Talk:Nonviolence/Archive 2

Nonviolence or Non-violence?
I am wondering if the title is correct: should there not be a hyphen separating 'non' from violence? Wiki-uk (talk) 17:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Proponents of 'nonviolence' think of the it as 'active force that is not violent' rather than than the negation of the word 'violence'. There is no good word (in English) for 'active nonviolence' which is what the word 'nonviolence' is supposed to mean as opposed to 'Non-Violence' which links closely with "Not Violence".

Does that make sense? Salinecjr (talk) 21:18, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Spelling should remain same as article name
It was recently changed from nonviolence to non-violence throughout article. Obviously different people spell it differently for different reasons. At some point it was decided it would be spelled that way. That does seem to be a naming convention on wikipedia (for example Antisemitism is one word in that article. So to be consistent it should be spelled without hyphen throughout. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Archiving
I just archived the sections that have been resolved or in which people lost interest. That means, if they either had the "resolved" tag, or if there was no discussion since last year and it didn't look like anyone was waiting for more opinions. The long section Talk:Nonviolence/Archive I was a borderline case; I figured that if someone wants to bring up some of the issues discussed there, it would be better to summarize that part of the discussion, and write it as a new section. &mdash; Sebastian 05:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * When I edited the archive, I noticed that there was already a discussion about the hyphenation. Since that seems to be a perpetually repeating issue, I'll add it to the relevant section here. &mdash; Sebastian 05:26, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Gelderloos
Need an indication that this is a notable criticism of nonviolence. Viriditas (talk) 21:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, this is hugely out of proportion, with a paragraph bigger than the text of some entire sections, such as Respect. I took a look at the article Peter Gelderloos, and there are no independent sources that support his notability. The only links that are not to advertisement for his book are the two articles from anarchistnews.org, reporting about his arrest and acquittal, hardly a claim to fame. Moreover, that website doesn't seem like it meets our standards for reliability, such as being third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and having editorial oversight. &mdash; Sebastian 05:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

List of leaders and theorists of nonviolence
This article contains a list of "leaders and theorists of nonviolence", which is currently a free-for-all; there seems to be no agreed criterion for who should be in that list. We already have category:Nonviolence advocates with two subcategories and over 200 articles; it is obviously impossible to include them all into one sentence. I remember reading somewhere else that most people can handle up to 5 different entities, so I propose we strive for a list of 5 people. If we can't do that, it would be better if we just replaced the list with a link to category:Scholars and leaders of nonviolence, or nonviolent resistance.

Also, there is no rhyme or reason to the way the list is currently sorted; I think the least POV and most meaningful way to sort this list would be chronologically.

I looked at all articles linked from that list and in the process created the following table.

Legend - explanation of columns
 * closest categories: abbreviations mean:
 * SL: category:Scholars and leaders of nonviolence, or nonviolent resistance
 * A: category:Nonviolence advocates
 * P: category:Pacifists or descendant thereof
 * NV in article: lists approximately how often the term "nonviolence" or "non-violence" occurs in the article about a given person. (I stopped counting at 10.) I also included related terms when I recognized them. That's obviously a crude measure, and I realized after I did it that it's probably not useful, but I thought it won't hurt to keep it.
 * born: This column is included so we can sort by it.

After going through this list, I realized that it's not as useful as I had thought. I wanted to include a column "referenced" to indicate if there a a reference that shows the significance of this person for NV thinking and action, because I felt that that should be the ultimate criterion. But when I thought about Wałęsa and Einstein, I realized that that is not at all clear cut. Both don't have "nonviolence" proper in their article, but there are plenty of references to back up the general notion that they were doing something related. Is that good enough?

A systemic problem of this list is recentism. E.g., the list contains Stanley Hauerwas, but not his role model Dietrich Bonhoeffer. That is exacerbated because the term nonviolence has only recently been coined and anything older is a matter of interpretation. Any ideas how to overcome this? I'm running out of time now, but I'm looking forward to your replies. &mdash; Sebastian 18:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

