Conveniently for this purpose, last year Robert Burrowes took the excellentinitiative of setting up the Nonviolence Scholars' Forum. He made contactwith some fifteen people in Australia doing research relating to nonviolence,obtained their electronic mail (email) addresses and encouraged eachindividual to send email to the list of all the others. This electronicexchange was called the Nonviolence Scholars' Forum.
I slightly edited the questions collected at the gathering to provide clarityand continuity of style, and attached the name of the person who suggestedeach question. At the end of June I sent the questions to everyone in theNonviolence Scholars' Forum, inviting responses. Rebecca Spence and RobertBurrowes were the only respondents, Robert providing a comprehensivecommentary. I have added a few comments of my own.
In my view, there is still quite a way to go towards getting activiststhinking of research that researchers can relate to and towards gettingresearchers thinking in terms of the needs of activists. The followingquestions and answers provide one more stage in this ongoing process.
Brian Martin
Rebecca Spence: Two excellent books are Robin Arnold and Dale Hess, TheParadox of Economic Growth and Inequity (Victorian Association for PeaceStudies, 1994) and Michael Cranna (ed.), The True Cost of Conflict (London:Earthscan Publications, 1994).
Robert Burrowes (RJB): Very few that I have discovered. One is the A. J.Muste Memorial Institute's International Nonviolence Training Fund whichmakes grants of up to $US3,000 to sponsor projects that promote theprinciples and practice of nonviolent social change. The Institute's addressis 339 Lafayette St, New York, New York 10012, USA. Tel: +1-212-5334335.
RJB: Many indigenous societies all over the world, particularly those thatare nomadic. And many societies based on spiritual or religious traditionsthat have maintained the practice (and not just paid lipservice to thephilosophy) of nonviolence in their way of life. One useful reference on thissubject is Bruce D. Bonta, Peaceful Peoples: An Annotated Bibliography(Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1993).
Brian Martin (BM): According to a number of theorists, there is a close linkbetween the rise of the state, patriarchy and the military. This may explainwhy family structures supportive of nonviolence are more common in societieswithout a state. See Harold Barclay, People without Government (London: Kahnand Averill, 1982). How it might be possible to build a nonviolent societyincorporating forms of agriculture, industry, telecommunications and the likeseems to be an unanswered question.
RJB: Apart from the societies identified above, the Western communities thathave most closely resembled the ANN are probably the Movement for a NewSociety (MNS) in the United States (now defunct) and some of the intentionalcommunities throughout Europe, such as La Communaute de l'Arche (TheCommunity of the Ark) in France. MNS and the Community of the Ark bothembrace(d) a reasonably similar set of (Gandhian) nonviolence principles(with MNS more committed to feminist principles as well), live(d) incommunities, teach (taught) nonviolent action, and participate(d) innonviolent action campaigns.
There is no quick response to what MNS and the Community of the Ark lack(ed)but I have an article which gives one account of why MNS disintegrated:George Lakey, 'The Life and Death of the Movement for a New Society,' FriendsJournal, September 1989, pp. 22-25.
RJB: Nonviolent activists have used a variety of successful strategies in thepast, although not all of these have been systematically documented. MohandasK. Gandhi, for example, had a superb intuitive grasp of strategic principles(which he did not record in any organised way) and, as a result, hisnonviolent campaigns in India were very successful. In contrast, thestrategies of nonviolent activists have often failed. For example, without anintuitive strategic thinker of Gandhi's calibre--and without a clearlydeveloped strategic framework to guide the formulation of their strategy--theSouth African anti-apartheid struggle took much longer than it might have.
