall, J. (2000). A force more powerful: A century of non-violent conflict . London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Google Scholar

Ackerman, P., & Kruegler, C. (1994). Strategic nonviolent conflict, the dynamics of people power in the twentieth century . Boston, MA: Praeger.

Aitchison, G. (2018). Domination and disobedience: Protest, coercion, and the limits of an appeal to justice. Perspectives on Politics, 16 (3), 666–679.

Article Google Scholar

Bartkowski, M. J. (Ed.). (2013). Recovering nonviolent history: Civil resistance in liberation struggles. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Incorporated.

Bayer, M., Bethke, F. S., & Lambach, D. (2016). The democratic dividend of nonviolent resistance. Journal of Peace Research, 53 (6), 758–771.

Bedau, H. A. (1961). On civil disobedience. The Journal of Philosophy, 58 (21), 653–665.

Belli, G. (2018, August 24). How Daniel Ortega became a tyrant: From revolutionary to strongman. Foreign Affairs . Retrieved October 18, 2018, from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/nicaragua/2018-08-24/how-daniel-ortega-became-tyrant?cid=int-fls&pgtype=hpg

Bermeo, N. (2003). What the democratization literature says-or doesn’t say-about postwar democratization. Global Governance, 9 , 159.

Bethke, F. S., & Pinckney, J. (2016). Nonviolent resistance and the quality of democracy . Gothenburg, Sweden: V-Dem Institute.

Bingenheimer, J. B., Brennan, R. T., & Earls, F. J. (2005). Firearm violence exposure and serious violent behavior. Science, 308 (5726), 1323–1326.

Bondurant, J. V. (1958). Conquest of violence: The Gandhian philosophy of conflict . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Braithwaite, A., Braithwaite, J. M., & Kucik, J. (2015). The conditioning effect of protest history on the emulation of nonviolent conflict. Journal of Peace Research, 52 (6), 697–711.

Breines, W. (1982). Community and Organization in the new Left, 1962–1968: The great refusal . New York, NY: Praeger.

Brinton, C. (1938). The anatomy of revolution . New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Book Google Scholar

Butcher, C., & Svensson, I. (2016). Manufacturing dissent: Modernization and the onset of major nonviolent resistance campaigns. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 60 (2), 311–339.

Celestino, M. R., & Gleditsch, K. S. (2013). Fresh carnations or all thorn, no rose? Nonviolent campaigns and transitions in autocracies. Journal of Peace Research, 50 (3), 385–400.

Chabot, S., & Sharifi, M. (2013). The violence of nonviolence: Problematizing nonviolent resistance in Iran and Egypt. Societies Without Borders, 8 (2), 205–232.

Chabot, S., & Vinthagen, S. (2015). Decolonizing civil resistance. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 20 (4), 517–532.

Chenoweth, E., & Cunningham, K. G. (2013). Understanding nonviolent resistance: An introduction. Journal of Peace Research, 50 (3), 271–276.

Chenoweth, E., & Stephan, M. J. (2011). Why civil resistance works: The strategic logic of nonviolent conflict . New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Chenoweth, E., & Ulfelder, J. (2017). Can structural conditions explain the onset of nonviolent uprisings? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61 (2), 298–324.

Collier, P., & Sambanis, N. (2002). Understanding civil war: A new agenda. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46 (1), 3–12.

Cunningham, K. G., Dahl, M., & Fruge, A. (2017). Strategies of resistance: Diversification and diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 61 (3), 591–605.

Dahlum, S. (2018). Students in the streets: Education and nonviolent protest. Comparative Political Studies , 0010414018758761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018758761

Deming, B. (1971). Revolution & equilibrium . New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Ekiert, G., & Kubik, J. (2001). Rebellious civil society: Popular protest and democratic consolidation in Poland, 1989–1993 . Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Fanon, F. (1963). The wretched of the earth. (C. Farrington, Trans.). Grove Weidenfeld.

Fernandes, T. (2015). Rethinking pathways to democracy: Civil society in Portugal and Spain, 1960s–2000s. Democratization, 22 (6), 1074–1104.

Fortna, V. P., & Huang, R. (2012). Democratization after civil war: A brush-clearing exercise. International Studies Quarterly, 56 (4), 801–808.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977 . New York, NY: Pantheon.

Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 6 (3), 167–191.

Ganz, M. (2009). Why David sometimes wins: Strategic capacity in social movements . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Garner, R. (2013). A theory of justice for animals: Animal rights in a nonideal world . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Gilligan, M. J., Pasquale, B. J., & Samii, C. (2014). Civil war and social cohesion: Lab-in-the-field evidence from Nepal. American Journal of Political Science, 58 (3), 604–619.