BTW, see also Category talk:Scholars and leaders of nonviolence, or nonviolent resistance. &mdash; Sebastian 22:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * OK after a week of silence, it seems nobody cares for that list. I will therefore pare it down to the three most famous people. &mdash; Sebastian 06:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, seeing how that paragraph is just carelessly attached to the unrelated section Nonviolent intervention, and since the most important people are already mentioned elsewhere in this article, I will just remove the paragraph altotgether. For all others, we already have a link to Category:Scholars and leaders of nonviolence, or nonviolent resistance under "See also". &mdash; Sebastian 06:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Article misses the point
Nonviolence is many things, but it is not specifically a philosophy or strategy for social change as the lead claims. It may be used for those things, but it is not those things. Thich Nhat Hanh best describes it as "awareness", which comes before all of the things the article claims it to be. Viriditas (talk) 10:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It has been a constant problem of this article (and others in this category) that there are many opinions by individual editors who each is certain to know the true meaning of the terms, but few reliably sourced definitions. That shows in the lead section, too. If you have a reliably sourced definition, you're very welcome to replace the unsourced text with it. "NV is awareness" alone, of course, would not be a sufficient encyclopedic definition; any more than any single "Love is ..." statement. &mdash; Sebastian 15:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The problem is much greater than a simple definition. This article is not really about nonviolence.  It is about nonviolence in political movements.  Viriditas (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * You have a point. There currently is a huge thematic overlap with nonviolent resistance. It would make sense to sort that out. Looking at the bigger picture, maybe we could merge the details of NVR into that article, and move the table in that article into a new page, which we could call something like "Timeline of ..." per nonviolent resistance. &mdash; Sebastian 05:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, we could also move the quote "We will wear you down by our capacity to suffer", which you removed from this article, to the NVR article. That would fit nicely there. &mdash; Sebastian 09:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Distinction between different NV articles
As User:Salinecjr remarked: We currently have several largely overlapping articles about NV. I believe sorting these out is a great first task for the NV wikiproject proposed above. The following is a presumably incomplete list (numbers in italics are google counts of the term):

Related terms for which we have no articles or redirects yet include: If there is interest, then I propose we start the project as Kingturtle proposed and move the discussion there. &mdash; Sebastian 02:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Nonviolence (1,700,000) (with redirects from Nonviolent direct action (69,400), Non-violence (1,770,000), Non-violent (2,960,000), Non-violent protest (4,850,000 - I am amazed that this number is so much higher than the simple term!) and various other spellings): Most generic title, but article text actually explicitly excludes pacifism and seems to also exclude Ahimsa (or "passive resistance" as Gandhi called understood the term since 1920, or what Mark Kurlansky calls "nonactive pacifism". This distinction was so vital for Gandhi that he said he would "rather see someone incapable of nonviolence resist violently than not resist at all.").
 * 2) Nonviolent resistance (168,000) (with redirects from Nonviolent action (118,000), Passive resistance (544,000)) - this is largely a "History of nonviolent resistance", and it is currently being discussed there if the article should be renamed accordingly.
 * 3) Civil disobedience (2,090,000) - This is less a definition of the term "civil disobedience" than a list of events, which is largely the same as the ones listed in Nonviolent resistance. (Of the 15 examples in the former, only 3 are not in the latter. There is some overlap; the examples of Egypt, the Velvet Revolution, and the Rose Revolution are mentioned in lead, but not in body text; also, it is doubtful if "Religious examples" and "Climate Change" are good examples: The former is unreferenced OR, and the latter hasn't really happened yet.)
 * 4) Nonviolent revolution (28,100) (with redirects from Bloodless coup (159,000) and  Soft revolution (38,300)) - Has request to merge from Peaceful revolution since Aug. 8. Also lists many of the movements already listed in Nonviolent resistance and Civil disobedience.
 * 5) Peaceful revolution (208,000) - Stub; lead says it's synonymous to "bloodless coup", but that is a redirect to Nonviolent revolution. Has request to merge into Nonviolent revolution since Aug. 8. -- this has been merged in the last year.
 * 6) Civil resistance (83,700) - barely above stub level; with distinctions to other terms either nonexistent or based on an unreliable source such as a blog.
 * 7) Satyagraha (650,000): This article currently has a dual function: On one hand, it describes Gandhi's take on nonviolence, and it also serves as an overarching article for a whole list of specific nonviolent movements in India. I think Gandhi's concept would fit nicely in an overall article, such as nonviolence.
 * 8) Ahimsa (950,000) - This is what Gandhi meant by "passive resistance" in the quote above
 * 9) Pacifism (1,470,000) - see above for distinction
 * "Non-cooperation" (208,000) or "Noncooperation" (108,000) - but we do have Non-cooperation movement (24,400) for the specific movement in India. There is also a subsection for it in Nonviolence.
 * "Nonviolent intervention" (59,800) or "non-violent intervention" (3,090) - but we do have Third Party Non-violent Intervention (1,270).