The earliest attempt to offer a systematic explanation of the dynamics ofnonviolent action was the book by Clarence Marsh Case published in 1923(Clarence Marsh Case, Non-violent Coercion: A Study in Methods of SocialPressure (1923; Reprint, Jerome S. Ozer, 1972)), but he made no attempt todevelop a strategic framework. It was in 1939, based on an analysis ofGandhi's campaigns in India, that Krishnalal Shridharani introduced the firststrategic framework for nonviolent struggle (Krishnalal Shridharani, Warwithout Violence (1939; Reprint, Bombay, India: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan,1962), pp. 15-57). In 1958, Joan Bondurant presented a modified version ofthis framework and illustrated the dynamics of nonviolent action by analysingfive satyagraha (Gandhian nonviolence) campaigns conducted in India (Joan V.Bondurant, Conquest of Violence: The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict (Rev.ed. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1965), pp. 36-104). And at therequest of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the Fellowship of Reconciliation(FOR) in the United States developed a set of four principles and six'strategic steps' to guide the civil rights struggles in that country (AngieO'Gorman (ed.), The Universe Bends Toward Justice: A Reader on ChristianNonviolence in the U.S. (Philadelphia: New Society, 1990), pp. 185-188).These 'strategic steps' were, intentionally or otherwise, a simplified andmodified version of the strategic framework introduced by Shridharani.
Parallel with the research of Bondurant, Gene Sharp was developing astrategic framework that drew inspiration from Gandhi, the nonviolenceliterature generally, and the strategic thinking of the British militaryhistorian Basil Liddell Hart. This framework was eventually published in 1973(Gene Sharp, The Politics of Nonviolent Action (Boston: Porter Sargent,1973), pp. 451-520). In the same year, George Lakey presented anotherstrategic framework: this one drew on a variety of published sources andLakey's own experience as a nonviolent activist (George Lakey, Strategy for aLiving Revolution (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1973); George Lakey,Powerful Peacemaking: A Strategy for a Living Revolution (Philadelphia: NewSociety, 1987)). In 1981 Virginia Coover and her co-authors presented astrategic framework that drew on Sharp and Lakey, but which also offered awide variety of new tools to assist activists in the development of theircampaign strategy (Virginia Coover, Ellen Deacon, Charles Esser andChristopher Moore, Resource Manual for a Living Revolution (Philadelphia: NewSociety, 1981)). And in 1986, based on an analysis of U.S. social movements,Bill Moyer presented 'The Movement Action Plan' (Bill Moyer, 'The MovementAction Plan,' The Dandelion, Fall 1986. pp. 1-8).
The last four strategic frameworks, and the numerous unpublished variationsderived from them, have been used by many peace, social justice andenvironment activists working on campaigns in the West. And these or similarstrategic frameworks have been taught to nonviolent activists in Africa, Asiaand Central/South America. Jean Goss and Hildegarde Goss-Mayr are undoubtedlythe best known Western activists to have performed this role: they conductednonviolence workshops in several countries on each of these continents formore than three decades (Jean and Hildegarde Goss-Mayr, The Gospel and theStruggle for Peace, Trans. Dave Parry (Alkmaar, Netherlands: InternationalFellowship of Reconciliation, 1990)).
In many cases, nonviolent struggles have been conducted with a soundappreciation of tactical principles (the needs for planning, organisation anddiscipline in a particular nonviolent action, for example) but without thebenefit of any systematic strategic guidance. This was the case during theIranian revolution and the Chinese pro-democracy movement. In other cases, asin Poland, the long duration of the struggle gave Solidarity activists thechance to learn from their experience and to acquire assistance and resourcematerials on nonviolence from outside Poland.
BM: Robert's answer is comprehensive. It is worth remembering that thestrategies of both nonviolent activists and their opponents change over time.Situations change due to new social relationships and new technologies, amongother factors. Our interpretations of what was successful in the past maychange. What worked for Gandhi may not be entirely appropriate for a campaignagainst government surveillance or a transnational corporation. It isimportant both to learn from the past but not to follow it unquestioningly.
RJB: By learning how to campaign strategically; that is, by learning how toplan and implement nonviolent strategy so that the strategic considerationsthat should guide the selection and application of tactics (actions) areunderstood.
RJB: By developing the social cosmology (the organisational philosophy,social structures, group processes, matter-energy environment and conflictresolution mechanisms that mutually reinforce each other) in the direction ofthe radicalism. For example, if a social change organisation is committed tononviolence, it is insufficient, in my view, to state that philosophically.It is necessary to develop and practice using all of the (non-hierarchical)structures, (consensual) processes, (renewable) energy resources and(nonviolent) conflict mechanisms that are consistent with that philosophy. Ifan organisation fails to address even one of these (and perhaps other) facetsof its cosmology, it tends to reinforce dominant patterns of behaviour and toundermine its own efforts to forge lasting change in a radical direction.This has happened in many alternative communities as people have committedthemselves, for example, to ecological sustainability, but failed to alterthe existing patterns of (patriarchal, capitalist, racist) social relationsor the (win-lose) conflict mechanisms that were ingrained in them bymainstream socialisation.