Hartzell, C., Hoddie, M., & Rothchild, D. (2001). Stabilizing the peace after civil war: An investigation of some key variables. International Organization, 55 (1), 183–208.

Helvey, R. L. (2004). On strategic nonviolent conflict: Thinking about the fundamentals . Albert Einstein Institute.

Howes, D. E. (2015). Defending freedom with civil resistance in the early Roman Republic. In K. Schock (Ed.), Civil resistance: Comparative perspectives on nonviolent struggle (pp. 203–226). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Iyer, R. N. (1973). The moral and political thought of mahatma Gandhi . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Johnstad, P. G. (2010). Nonviolent democratization: A sensitivity analysis of how transition mode and violence impact the durability of democracy. Peace & Change, 35 (3), 464–482.

Karakaya, S. (2016). Globalization and contentious politics: A comparative analysis of nonviolent and violent campaigns. Conflict Management and Peace Science . https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894215623073

Karatnycky, A., & Ackerman, P. (2005). How freedom is won: From civic resistance to durable democracy . Washington, DC: Freedom House.

Khalil, A. (2011). Liberation Square: Inside the Egyptian revolution and the rebirth of a nation . New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.

King, M. L. (1958). Stride toward freedom: The Montgomery story . New York, NY: Harper & Row.

King, M. L. (1963). Letter from Birmingham jail. Retrieved July 3, 2018, from https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/letter-birmingham-jail

King, M. L. (1964). Martin Luther King’s Acceptance Speech, on the occasion of the award of the Nobel Peace Prize. Retrieved October 26, 2018, from https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1964/king/26142-martin-luther-king-jr-acceptance-speech-1964/

Kuran, T. (1991). Now out of never: The element of surprise in the East European revolution of 1989. World Politics, 44 (1), 7–48.

Lehoucq, F. (2016). Does nonviolence work? Comparative Politics, 48 (2), 269–287.

Lyons, T. (2016). The importance of winning: Victorious insurgent groups and authoritarian politics. Comparative Politics, 48 (2), 167–184.

Martin, B., & Varney, W. (2003). Nonviolence and communication. Journal of Peace Research, 40 (2), 213–232.

McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930–1970 . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Nepstad, S. E. (2008). Religion and war resistance in the plowshares movement . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Nepstad, S. E. (2015). Nonviolent struggle: Theories, strategies, and dynamics . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Niebuhr, R. (1932). Moral man and immoral society: A study in ethics and politics . New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Nussbaum, M. C. (2005). Beyond “compassion and humanity:” justice for nonhuman animals. In C. R. Sunstein & M. C. Nussbaum (Eds.), Animal rights: Current debates and new directions (pp. 300–319). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Pearlman, W. (2011). Violence, nonviolence, and the Palestinian National Movement . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Pinckney, J. (2016). Making or breaking nonviolent discipline . Washington, DC: ICNC Press.

Pinckney, J. (2018). When civil resistance succeeds: Building democracy after popular nonviolent uprisings . Washington, DC: ICNC Press.

Pinckney, J. (2020). From dissent to democracy: The promise and peril of civil resistance transitions . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Polletta, F. (2002). Freedom is an endless meeting: Democracy in American social movements . Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (Revised Edition). Oxford University Press.

Ritter, D. P. (2015). The Iron cage of liberalism: International politics and unarmed revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Schaftenaar, S. (2017). How (wo)men rebel: Exploring the effect of gender equality on nonviolent and armed conflict onset. Journal of Peace Research, 54 (6), 762–776. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343317722699

Schelling, T. C. (1969). Some questions on civilian defense. In A. Roberts (Ed.), Civilian resistance as a National Defense: Nonviolent action against aggression . New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Schock, K. (2003). Nonviolent action and its misconceptions: Insights for social scientists. PS: Political Science and Politics, 36 (4), 705–712.

Schock, K. (2005). Unarmed insurrections: People power movements in nondemocracies (Vol. 22). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Schock, K. (2015). Rightful radical resistance: Mass mobilization and land struggles in India and Brazil. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 20 (4), 493–515.

Sharp, G. (1973). The politics of nonviolent action . Boston, MA: Porter Sargent.

Sharp, G. (1999). Nonviolent Action. In L. Kurtz & J. E. Turpin (Eds.), Encyclopedia of violence, peace, and conflict (pp. 567–574). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Shrestha, M. B., & Chaudhary, S. K. (2013). The economic cost of general strikes in Nepal. NRB Economic Review. Retrieved September 8, 2018 from https://www.nrb.org.np/ecorev/pdffiles/vol26-1_art1.pdf

Shridharani, K. (1939). War without violence: A study of Gandhi’s method and its accomplishments . London, UK: Gollancz.

