There are two broad approaches to nonviolence: tactical nonviolence and principled nonviolence. Tactical nonviolence is based on the belief that nonviolence is one tactic or strategy among a range of choices (Bond, 1994; Sharp, 1973a; Zunes, Kurtz, & Asher, 1999). From this perspective:
Nonviolent action is a generic term covering dozens of specific methods of protest, noncooperation and intervention, in all of which the actionists conduct the conflict by doing – or refusing to do – certain things without using physical violence. As a technique, therefore, nonviolent action is not passive. It is not inaction. It is action that is nonviolent (Sharp, 1973b, p. 64, emphasis in original).
Principled nonviolence is built on a commitment to nonviolence as a philosophy or a way of life, and the belief that nonviolence is morally superior to violence (Burgess & Burgess, 1994; Burrowes, 1994; Moyer, 1999b). Those who adopt a principled approach to nonviolence argue that it “is not simply a matter of abstinence from physical or verbal violence, it is an attitude of mind, an emotional orientation towards loving care and concern” (Curle, 1995, p. 17). From this perspective nonviolence is:
A means of breaking the cycle of violence; it is a moral method of social change which is not passive nor violent; it requires human commitment but not military might; and it seeks to change but not to completely destroy relationships. Employing nonviolence entails breaking from our traditional patterns of resolving conflicts; patterns which distribute power to the strongest and the most violent (Woehrle, 1993, p. 209).
For advocates of principled nonviolence, the issue is not whether or not nonviolence is more effective than violence but rather that, regardless of what other people do, nonviolence is the morally right thing to do (Burgess & Burgess, 1994, pp. 13-14). According to the Feminism and Nonviolence Study Group (1983), nonviolence is “a principle and a technique, a set of ideas about how life should be lived and a strategy for social change” (p. 26).
Here I concentrate on literature discussing principled nonviolence. Due to the broad focus of principled nonviolence, there are problems with the word nonviolence itself since it implies that “we are still thinking in terms of violence” (Starhawk, 2001, p. 2). Mahatma Gandhi was dissatisfied with nonviolence and associated terms (Gandhi, 1987, p. 63) and so, following a search to find a more appropriate description, he decided on satyagraha as an alternative (Gandhi, 1987, p. 35). Its literal meaning is “holding on to Truth and it means, therefore, Truth-force [where] Truth is soul or spirit. It is, therefore, known as soul-force” (Gandhi, 1951, p. 3). Reid (in McAllister, 1982) argues that soul-force “implies a more assertive, positive stand than does nonviolence – that we rely on the strength of truth rather than on physical force” (p. vi). Satyagraha relates particularly to the practice of nonviolent action; the philosophy of nonviolence is more closely related to ahimsa, which is discussed in greater depth below. Like Gandhi, Martin Luther King initially did not describe his guiding principle as nonviolence but as Christian love (King, 1958, p. 84). Later, he spoke more frequently of nonviolence, which he described as “the persistent and determined application of peaceable power to offenses against the community” (King, 1967, p. 184).
Although an alternative is needed that embodies the idea of it being more than the absence of violence, the term nonviolence has a rich tradition, is widely used and, at present, remains the best alternative. Although satyagraha has greater depth of meaning, it has not been adopted in this study because it is strongly linked to nonviolence in the Gandhian tradition and the term has not been widely used in the West. For some writers and activists, the hyphenated non-violence emphasises the absence of violence (Cumming, 1985, p. 9), whereas nonviolence, without the hyphen, refers to the broader philosophy of social change and human relationship (Boulding, 1999; Cumming, 1985; McAllister, 1982). This thesis follows this convention by using nonviolence for the latter broad meaning but non-violence when discussing the absence of violence (for example in discussion of the survey and in-depth interviews) or when using quotes from other sources which retain the hyphen.