BM: To be realistic, very few egalitarian social change organisations manageto survive for decades, not to mention retaining their radicalism. Massivechanges in society have continued to occur in lifestyles, economics, media,families, skills and other areas. The persistence of organisations may not bethe key to social change. Promoting egalitarian social change is essential.The question is how best to do this.
RJB: By some combination of simplification of personal lifestyles andconsumption patterns, living in communities which allow more sharing ofresources, increased personal and community self-reliance in food and otheressential production, involvement in local economies based on bartering (suchas LETS systems), and by offering ethical knowledge, skills and/or productsfor which there is a demand in the mainstream economy.
RJB: By asking activist scholars to identify sympathetic researchers, bycontacting relevant university departments, and by contacting researchers whowrite articles in 'activist' or other journals (who might also provide leadsto other researchers).
BM: When approaching researchers, your query is likely to fall into one ofthree categories. Firstly, it might be one for which the answer is readilyavailable, for example in a book; to get a quick response, you need to findthe right person. Secondly, your query might be too hard or totallyunresearched, in which case you'll not find much help from anyone. Thirdly,it might be a case where a modest amount of research could lead to insights.These sorts of cases are the ones where activist-researcher collaboration ismost likely to be fruitful. For example, can a researcher help by studyingyour campaign, possibly as a participant observer?
Don't forget students. Ask academics whether they have undergraduate orpostgraduate students who can do a project to help you. You'll probably endup helping the students as much as they help you, so make sure it's a fairexchange.
RJB: I do not know of a single reference that deals systematically with thismassive topic but there is a good case study of grassroots networking inMatthew Nemiroff Lyons, The 'Grassroots' Network: Radical Nonviolence in theFederal Republic of Germany 1972-1985 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University,Center for International Studies, 1988).
RJB: There is no comprehensive history of this subject of which I am aware.Perhaps the best summary is contained in Ralph Summy's contribution to theEncyclopaedia of Nonviolence that is being edited by the Program onNonviolent Sanctions at Harvard University. It is due for publication in1996.
RJB: Gandhi provided a great deal of guidance about nonviolent economics,emphasising the importance of decentralised, small-scale, mainlyhuman-powered activity that is designed to enhance local self-reliance.Perhaps the most readily accessible references for this topic are those thatdeal with bioregional economies. See, for example, Kirkpatrick Sale, Dwellersin the Land: The Bioregional Vision (Philadelphia: New Society, 1991).Another useful book is Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel, Looking Forward:Participatory Economics for the Twenty First Century (Boston: South EndPress, 1991).
BM: 'Nonviolent economics' has a number of possible meanings. It can mean aneconomic system avoiding military production and geared instead towardsnonviolent struggle. It can mean an economic system minimising environmentalimpacts. It can mean an economic system fostering equality, self-reliance andsatisfaction in work. Of course, these aren't mutually exclusive.
There are various relevant bodies of writings. Gandhian economics is onearea, for example Amritananda Das, Foundations of Gandhian Economics (Bombay:Allied Publishers, 1979); Romesh Diwan and Mark Lutz (eds.), Essays inGandhian Economics (New Delhi: Gandhi Peace Foundation, 1985). Some works onanarchist economics are relevant, such as Pierre Guillet de Monthoux, Actionand Existence: Anarchism for Business Administration (Chichester: Wiley,1983) and the magazine Libertarian Labor Review.
RJB: Yes; many in fact. Perhaps the most obvious examples are the experiencesof nonviolent activists (such as Swati, who visited Australia in 1992) wholive and work with the poor (some as part of the Sarvodaya movement) inIndia. Other examples include Danilo Dolci in Italy and the Church people wholive with poor people in the Christian base communities in Central and SouthAmerica. See, for example, Dominique Barbe, Grace and Power: Base Communitiesand Nonviolence in Brazil, Trans. John Pairman Brown (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis,1987); Danilo Dolci, Poverty in Sicily: A Study of the Province of Palermo byDanilo Dolci, Trans. P. D. Cummins (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin, 1966).