 * I worked on some of these when first started editing, but not since I've learned the ropes. Now I know most of these article are filled with WP:original research. So we should not take too seriously anything NOT sourced. And check out the source of anything that looks questionable. A few comments, with yours in italics:
 * Non-violent protest (4,850,000 - I am amazed that this number is so much higher)'' Probably because of all the news articles or protest announcements, various descriptions of events using "nonviolent protest."
 * Most generic title, but article text actually explicitly excludes pacifism and seems to also exclude Ahimsa (or "passive resistance. What is there now is all WP:original research which needs to be re-written according to good WP:RS.
 * Nonviolent resistance - is largely a "History of nonviolent resistance", and it is currently being discussed there if the article should be renamed accordingly. Sounds good.
 * Civil disobedience -Nonviolent revolution -Peaceful revolution -Civil resistance  A well written WP:RS article will create the right context for all these articles.
 * Satyagraha This article currently has a dual function: On one hand, it describes Gandhi's take on nonviolence, and it also serves as an overarching article for a whole list of specific nonviolent movements in India. I think Gandhi's concept would fit nicely in an overall article, such as nonviolence. It is a specific Philosophy of nonviolence and deserves own article as well as section. "Duragraha" is the other philosophy Gandhi described and is what is used by many groups; it's more nonviolent badgering than anything else.
 * Ahimsa This is what Gandhi meant by "passive resistance" in the quote above. It also is a religious term so deserves own article. Would be integrated into Gandhi's views on Satyagraha.
 * Pacifism It first means opposition to war and organized military violence, allowing some room for violent tactics in self-defense. Does not necessarily mean total nonviolence. Need good WP:RS on this.
 * "Non-cooperation" or "Noncooperation" - but we do have Non-cooperation movement for the specific movement in India. There is also a subsection for it in Nonviolence. Should stay as is, subsection and a specific movement.
 * "Nonviolent intervention" or "non-violent intervention" - but we do have Third Party Non-violent Intervention. Should stay as is, a subsection of Nonviolence (or of nonviolent direct action) and a specific movement.
 * What sources do you suggest people use as some of the main texts? There are a number of classic texts, of course. And then there are all sorts of new books describing varieties of views, having different definitions and synthesis, etc. CarolMooreDC (talk) 02:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This sounds very good and I would like to help you with this. Unfortunately I don't have much time, and I was hoping there'd be more people to share the work; maybe we should leave messages on the talk pages who signed up for the wikiproject? I do think that a wikiproject would be the best location for discussing issues that cross a series of articles on related topics. If you don't like the idea of creating a new one, then maybe we could go to WikiProject Anti-war? Either way, after we decided where to move this discussion, we should post pointers there on each of the affected articles talk pages. &mdash; Sebastian 00:50, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have much background in sources; I just finished Kurlansky's "Nonviolence", which seems to be a good overview. You obviously have a much better background, and I will largely trust you on this. I don't have a preconceived notion; all I want is to see this mess cleaned up. &mdash; Sebastian 00:47, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

In this context, we should also look at the article Peace movement. &mdash; Sebastian 01:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yet another one to add to the above list: Nonresistance. &mdash; Sebastian 06:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And there's de:Gütekraft. I know, it's a different language, but it's just such a beautiful word that I want to mention it here, too. &mdash; Sebastian 06:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * One more: Nonkilling. &mdash; Sebastian 23:33, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've tried to do a bit of housekeeping, removing the image-cruft, which was making the text difficult to read, and removing the last section, which neither appeared notable or remotely relevant. Viriditas (talk) 20:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I've responded to some of the problems identified on this page (and to others I saw in the article) by adding new first paragraph to clarify dual meaning of term. I've also revised what are now 2nd to the 5th paras extensively to make the analysis more coherent; and added source where one had been requested. There is still much to be done, in my view, in the rest of the article (including a critical evaluation of Gelderloos - see below), but I haven't time to do it.Aberdonian99 (talk) 22:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Anti-war cartoons
Just to let you know that I have loaded several cartoons onto Wikimedia Commons under Category:Anti-war cartoons. Feel free to use them on Wikipedia articles. Nirvana2013 (talk) 08:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

potential resource
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/11/28/a_history_of_nonviolence