INFJ Assumes the Role of Common Enemy to Unite the Group
isms and stuff you can’t really you can210:10use those to an extent but you know210:12everybody’s a little different me210:14personally I think I’m a more goofy210:16sarcastic infj I can be serious I think210:20it’s I think it’s a lot about like I210:22said everything evolves around your210:24environment and who you’re around okay210:25and your circle of friends or210:27acquaintances in this case for infj is210:29could you I don’t have a whole lot of210:30friends which is not a bad thing by the210:32way I don’t ever assume it’s a bad thing210:35uh I have a group that I am more the210:40serious straight man in and the more210:42concrete rationalized analytical mind in210:45that group but I also have groups that I210:48am the clown I’m the jokester I210:50basically I know J’s in my personal210:54opinion assumed the role that is most210:57necessary for whatever group or210:59organization they become a part of so if211:02the organization is missing that211:03level-headed the structured thinker I211:05will do my best to become that isn’t211:08necessarily my strong point probably not211:10but I will try to do it anyway if I feel211:12like I need to be the bad guy in the211:14group I will become that bad guy so one211:17thing to keep in mind is that I know211:18Jays are very capable of becoming211:20extremely despotic and tyrants all the211:27biggest tyrants and then despots and and211:30all those kind of people in the world211:32like Hitler and all that where INF211:34J’s at the same time some of the211:37greatest philosophical minds people who211:41pushed society into a more positive211:43direction and things like that like211:45Gandhi and stuff Brian of JS as well so211:48we’re bit were capable of either role so211:52it’s all about it’s all about how you’re211:55shaped by your environment and the211:57people you interact with and meet you212:00can very much Teeter on either edge212:03there’s also RJ’s are very complicated212:06to write because I’m very capable evil212:09I’ve done evil in the past what I would212:12consider evil to people but I do those212:16things because I see them necessary I212:18very much see212:21like when I was talking about conflict I212:23very much feel sometimes conflict is212:26necessary sometimes lies are necessary212:29and I will do those things if I feel212:33like I can benefit the people involved212:35I’ve had groups in the past where I’m212:38taking the role of the bad guy the the212:41guy who who will say things that212:43triggers people gets them upset it’s212:46very much it’s almost it’s almost212:48considered like a martyr complex but at212:50the same time it’s almost more of just212:52this being annoying I actually find212:55actually weird feeling to be extremely212:56obnoxious to be honest makes me do212:59things I don’t really want to do I213:01always it always leads me to this213:05demonizing my life and doing things and213:08making decisions based on this because I213:11want to make other people happy I don’t213:13do enough of this to feel it what makes213:15me happy and what I value and what’s213:17important to me because this is weak I213:19don’t know how to do these things213:21properly when I do figure them out so I213:23ended up just naturally catering to213:25other people there’s times I’ve213:27sacrificed myself for groups taking the213:29blame for things that I don’t need to213:30take the blame for for the most part213:32I’ll just let that happen to me213:35I’ve gotten better at not letting it213:38happen but it’s always gonna naturally213:39have and I’ve always kind of fallen into213:41this I think it’s just because you get213:42so comfortable playing that role it213:45eventually just becomes into natural and213:47an everyday part of your life213:49I have groups that I’ve played that role213:51in and you know every once in a while213:53there’s always like that one or two213:55people you know hilariously one of my213:58friends that I talked to a lot it’s hard214:02to say if we’re even friends or not but214:04I for whatever reason I’m always like214:06extremely comfortable we were just214:07sharing some really private things with214:08her and like bouncing a lot of ideas and214:11things offer her she was in a group that214:14we were in together where I was214:16basically like everybody knew who I was214:19this wasn’t a this wasn’t an MMO we214:22played everybody in the server knew who214:25I was and I was basically the number-one214:27villain in that entire game server214:29across thousands of people everybody214:32knew who I was214:33there was forum posts about me all the214:35time and how214:35much of a scumbag I was how vile I was214:38and I took that role in our group mostly214:42for unification purposes because people214:44weren’t getting along so I pretty much214:46became the bad guy in order to help push214:49the group in order to achieve things and214:51the group ended up becoming the number214:53ones and you serve Gildan server for a214:56long time I think they still are and I214:58have a lot of archived at villainous215:01posts to both have myself in that game215:03it’s pretty funny actually I think I215:05think they have I think they still keep215:07my character active then they just kind215:09of rename it and around to fit and215:11they kind