{"title":"The Violence of Nonviolence: Contextualizing the Movements of King and Gandhi","authors":"Greg Mileski","doi":"10.33011/next/5/1/4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"King and Gandhi: two names that have come to be synonymous with nonviolence. And yet, the movements they led responded to and, in some cases with, significant violence. In a recent paper (2016), August H. Nimtz analyzes the role of violence in the movement of Dr. King, concluding that violence played a significant role in the success of the African-American Civil Rights Movement. Using Nimtz’s work as a starting point, this paper analyzes King’s movement and views, comparing definitions of “principled nonviolence” versus “pragmatic nonviolence.” From there, this paper analyzes the role of violence in the struggle for Indian independence from British colonialism and Gandhi’s own views on when, if ever, violence is appropriate. This paper concludes that, indeed, violence—that of sanctioned, state-sponsored violence and that of non-sanctioned actors—has had significant roles in both of these movements. In what way, then, could these movements be said to be nonviolent? Finally, this paper asks why there remains such an impetus to identify these movements, and their leaders, with “principled nonviolence.”","PeriodicalId":90934,"journal":{"name":"Next generation, sequencing & applications","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Next generation, sequencing & applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33011/next/5/1/4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
King and Gandhi: two names that have come to be synonymous with nonviolence. And yet, the movements they led responded to and, in some cases with, significant violence. In a recent paper (2016), August H. Nimtz analyzes the role of violence in the movement of Dr. King, concluding that violence played a significant role in the success of the African-American Civil Rights Movement. Using Nimtz’s work as a starting point, this paper analyzes King’s movement and views, comparing definitions of “principled nonviolence” versus “pragmatic nonviolence.” From there, this paper analyzes the role of violence in the struggle for Indian independence from British colonialism and Gandhi’s own views on when, if ever, violence is appropriate. This paper concludes that, indeed, violence—that of sanctioned, state-sponsored violence and that of non-sanctioned actors—has had significant roles in both of these movements. In what way, then, could these movements be said to be nonviolent? Finally, this paper asks why there remains such an impetus to identify these movements, and their leaders, with “principled nonviolence.”
金和甘地:这两个名字已经成为非暴力的代名词。然而,他们领导的运动回应了,在某些情况下,严重的暴力。在最近的一篇论文(2016)中,August H. Nimtz分析了金博士运动中暴力的作用,得出结论认为暴力在非洲裔美国人民权运动的成功中发挥了重要作用。本文以尼姆兹的著作为出发点,分析了金的运动和观点,比较了“原则性非暴力”和“实用主义非暴力”的定义。在此基础上,本文分析了暴力在印度从英国殖民主义中独立的斗争中所起的作用,以及甘地自己对何时(如果有的话)使用暴力是适当的看法。本文的结论是,事实上,暴力——受制裁的、国家支持的暴力以及未受制裁的行为者的暴力——在这两种运动中都发挥了重要作用。那么,这些运动如何才能被称为非暴力的呢?最后,本文提出了一个问题,为什么仍然有这样一种动力将这些运动及其领导人与“有原则的非暴力”联系起来。