Singer, P. (1995). Animal liberation . New York, NY: Random House.

Skocpol, T. (1979). States and social revolutions: A comparative analysis of France, Russia and China . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, J. (2008). Social movements for global democracy . Baltimore, MD: JHU Press.

Svensson, I., & Lindgren, M. (2011). Community and consent: Unarmed insurrections in non-democracies. European Journal of International Relations, 17 (1), 97–120.

Thoreau, H. D. (2016). Civil disobedience . Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.

Thurber, C. (2018). Ethnic barriers to civil resistance. Journal of Global Security Studies, 3 (3), 255–270.

Toft, M. D. (2010). Ending civil wars: A case for rebel victory? International Security, 34 (4), 7–36.

Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Vinthagen, S. (2015). A theory of nonviolent action: How civil resistance works . Zed Books Ltd..

Walter, B. F. (2004). Does conflict beget conflict? Explaining recurring civil war. Journal of Peace Research, 41 (3), 371–388.

Williams, K. (2009). Civil Resistance in Czechoslovakia: From Soviet Invasion to “Velvet Revolution,” 1968–89. In A. Roberts & T. G. Ash (Eds.), Civil resistance and power politics: The experience of non-violent action from Gandhi to the present (pp. 110–126). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Wood, E. J. (2000). Forging democracy from below: Insurgent transitions in South Africa and El Salvador . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

United States Institute of Peace, Washington, DC, United States

Jonathan Pinckney

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Pinckney .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Ntl. Centre for Peace & Conflict Studies, University of Otago Ntl. Centre for Peace & Conflict Studies, Dunedin, New Zealand

Katerina Standish

National Centre for Peace, University of Otago National Centre for Peace, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand

Heather Devere

Rachel Rafferty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Pinckney, J. (2021). Nonviolent Resistance, Social Justice, and Positive Peace. In: Standish, K., Devere, H., Suazo, A., Rafferty, R. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Peace. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3877-3_11-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3877-3_11-1

Received : 22 September 2020

Accepted : 22 September 2020

Published : 22 July 2021

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-15-3877-3

Online ISBN : 978-981-15-3877-3

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Political Science and International Studies Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Your Article Library

Essay on peace: need and importance of peace.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Essay on Peace: Need and Importance of Peace!

The issue of war and peace has always been a focal issue in all periods of history and at all levels relations among nations. The concern of the humankind for peace can be assessed by taking into account the fact that all religions, all religious scriptures and several religious ceremonies are committed to the cause of peace and all these advocate an elimination of war. The Shanti Path recited by the Hindus, the sermons of Pope and the commands of all the holy scriptures of the Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and all other communities hold out a sacred commitment to peace.

Yet the international community fully realized the supreme importance of the virtue of peace against the evil of war only after having suffered the most unfortunate and highly destructive two World Wars in the first half of the 20th century. The blood soaked shreds of humanity that lay scattered in several hundred battle grounds, particularly on the soils of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, cried for peace, peace and peace on the earth.

The UN Charter and International Peace and Security:

The human consciousness then rallied in the Charter of the United Nations to affirm. “We the people of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our life time has brought untold sorrow to humankind…. and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security….. have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims.”

Since 1945, the United Nations and its specialized agencies, several international associations and institutions, international peace movements, global and national level human rights movements and in fact all members of the international community have been consistently and strongly advocating the need for the preservation and promotion of peace against war.

In contemporary times, the most urgent and important international objective has been to preserve protect and defend peace against terrorism and terrorist organizations like A1 Qacda, Talibans, and other enemies of peace.

How International Community has been trying to secure peace:

Through international peace keeping under the aegis of the United Nations through the development and use of international law; creation of more international and regional institutions committed to promote peace, promotion of friendly cooperation for development among the member countries; popularization of peaceful means of conflict-resolution, institutionalization of relations among nations; integration of international community through strengthening of human consciousness in favour of peace against war; and by enhancing the ability for crisis-management, the humankind has been trying to secure peace against war.

Currently, through:

(i) Globalization i.e. by encouraging the free flow of people goods, information services and knowledge;

(ii) Establishment of non-official people to people socio-economic-cultural relations;

(iii) Organisation of international peace movements against nuclear weapons, armament race, militarisation, and environmental pollution;

(iv) Launching of special drives for elimination of such evils as apartheid, poverty, illiteracy; ill-health, hunger, disease, inequalities, tyranny and terrorism; and

(v) organised attempts at environment protection and protection of Human Rights of all, the international community has been making meaningful attempts to limit the chances of war.