of use it as like almost like215:14a statue now of remember remember the215:17villain it’s pretty funny but this is215:20this girl in particular understood like215:22she could see I know I don’t know what215:25type she is I never bothered and really215:26care but you know she could see she215:28understood what I was doing and she’s215:31somebody that it was really painful for215:35me to actually do those things but215:37because she understood what I was doing215:39and I could talk to her about it and and215:40and and she understood what was215:42happening what I was trying to do it was215:45easier for me that way so there’s always215:47gonna be people who can see and215:50understand the hidden meaning behind215:53your actions so don’t think there won’t215:55be so there’s always going to be people215:57out there for you you’re not going to be215:59misunderstood forever there are people216:01who do understand and so oh that’s it216:06man this video is extremely long I216:07apologize I have nothing else I don’t216:09know what to say guys you have any216:12questions or comments let me know your 9216:14MJ you want to talk about things I guess216:19that’s that’s everything that’s216:22everything I’m pretty sure216:26yeah216:29goodbye
Richard Rohr Meditation: Courageous Nonviolence
Thomas Merton writes, “Non-violence implies a kind of bravery far different from violence.” [3] Our dualistic minds see evil as black and white and that the only solution is to eliminate evil. Nonviolence, on the other hand, comes from an awareness that I am also the enemy and my response is part of the whole moral equation. I cannot destroy the other without destroying myself. I must embrace my enemy just as much as I must welcome my own shadow. Both acts take real and lasting courage.
Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) coined a new term, satyagraha, because “passive resistance” didn’t capture his mission. Satyagraha combines the Sanskrit word sat—that which is, being, or truth—with graha—holding firm to or remaining steadfast in. It is often translated as “truth force” or “soul force.”
.. To create peaceful change, we must begin by remembering who we are in God. Gandhi believed the core of our being is union with God. From this awareness, nonviolence must flow naturally and consistently:
Non-violence is not a garment to be put on and off at will. Its seat is in the heart, and it must be an inseparable part of our very being. . . . If love or non-violence be not the law of our being, the whole of my argument falls to pieces
.. Regardless of what name we call the divine, Gandhi believed that experiencing God’s loving presence within is central to nonviolence. This was his motivation and sustenance as he fasted for peace, as he embraced the untouchables (whom he called “Children of God”)
Richard Rohr Meditation: The Root of Violence
The root of violence is the illusion of separation—from God, from Being itself, from being one with everyone and everything. When you don’t know you are connected and one, you will invariably resort to some form of violence to get the dignity and power you lack.
.. When you can become little enough, naked enough, and honest enough, then you will ironically find that you are more than enough. At this place of poverty and freedom, you have nothing to prove and nothing to protect. Here you can connect with everything and everyone. Everything belongs. This cuts violence at its very roots before there is even a basis for fear or greed—the things that usually cause us to be angry, suspicious, and violent.
.. To be clear, it is inconceivable that a true believer would be racist, anti-Semitic, xenophobic, homophobic, or bigoted toward any group or individual, especially toward the poor, which seems to be an acceptable American prejudice. In order to end the cycle of violence, our fight must flow from our authentic identity as Love.
.. I founded the Center for Action and Contemplation thirty years ago was to give activists some grounding in spirituality so they could continue working for social change, but from a stance much different than vengeance, ideology, or willpower pressing against willpower.
Most activists I knew loved Gandhi’s and Martin Luther King, Jr.’s teachings on nonviolence. But it became clear to me that many of them had only an intellectual appreciation rather than a participation in the much deeper mystery. I often saw people on the Left playing the victim and creating victims of others who were not like them. The ego was still in charge. It was still a power game, not the science of love that Jesus taught us.
.. It takes a lifetime, I think. This kind of action, rooted in one’s True Self, comes from a deeper knowing of what is real, good, true, and beautiful, beyond labels and dualistic judgments of right or wrong. From this place, our energy is positive and has the most potential to create change for the good. This stance is precisely what we mean by “being in prayer.” We must pray “unceasingly” to maintain this posture.
.. Wait in prayer, but don’t wait for absolutely perfect motivation or we will never act. Radical union with God and neighbor is our starting place, not private perfection. Contemplation offers a way to make our action sustainable and lasting over the long haul, without being overly defended or cynical.