Talk:Nonviolent resistance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Politics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Nonviolence
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nonviolence, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of nonviolence on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

/archive 1

Case of Czechoslovakia[edit]

Velvet revolution 1989 is correctly shown as an example of non-violent resistence, however the description of this event is wrong. There is desribed a resistence after Soviet invasion in 1968, Velvet revolution was a non-violent revolution which overthrown the communist regime more than 20 years later, it was not a response to any military action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Overlap between Nonviolence, Nonviolent Action, and Pacifism[edit]


There is definitely overlap between these three articles. I believe there is a distinction between nonviolent action and pacifism (one being active and one passive, respectfully), but I am not aware of a distinction between nonviolence and nonviolent action. Any thoughts? Salinecjr (talk) 22:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, and I will bring it up at talk:Nonviolence#Distinction between different NV articles; that's the most generic name, and maybe there are more people there. — Sebastian 22:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

This Page Should be a List[edit]


I hate to throw this out there when I don't have the time to change it, but I think this page should be a list considering the article simply explains the nonviolent aspects of certain movements. Does anyone else think it would be rational to move the majority of information to their own respective articles and turn this into a nice looking list (See this really nice example of Prehistoric Scotland).

Additionally, I think the name could be changed from Nonviolent resistance to something like 'Timeline of Nonviolent Movements' or 'Nonviolent Movements'. Salinecjr (talk) 06:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Name change[edit]


Now that these examples have been organized in list form, I suggest renaming the article "List of nonviolent resistance" Salinecjr (talk) 02:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Other names (proposed in previous section) are: 'Timeline of Nonviolent Movements' or 'Nonviolent Movements'. Maybe we could also have a name of the pattern "History of ...". For the second half of the name, we might also consider just "nonviolence", since we currently don't have such a more general list, and it seems a bit arbitrary to exclude other notable or influential moments of NV history from such a list. For that reason, I would like to postpone that decision till after we reached a decision on talk:Nonviolence#Distinction between different NV articles. — Sebastian 22:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, that discussion has become stale, so that we don't have a decision there yet - after over a year! In the meantime, I noticed that we also have Peace movement, which also is a collection of different events in history. Still, I like the table format here better, and I'm tempted to propose a merge of these two, so that all can be listed in table format. — Sebastian 01:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Just an idea: The merged article could be named timeline of nonviolence. — Sebastian 05:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)



Do you think Henry Thoreau should be listed in this article? - Babygrand1 (talk) 00:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

That depends on whether we want this to be a timeline of nonviolent movements, or more generally a timeline of nonviolence - see previous section #Name change. — Sebastian 22:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Replace "country" with "region" and leave out flags?[edit]


We can't really limit ourselves to "countries". Judea never was a country, nor were the Chatham Islands. How about if we change the heading to "region"? Also, MOS:FLAG requires a "good reason" for adding flags. Is there one, other than that it looks nice? Most of the flags are wrong, since they use the flags for current countries instead of the historic ones, and it's hard to come up with flags for regions like Judea. How about if we remove the flags? — Sebastian 06:53, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Iranian election protests non-violent?[edit]


I'm not 100% sure I would call the Iranian election protests non-violent in the truest sense of the term, not all, but many have been going out looking for confrontations with police, throwing bricks and petrol bombs, burning cars and buses, some looting, and fighting with police. I would call the iranian eletion protests more of a typical uprising than non-violent protest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, you seem to be right. The cited article[1] says "Reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi urged his supporters to avoid violence", but later reports "secret policemen being attacked and chased away by protesters" and "police motorbikes were set on fire". The video shows what appear to be some nonviolent protesters being clubbed by the police, but also protesters throwing stones. The article 2009–2010 Iranian election protests lists some nonviolent actions, such as "using tactics such as the boycott of goods advertised on state-controlled television", but also says they were chanting chant "Death to the dictator!", which doesn't sound nonviolent to me. So, at best, it's a very mixed picture, but I don't see the level of nonviolence that would warrant for it to be listed here. — Sebastian 00:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Palestinians Try a Less Violent Path to Resistance[edit]

Resolved: This didn't need to be resolved in the first place.