What is Peace?

One elementary way of defining peace has been to say that peace is absence of war. This is, however, a very narrow view of peace. No doubt absence of war is the first condition of peace, yet peace is not merely an absence of war. It is in reality a condition characterised by peaceful, cooperative and harmonious conduct of international relations with a view to secure all-round sustainable development of the people of the world.

Nevertheless, since absence of war is the first condition of peace, one of the major concerns of all scholars and statesmen has been to formulate and follow the principles and devices needed for securing this primary objective. The cold war that kept the world preoccupied during 1945-90, indirectly secured this objective in a negative way by developing a balance of terror in international relations.

While it was successful in preventing a global war, it failed to prevent local wars and in fact gave rise to several tensions, stresses, strains and crises in international relations. The international community had to work very hard for keeping the conflicts and wars limited. It, however, successfully exhibited a welcome and positive ability in the sphere of crisis-management.

In fact, till today there have been present several hindrances in way of securing a stable, healthy and enduring peace. Fortunately, the final end of cold war came in the last decade of the 20th century and the world found herself living is an environment characterised by a new faith and commitment to peace, peaceful co-existence, peaceful conflict-resolution, liberalisation, cooperation for development and attempts at sustainable development.

The people began focusing their attention on the need for the protection of human rights of all, protection of environment and securing of a real and meaningful international integration. However several negative factors, ethnic conflict, ethnic violence, ethnic wars, terrorism in its several dimensions, neo-colonialism, hegemony n-hegemony and the like kept on acting as big hindrances.

The need to secure peace by controlling these evils continues to be a primary aim of international community. Crises have been repeatedly coming and these are bound to keep coming. This makes it very urgent for the humankind to prepare and act for managing crises through collective efforts and by the use of several devices.

Does Peace Require Non-Violence?
8 Devices used for the Preservation of Peace

No comments yet.

Leave a reply click here to cancel reply..

You must be logged in to post a comment.

IMAGES

The Essay Contest To End Violence Against Women
Essay on Non-violence of Mahatma Gandhi
≫ Nelson Mandela's Non Violence Method of Protest Free Essay Sample on
Promoting a culture of non-violence (essay)
Essay on Non-Violence [ Concept, Features & Importance ]
how to write a literature review on domestic violence

VIDEO

PEACE NOT WAR
Mahatma Gandhi The Father of India's Freedom
『SHORT PEACE ショート・ピース』予告編
Writing as an act of resistance to colonial violence: from Iran to Australia
B.A 1st Year, Introduction of Aldous Huxley and his Essay- Non- Violence
Peace and Love, Not War, Hate and Violence