99.19.42.30 (talk) 07:31, 4 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.190.81.65 (talk)
 * A History of (Non)Violence; Why humans are becoming more peaceful. by Steven Pinker December 2011, excerpt ... removed because it's excessive.
 * 99.181.130.209 (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Not a shred of potential relevance to this article. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 01:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Shorten, see View History(s) ... 99.181.131.59 (talk) 05:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Here is a shorter version of 99.181.130.209's which was deleted by Special:Contributions/Arthur Rubin along with signatures, see WP:TALK.  99.181.139.130 (talk) 10:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Arthur Rubin, please see Talk page guidelines. 141.218.36.41 (talk) 00:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's still a probable copyright violation, many of links (within quotes) violate Wikipedia guidelines as being either obvious (violating WP:OVERLINK), speculative as to the author's intent, or just wrong (the Wikipedia article being on something entirely different).
 * And irrelevant to the improving the article. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 02:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * And irrelevant to the improving the article. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 02:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

potential resource
In Uprising, Syrians Find Spark of Creativity "In Protests, Syrians Find the Spark of Creativity." published NYT December 19, 2011 by Neil MacFarquhar

97.87.29.188 (talk) 00:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

potential resource; 'empathy, imagination, and a healthy sense of humor"
from Talk:Extremism ... Fanatics Attack; The best defense against extremism includes empathy, imagination, and a healthy sense of humor by Amos Oz, from How to Cure a Fanatic Utne Reader November-December 2011

Here is an excerpt ... 99.181.147.88 (talk) 03:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I literally laughed out loud.
Leon Trotsky, Frantz Fanon, Reinhold Niebuhr, Subhash Chandra Bose, George Orwell, Ward Churchill...

Ward Churchill in between George Orwell and Malcolm X? Jesus, not to be mean to the poor guy, can we edit him out for the sake of style? --66.233.55.145 (talk) 02:15, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What? 24.7.129.254 (talk) 08:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Indo-centric
The article is much too centred around India. Like, for example, why is it necessary to include the Sanskrit word for nonviolence? SomePseudonym (talk) 03:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Because this is where the concept and the word come from. The English word "Nonviolence" is a loan translation from Sanskrit, just like Beer garden and Voice exchange come from German and mention the German word. That said, you might ask whether that information needs to be right at the beginning; I'm not a friend of that, either. I'd rather see it further down in the lead section, as in Civil war or Wednesday, or in its own section, as in Iceberg, Shellac and Politburo. &mdash; Sebastian 05:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Misdirecting sentence in a very important article.
"Mahavira (599 BCE–527 BCE), the twenty-fourth tirthankara of the Jain religion, was the torch-bearer of "ahimsa" and introduced the word to the world and applied the concept in his own life. He taught that to more strongly connect with God, one must likewise be harmless."  Paragraph two in article Nonviolence

This is false, since Mahavira never preached about the existence of God. He did not believe in God as a creator or destroyer. If he did not believe in God, it's false to state the above mentioned sentence. Misdirecting.

I know what I speak of, for I'm a Jain. The philosophy of Jainism rejects the existence of God. It states that human beings have the ability to become divine (false again to use the word God here, since to the majority of the population God = creator) if that person follows the path of Nonviolence.

He never did believe in God or told people to follow the path of ahimsa because it would help them connect with God. He said follow it for there's no other way to transcend.

I don't have a proper source to substantiate my argument, since this was taught to me as a child by my mum. But, if you are to read wiki's article on Jainism, it mentions that Jainim doesn't profess the existence of God. Sadly, what Mahavira taught then has been corrupted over time, and several Jains today do believe in God. Several Jain consider him God in fact. Fragments of dust comprehending the universe. Corruption of knowledge is inevitable then, but we must strive nevertheless. Hence, I write to you.

I hope somebody reads this... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scribblingchimpanzee (talk • contribs) 10:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Pacifism vs Passivity
I'm not sure I agree with the notion that pacifism and passivity are synonymous. Pacifism is about antiviolence, how does that equate to being passive? How is that different from nonviolence? Sonofathens (talk) 23:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC)


 * This article seems clear to me in saying that nonviolence is different form passivity.
 * The best forms of nonviolence -- nonviolent direct action -- expose hypocrisy or stupidity in existing policies. With Gandhi's Salt March, he set out to deliberately break British law that forbade Indians from making salt.  He marched 240 miles in 24 days, 10 miles per day, telling people along the way that he planned to make salt in violation of British law.  By the time he was arrested 53 days later, millions of Indians were making salt illegally or buying illegal salt.
 * Seventeen years later, the British could no longer govern India. They quit.  A few thousand had been killed in the interim, but no where nearly as many as would have been killed with violent resistance, which may not have succeeded. See Effective defense and sources cited therein.  DavidMCEddy (talk) 00:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)