This is probably also not notable enough to be listed here, but it gives me hope, and I would like to celebrate it [2]: "Something is stirring in the West Bank. With both diplomacy and armed struggle out of favor for having failed to end the Israeli occupation, the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority, joined by the business community, is trying to forge a third way: to rouse popular passions while avoiding violence." Rajmohan Gandhi just visited Palestine for a protest march, and next week, Martin Luther King III is scheduled to speak here at a conference on nonviolence. Let's hope for the best! — Sebastian 00:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Section "Current and recent nonviolent resistance organizations"[edit]


This section is a mess; it contains links to articles that are no organizations, and to articles that don't even mention "nonviolence". I will simply remove those that don't fit, and I will move those that seem to specifically advocate nonviolence to category:Nonviolent resistance movements or category:Nonviolence organizations, as appropriate. (See also Talk:Nonviolence#Organizations that embrace nonviolence and category talk:Nonviolence organizations.) — Sebastian 20:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Women of Liberia Mass Action for Peace[edit]

I'm taking the liberty to add the Women of Liberia Mass Action for Peace here. It probably should rather go in the peace movement article, but that article is a mess, and I like the table format here. Maybe, as mentioned above, one day we will merge the two anyway. — Sebastian 02:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Do we need the refs column?[edit]

While it is generally good to encourage the use of reliable sources, I don't think we need an extra column for that here. It seems obvious to me that whatever we write in the table here should always be an excerpt of the "main article", and that article already should have all the necessary references. Moreover, a general refs column doesn't make it clear what part of the text is being referenced. Can we therefore remove the refs column and move the existing refs to their pertinent locations? — Sebastian 02:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

"Jasmine" revolution in Tunisia[edit]

I have added material concerning the "Jasmine" Revolution in Tunisia. I believe the protests would be widely considered non-violent. I would also like to see a link added to the page concerning "Islamic nonviolence" in parity with "Christian nonviolence", but I am running out of time to be online today. Are there any objections to my current material, or to the additions I propose? Feedback is very welcome, as this is a very serious and possibly controversial issue. -- TheLastWordSword (talk) 21:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Merge with "Civil resistance"[edit]

There are compeling resasons for the merging. It is basicaly the same concept. The examples cited are also the same! Olegwiki (talk) 18:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC). There has been a response to this suggestion in the talk page of civil resistance. Also both entries (CR and NVR) were promptly amended to take into account the points made in the CR talk page. I have now made further changes to the CR page, mostly responding to these same points, and have removed the merge notice from both articles. Aberdonian99 (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


‎Wnjr reverted my addition of Bahrain to the article because "no indication of relevance to article". IMHO, this is invalid. The means of the uprising are non-violent and we already have Egypt and Tunisia there. Bahraini people didn't pick up arms like in Syrian and Libya. Could explain your reason a bit more? Same applies to the revert in Nonviolent revolution‎ article which the edit summary said "no indication Bahraini revolt is nonviolent, or relevant to article".

Maybe the text didn't display that clearly, but as far as I saw in the previous entries, this wasn't required. Anyway, here's a source to help clear the picture:

  1. foreignpolicy: "Also there is a history of non-violent revolutions faling miserably as well: The Green Movement in Iran in 2009, The Burmese Saffron Revolution in 2007 and the Bahrain uprising this year".
  2. There were general strikes: [3], [4].
  3. Large peaceful protests: March of loyalty to martyrs.
  4. And they even used flowers: [5] [6].

Good? Mohamed CJ (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Main section needs work - two suggestions.[edit]

I have spent parts of the last three days enhancing the "See also" and "Further reading" sections. I'd like to suggest two improvements to the main section - please say what you think:

1. The title of the main section, "History of nonviolent resistance," is misleading. It is not a history, and calling it a history is encouraging contributors to make overly long entries in the "Summary" boxes. It is, in fact, a timeline, and a wonderfully useful one. (I wish I'd had one like it many decades ago.) I believe a truer title for the main section would be, "Timeline of nonviolent resistance activities." I therefore propose substituting that title.

2. It is not consistent with balance and objectivity (i.e. with our encyclopedic enterprise) for some "Summaries" to be hugely longer than others. And it's silly, since every summary links to a "Main Article" where viewers can learn more. I therefore propose limiting all "Summary" boxes to 100 words or less, and putting the phrase "100 words max" in parenthesis after the "Summary" heading at the top of the timeline. (Perhaps someone with more temerity than I could edit existing summaries down to 100 words.)

Do you support either of these changes? - Babel41 (talk) 23:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with your first suggestion, but the second needs working on. We're supposed to give due weight to events. For instance the Egyptian revolution should be given more weight than say the Bahraini uprising (these are easy to compare, because both are Arab Spring uprisings). The question is how do we determine the weight (significance) of the event? number of participants is good, but alone that is not enough and it might not be always available or accurate. The outcome, especially if it's successful is another thing to consider. Obviously inclusion criteria for any entry is that it is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article.
This article gets ~8500 reads per month and deserves to look better than this. I'd say the first thing to work on is to find citations for verification to almost all entries. I'm not ready to work on this article, but I can provide all source for the Bahraini uprising section (and to summarize it further if needed). Mohamed CJ (talk) 14:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Bad nonviolent resistance[edit]

Should we put examples of bad non violent resistance? For example:

  • Protests and pro-NAMBLA activism, like the one in Los Angeles in 1986.
  • The ongoing protests of the Westboro Baptist Church.