COMMENTS

Essay on Non Violence
Essay on Non Violence: Non-violence is a powerful tool that has been used throughout history to bring about social change and promote peace. In this essay, we. ... Short Essay on Non Violence in 200-500 Words. Non-violence is a principle that has been practiced by many great leaders throughout history, including Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther ...
100 Words Essay on Non Violence
500 Words Essay on Non Violence Introduction. Non-violence, a concept deeply rooted in human ethics, is often associated with the peaceful resistance movements led by figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. It advocates for the use of peaceful means, rather than violence, to bring about political or social change.
The Ethics of Nonviolence: Essays by Robert L. Holmes
Indeed, these essays should be read and carefully considered by students of peace studies and peace activists. One significant contribution is Holmes' is analysis of the difference between nonviolentism and pacifism. Indeed, it appears that he coined the term "nonviolentism" in a 1971 essay that is reprinted in this collection (157).
Essay On Peace in English for Students
Answer 2: Peace is a concept of societal friendship and harmony in which there is no hostility and violence. In social terms, we use it commonly to refer to a lack of conflict, such as war. Thus, it is freedom from fear of violence between individuals or groups. Share with friends.
PDF The Good News of Peace and Nonviolence: How nonviolence is essential to
for the well-being of all. In short, Jesus called us to a peace that includes the way of active nonviolence. Unfortunately, "peace" also often functions as short-hand for what follows from the "pacification" of enemies: "peace" stemming from defeat and domination. Cardinal Peter Turkson stressed that the peace of the Roman
Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts
Non-violence is a form of protest, philosophy and a way of life. The term non-violence refers to the negation of violence. Non-violence is a way of resisting and relates to conflicts and not peace. Many countries have embraced the non-violence approach to conflicts (King 1958, p.24). Get a custom essay on Non-Violence Approach to Conflicts.
Towards a Planet-wide Culture of Non-Violence
This brings me to the central point of this essay: A Long March Towards a Planet-wide Culture of Non-violence. At the outset, let me clarify that this essay is geared to the concept of the entire ...
Essay on Importance of Non Violence
250 Words Essay on Importance of Non Violence Introduction. Non-violence, a philosophy championed by figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., is a powerful tool for social and political change. It is not merely the absence of violence, but a proactive stance towards peace and justice. Non-Violence: A Catalyst for Change
Handbook for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence
The Programme of Action for a Culture of Peace and Nonviolence is based in UN General Assembly Resolution A/53/243. Based on its introduction there, and on UNESCO's implementation in conflict situations worldwide and on the SDGs, we believe the following eight summary points can be made: FROM UN RESOLUTION A/53/243. 1.
10 Essential Things to Know about Nonviolent Resistance
Richard Sandbrook is professor emeritus of Political Science at the University of Toronto and President of Science for PeaceContributed fact sheet for the Working Group on Nonviolent Resistance 1. Two traditions of thinking about nonviolence hold sway. • Principled nonviolence: Adherents decide to use nonviolent means on ethical grounds. In the Gandhian approach, nonviolence is a way of ...
What is Nonviolent Peacemaking?
Tactical nonviolence, also known as pragmatic nonviolence, is utilitarian in nature. Its goal is to accomplish specific objectives and to defeat adversaries through nonviolent direct action. Its power concern is to gain "power over others" and is expressed in more adversarial terms. Gene Sharp, a leading advocate of tactical nonviolence ...
Nonviolence
Nonviolence is the personal practice of not causing harm to others under any condition. It may come from the belief that hurting people, animals and/or the environment is unnecessary to achieve an outcome and it may refer to a general philosophy of abstention from violence. It may be based on moral, religious or spiritual principles, or the ...
Nonviolence
Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him. -Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Nonviolence is both a principle and a practice. The principle of nonviolence affirms the active use of non-coercive and non-aggressive means to create a ...
Introduction to Nonviolence
Nonviolence: An Introduction. Nonviolent activism over the course of the 20th century helped influence the world and century in a positive direction. There now is an effective option to fight back against injustice and oppression around the world without having to cause more pain and conflict. These days, nonviolence has an academic catalog ...
"Nonviolence and Racial Justice"
Author: King, Martin Luther, Jr. Date: February 6, 1957 Location: Chicago, Ill. Genre: Published Article Topic: Nonviolence Details. On 26 November 1956 King submitted an article on nonviolence to Christian Century, a liberal weekly religious magazine.In his cover letter to editor Harold Fey, King noted that "it has just been within the last few days that I have been able to take a little ...
Inner Peace, World Peace: Essays on Buddhism and Nonviolence on ...
What can one person do to foster world peace? How does one person's state of mind affect the state of the world? How can the ideal of nonviolence be manife...
Peace and Violence
Peace is a product of human rights: the more a society promotes, protects and fulfils the human rights of its people, the greater its chances for curbing violence and resolving conflicts peacefully. However, peace is also increasingly being recognised as a human right itself, as an emerging human right or part of the so-called solidarity rights.
International Day of Non-Violence
The International Day of Non-Violence is observed on 2 October, the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian independence movement and pioneer of the philosophy and strategy of non ...
Peace Is More Than War's Absence, and New Research Explains How to
But peace is more than not fighting. The PPI, launched in 2009, was supposed to recognize this and track positive peace, or the promotion of peacefulness through positive interactions like ...
Essay on "Non-Violence" for Students and Children, Best English Essay
Truth and non-violence appear to him to be the same thing, and he uses these words almost interchangeably." Of course, man's history through centuries has been a history of bloodshed. There is hardly a page in the entire history of mankind when man lived completely in peace and free from war and turmoil.
Essay on Non-Violence For Students in English
Fools mock at non-violence, wise men admire it, while great men practise it. "Non-violence", said, Mahatma Gandhi, "is the weapon of the strong". Under Gandhiji's leadership, India won her freedom through the unique weapon of non-violence. Non-violence is the force of love. Believe it or not, love is a weapon stronger than the atom bomb.
Nonviolent Resistance, Social Justice, and Positive Peace
What is the shape of a political and social order characterized by positive peace? The seminal answer to this question comes from Johan Galtung, who made positive peace explicitly interchangeable with "social justice…egalitarian distribution of power and resources" (Galtung, 1969, p. 183).In Galtung's formulation, positive peace goes well beyond the absence of direct violence (of which ...
Essay on Peace: Need and Importance of Peace
ADVERTISEMENTS: Essay on Peace: Need and Importance of Peace! The issue of war and peace has always been a focal issue in all periods of history and at all levels relations among nations. The concern of the humankind for peace can be assessed by taking into account the fact that all religions, all religious scriptures and several religious ...