RJB: Gandhi's campaigns are the most inspirational examples of this. Thereare many books on this subject. Try the following: Horace Alexander, GandhiThrough Western Eyes (Philadelphia: New Society, 1984); M. K. Gandhi,Satyagraha in South Africa, 2d ed. Trans. Valji Govindji Desai (Ahmedabad,India: Navajivan, 1950). Another good book is yet to be published: ThomasWeber's On the Salt March which describes the 1930 Salt March in detail.
RJB: Among other strategies (including violent ones), social structures canbe undermined by strategically focused campaigns of nonviolent struggle. Thisis what many nonviolent struggles (such as the Indian independence struggle,the Gandhian campaign against untouchability, the U.S. civil rights movement,and the Palestinian Intifada) have been about. An important part of anycomplete nonviolent strategy is its constructive program: that part of thestrategy that focuses on creating social structures that satisfy human needs.At the simplest level, this means creating non-hierarchical groups in whichdecisions are made by consensus. As practice is obtained at this level,insight into how larger and more complex human-centred structures may becreated will be acquired.
BM: In many cases social structures are undermined but no one had anystrategy to achieve this. The undermining occurs as various groups seek theirown goals. For example, the rise of capitalism and the state helped toundermine feudalism. Currently the market is undermining various socialstructures, including indigenous cultures and family structures. Traditionalreligion has been undermined through various long-term processes, not just bycampaigns. Nonviolent activists cannot control these processes, but they canmake a difference through campaigns and influencing attitudes. Thedevelopment of the capitalist labour market may have helped to undermineslavery, but campaigns certainly made a difference. Is it more effective topose a complete challenge to historical trends or to adapt to them and try tomove them in a better direction?
What is the history of soldier resistance (not just contemporary)? (Anthony)
RJB: There is a growing literature on this subject, but still very little(particularly of its history) compared to the frequency of the phenomenon'soccurrence. See, for example, Cincinnatus, Self-Destruction: TheDisintegration and Decay of the United States Army during the Vietnam Era(New York: W.W. Norton, 1981); David Cortright, Soldiers in Revolt: TheAmerican Military Today (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1975);David Cortright and Max Watts, Left Face: Soldier Unions and ResistanceMovements in Modern Armies (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991); AndrewRothstein, The Soldiers' Strikes of 1919 (London: Macmillan, 1980).
BM: Katherine Chorley's classic book, Armies and the Art of Revolution(London: Faber and Faber, 1943) is not specifically about soldier resistancebut is well worth consulting by anyone developing strategies concerning themilitary.
How about producing an Australian version of the book Resource Manual for aLiving Revolution (Virginia Coover et al., New Society Publishers,Philadelphia, 1981)?
RJB: I think that this is a good idea, but not a priority given the peopleand resources we have in the Australian Nonviolence Network at the moment.
BM: Unless you are an experienced writer, I think it would be better to beginwith a small writing project, for example producing a leaflet dealing with anarea covered by the Resource Manual. If enough short writings were produced,they could become the basis for a book - but worry about that later.
How do nonviolent actions change participants, police, community, etc.?(Dani)
RJB: The best studies explaining how nonviolence works at the psychologicallevel are probably Erik H. Erikson, Gandhi's Truth: On the Origins ofMilitant Nonviolence (New York: W. W. Norton, 1969); Leroy H. Pelton, ThePsychology of Nonviolence (New York: Pergamon, 1974). And there are manystudies that illustrate how nonviolent action works politically. The standardreference is Gene Sharp's The Politics of Nonviolent Action (Boston: PorterSargent, 1973).
What are people's experiences of living in intentional communities? Why doesit work for some and not for others?
RJB: I haven't read much about this subject but a new book has just beenpublished on communities in Australia. Glen Ochre wrote a chapter aboutCommonground in this book. See Bill Metcalf (ed.), From Utopian Dreaming toCommunal Reality: Cooperative Lifestyles in Australia (Sydney: University ofNew South Wales Press, 1995).