Robert Hovey

War & Pacifism- Dr. Cochran

5/14/17
Viable Alternative of Nonviolence
According to Mahatma Gandhi, “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.” Prior to the second half of the semester, my view about non-violence success as a viable
alternative was diminutive. Over the course of my life I have always been interested in war
history such as World War II, the Vietnam War, or the Iraq war. I remember learning in class or
watching documentaries at home about major battles during those wars or certain turning points
that gave the ultimate winner the upper-hand. After this second half of the semester, I am pretty
disappointed in the time I have spent learning and researching about violent wars between
countries. Learning about successful nonviolent examples like Gandhi in India, UNIDO in the
Philippines, or the Otpor in Serbia has dramatically shifted my view on nonviolence success. If I
would have learned in school or watched more documentaries at home about successful
nonviolent movements my views about justifying warfare would have been different. Regarding
our world’s realistic effort to diminish war, Hardy writes an interesting poem line, “After two
thousand years of Mass…We’ve got as far as poison gas” (Hardy, p.1). This line proves true
because every time I attend mass I hear prayer intentions regarding the end of warfare, yet there
are currently violent wars constantly occurring between countries including my own. It frustrates
me to learn about these nonviolent success stories because I often question myself what if a
country or a certain group of people resorted to a nonviolent option rather than engaging
violently? I think many things could have been different and that moving forward nonviolence is
indeed a viable alternative to warfare. Examining different examples and arguments presented by
authors there must be a few constant variables present for a nonviolent strategy to be successful.
Nonviolence can be a viable alternative to warfare for a country if its population can withdraw
power from the oppressive government, effectively gain enough participation to form a large
mass of participants, use the mass for different forms of nonviolent protests and strikes, and gain
support from prominent institutions or foreign governments.

Foremost, it is essential to note the underlying ability for a government to rule a

population is through power, so to effectively use noncooperation techniques the population
must withdraw power from the government. Over the course of history, power has been used to
influence and control a population of people for positive and negative outcomes. We know on
one side of the spectrum Adolf Hitler used power to ultimately build a violent fighting
population of people to perform various harmful engagements. On the other side of the spectrum,
Martin Luther King used power to influence a population of peaceful people to nonviolently alter
the treatment of African Americans within the United States. Whether used for a positive or
negative outcome the theory of power indicates a ruler only has as much power as the population
is willing to give him, so therefore; if the people decide to withdraw power from the ruler he
would become powerless. Regarding the attitude of having power over a population, Norman
states, “What frightens power on top is the realization that people on the bottom have power”
(Norman, p. 216). This is so essential for nonviolent action because withdrawing power from a
ruler can be accomplished through nonviolent actions by the bottom aimed at removing power
from the top. Even in governments that are not a democracy, no one person can rule a whole
entire population on their own. They indeed need assistance from other top people willing to
work alongside the ruler and a population willing to go along with what the power demands. But,
what if the assistance working alongside the power and the population that goes along with the
power decides to start not cooperating? When these circumstances occur nonviolently, power can
be effectively taken away from the top and the pop. Sharp provides the essential elements to
nonviolent action through acts of omission, acts of commission, and or a combination of both
(Sharp, p. 259). The specific elements will be addressed later, but it is essential to note the ability
of direct nonviolent action to withdraw power. Along with the ability of the bottom to use
nonviolence to eliminate top power, the top also has the power to counter the bottom with
violence and harmful consequences. Norman regards this ability of the top as, “Those in power
can use sanctions against those who are disobedient, but even sanctions requires obedience to be
carried out” (Norman, p. 215). The realization of this ability demands the cooperation from both
top and bottom level to eliminate this power. It is easy to feel powerless within a population
oppressed by a government or ruler, but this overarching power can be effectively withdrawn
through noncooperation techniques by the population.

Furthermore, after realizing the theory of power, to combat an oppressing government a

successful nonviolent strategy above all needs a large number of participating members to make
an impact and gain recognition. It is obvious that the more participants a nonviolent movement
has the more likelihood it will succeed. To gain enough support behind the nonviolent resistance
movement the leader of the group must have some platform to communicate their goal and
strategies. Whether that platform is an underground media, press release, word-of-mouth, or
through modern day social media; these platforms are essential for communication and
organization. Gandhi during his nonviolent resistance to British rule used daily or weekly press
releases to connect to all classes of people to form a large resistance population (Gandhi film).
The more people participating in nonviolent techniques the more effective the techniques will be.
For example, during Nazi rule in Norway, 98% of teachers refused to join the Nazi Union
resulting in harsh punishments. Eventually, the large participation rate of their nonviolent
strategy succeeded because the government eventually gave-in and reinstated all the teachers due
to lack of ability to replace the ousted teachers (Schwarcz, p. 354). If the teachers wouldn’t have
had the whole 98% participation within the population of teachers the outcome could have been
different resulting in no teachers being reinstated. Regarding the importance of participation,
Chenoweth and Stephan state, “…nonviolent campaigns fail to achieve their objective when they
are unable to overcome the challenge of participation, then they fail to recruit a robust, diverse,
and broad based membership…” (Chenoweth & Stephan, p. 10). An important element to note
here is regarding the diverse characteristic of the participating population. For a successful
nonviolent campaign to work it must appeal to all members of society from the youth to the old,
the white-collar workers to the blue-collar workers, and the rich to the poor. If the opposition
group does not benefit all members of society as one whole population they will not achieve
enough diversification therefore not enough participants. On the other hand, if the nonviolent
resistance does not pertain to all classes the government can effectively use this as a loophole.
The government can use the classes against each other to combat the nonviolence such as
combating rural verse urban or religion verse religion. The Optor in Serbia effectively pertained
to all classes within the population that eventually allowed them to get a participating number in
the thousands from all different classes to strike at the Parliament building all at once (Bring
Down A Dictator). The belief in the power of numbers is so essential for a nonviolent resistance
group and to achieve those numbers they must relate their goals to all classes of people within
the population to effectively carry out their strategies.

At the same time, once a large number of participants are combined, the use of protests
and strikes from the population can directly alter the power of the government. There are various
ways a group can achieve noncooperation to directly affect sectors within the society such as the
economy, production, or political structure. Sharp provides three classes of noncooperation
methods: nonviolent protests where the group intends to persuade or express disapproval, acts by
withdrawing or withholding social, economic, or political cooperation, and finally acts by direct
intervention (Sharp, p. 259). Using mass of people to execute these type of methods are the best
way to get the attention of the government especially if the methods affect large sectors of the
economy. For example, Gandhi effectively harmed the economy of India and essentially Great
Britain when he lead the Salt March that included thousands of people extracting their own salt
at the ocean to protest the new salt tax imposed by Great Britain (Gandhi film). He successfully
got the attention of the government because he used his mass population of participants to
nonviolently counter the power of the salt tax. The population can also use sit-ins or protests to
affect political platform of the country. Optor successfully altered the political platform of Serbia
when they helped join all opposition parties to battle their dictator Slobodan Milosevic as one
political party eventually ousting the violent dictator (Bringing Down a Dictator). The most
crucial element for the nonviolent strategy is that during the process if they face violent response
from the government they must remain structured and nonviolent. This is often a turning point
for a nonviolent movement. If the group does face violent response from the government and
there is enough media there to capture the violence it will serve the group well in the long-run.
The sacrifice of personal harm or imprisonment by the government must be a realized possibility
for the group and its participants. Under no circumstance should they then decide to retaliate
with violence because it will jeopardize the nonviolent strategy. If the media platform can relay
the message through videos or articles that the government is violently attacking nonviolent
protests more support will be given to the nonviolent group. A participating population carrying
out these nonviolent protests or strikes must remain disciplined enough to remain nonviolent
even if they are faced with violence because that response will be the most beneficial.
 In addition, the nonviolent strategies performed by the people must also be supported by
prominent institutions within the country or foreign governments. Two aspects relating to
intuitional or foreign aid that are important is notoriety and financially. The notoriety of the aid
channel is important because the more notoriety that religion, group, or institution has it will
bring more attention to the underlying issue. For instance, in Norway during the nonviolent
resistance of the Nazis the Catholic Church played a vital role. The notoriety of the church
threatened the Nazi Party because they knew if they battled the religion it will bring more
attention to the underlying issue of their violent rule. Eventually, all bishops in the area resigned
and the congregation boycotted pastors appointed by the Nazi Party (Schwarcz, p. 356). The
church didn’t back down and the notoriety of their institution caused the Nazi Party to yield to
the noncooperation. Second aspect of financially deals with foreign countries more than
domestic institutions. Financial aid from foreign countries beings both money and support to the
nonviolent organization. Nonviolent organizations have expenses to cover to carry out their goals
and strategies. The various ways they might use to communicate or organize their participants
can cost money. The Otpor in Serbia also received financial aid from US and European countries
(Bringing Down a Dictator). Alongside money, support from foreign governments through
media coverage or direct involvement is beneficial. International media coverage brings more
attention to the issue and pressure on the oppressing government to start considering the
demands of the nonviolent organization. The UNIDO in the Philippines received direct support
from US President Reagan when he flew their dictator out of the country that accomplished the
parties’ nonviolent goal (Chenoweth & Stephan, p. 4). The support by institutions and foreign
countries that provide notoriety and financial aid helps the nonviolent groups achieve their goals
and objectives.

Finally, nonviolent movements can succeed with the above variables to successfully oust
a dictator or oppressive government. These variables also pose a better opportunity of success for
a nonviolent organization because they can be easier to obtain than if the organization was
violent. The essentials of international and institution support, participation, power withdrawal,
and protests or strikes are more attainable when they remain nonviolent. Regarding the success
rate of nonviolent movements compared to violent movements, Chenoweth and Stephan
concluded, in the past decade nonviolent movements have had a higher success rate than violent
movements (Chenoweth & Stephan, p. 7). The ability to achieve the above variables and ease
into peace after the ousted dictator or government have been removed are included in the success
rates. Nonviolence as a viable alternative to warfare can be realized if people start becoming
more educated on success examples like Gandhi in India or Otpor in Serbia rather than
successful violent campaigns. The more people who know that nonviolence can successfully be a
viable alternative to warfare, the more likely it will be chosen as a route to achieve freedom and
peace.
 Works Cited
Chenoweth, E., & Stephan, M. J. (2013). Why civil resistance works: the strategic logic of
nonviolent conflict. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
Hardy, T. (1928). Peace Upon Earth. Winter Words. Retrieved May 10, 2017
Norman, L. E., Holmes, R. L., & Gan, B. L. (2012). Nonviolence in theory and practice (#25).
Long Grove, Ill: Waveland Press.
Schwarcz, E., Holmes, R. L., & Gan, B. L. (2012). Nonviolence in theory and practice (#47).
Long Grove, Ill: Waveland Press.
Sharp, G., Holmes, R. L., & Gan, B. L. (2012). Nonviolence in theory and practice (#32). Long
Grove, Ill: Waveland Press.
York, S. (Director). (2002). Bringing Down a Dictator [Video file]. United States: York
Zimmerman Inc. Retrieved May 10, 2017.