Otherwise this article fails the Socratic method by assuming that all nonviolent resistance is good. --Pepsi Lite (talk) 13:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

In general if they have their own articles, yes it is fine to include them. By the way, I don't think it's appropriate to say "bad" non-violent resistance in the article, since we're supposed to be NPOV. Mohamed CJ (talk) 14:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Jan Rose Kasmir's picture[edit]

One of the people I removed from the See Also section was Jan Rose Kasmir, which is a pity because I really love her picture — I think it would be perfect for this article! Unfortunately, it's not in the public domain. — Sebastian 21:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Euromaidan as a sample of Nonviolent resistance?[edit]

I commented it out inside the table so far. As per List of people killed during Euromaidan "102 were conflict participants, 16 police officers, 1 bystander, 1 was allegedly killed by the activists". Placing it as a sample of a nonviolent resistance by Gandhi and Sharp brings an unnecessary black humor into a serious matter IMHO. --NeoLexx (talk) 12:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

New draft articles: Pacifism in France, Germany + USA‎[edit]

Please add to newly created Draft:Pacifism in France, Draft:Pacifism in Germany, and Draft:Pacifism in the United States. Thanks. M2545 (talk) 12:45, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

The omission of Libya from the list is glaring[edit]

The initial protests in Libya in 2011 were non-violent, and as in Syria, were met with harsh violent repression by the authorities, sparking a civil war/revolution/whatever you want to call it. Syria's non-violent protests are acknowledged, but Libya's are ignored, despite the fact that the initial non-violence of the protests are both acknowledged and repeatedly sourced on another wiki page: Libyan Civil War#Beginnings_of_protests. I don't suspect a political ideology backs this omission necessarily, but it is not hard to imagine this might comport with the aims of those who might be trying to downplay the role nonviolence played in Libya. Zachary Klaas (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I was just coming here to comment on Libya. It seems very strange when you see what happened and what is happening now. Non-violent? dragging a leader in the street and killing him? It really worked out for the country. --Inayity (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
That was at the end of the civil war, not in the beginning of the protests. - SantiLak (talk) 22:38, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


The entry corresponding to "non-cooperation movement" states that "In addition to bringing about independence, Gandhi's nonviolence also helped improve the status of the Untouchables in Indian society." If there is any logical link that is being suggested between Indian independence and Gandhi's nonviolence, then it must be corroborated by proper, objective references. Also, there is little to suggest that the condition of the "untouchables" in India has improved 68 years after Indian independence, as seen in the continuing cases of persecution, marginalization and humiliation of Dalits and minorities in India in general[1].[2] Hence, I am not sure the claim that "Gandhi's nonviolence helped improve the status of the untouchables in Indian society" is valid. Knaveknight (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Two Ukrainian movements "Do not buy Russian goods!"[edit]

I doubt that "Do not buy Russian goods!" was a part of nonviolent resistance. Please remove it. It was closer to war between nations or propaganda trick. The definition of nonviolent resistance includes the word "resistance". Resistance should be against local authorities or some local stuff, not foreigners. Depesha (talk) 05:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Nonviolent resistance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


What is the real reason it happened? Killereater23 (talk) 15:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


The section February 11, 1967 "main article" should be cleaned up by someone competent since it does not mention a real main article in fact, but rather gives a [confusing?] summary instead. Does anyone know what to do in this matter?--Hubon (talk) 01:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be an article about the "Black Cat Protest", the closest thing is Black Cat Tavern, which does give a little more information. - Lindert (talk) 15:03, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
@Lindert: Thanks. So, shall we leave it that way here? While reading, I did find the section written a bit unclearly, though, don't you think?--Hubon (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
The significant part seems to be its occurence a year before a significant event on the other side of the country, which hardly seems significant and applies to everything. No details on who this gay Republican is, why a stand-down order would apply "for decades", who "LAPD hierarchy" means, what happened in 2001 or whether the crowd resisted anything.
This, and the redlinked Burma one, stand out like sore thumbs and should be deleted till something clear comes along. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:51, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
The Burmese one probably refers to the 8888 Uprising. If we wanted to fix that one, we should probably just pare the time scale back to 1988 and link to that article instead. The table here seems to conflate several distinct events over a long period of Burmese history, including the 8888 protests, the Saffron Revolution, and others. It is broadly true that Aung San Suu Kyi was a figurative leader of the nonviolent opposition in Burma for 30 years; however 1) there is not a single article for the entire time period, unless one counts the National League for Democracy which is really a political party more than a movement, and 2) I'm not sure their should be. At best, we should split it into one or two entries, and narrow the focus to the 8888 and Saffron articles. --Jayron32 19:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC)