NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE NONVIOLENCE

• by Johan Galtung
• Tuesday, July 19, 2011
• Inter Press Service

Barack Obama, in his belligerent Nobel Peace Prize speech of 2009, failed to mention the power of nonviolence. But he would not have been president without the nonviolence of, for example, the Freedom Riders against Anglo-Saxon brutality in the US South.

Gandhian nonviolence covers negative and positive aspects. It may include self-immolation (Tunis) and massive protests (Cairo). But seeing the opponent as somebody simply to be removed is not Gandhian. The Gandhian approach is to remove autocracy and kleptocracy in favour of rule by the people and an economy for the people by converting the autocrat-kleptocrat, not by coercing him.

Eliminating a demonised leader is counted as victory, and to violent logic it is. But Gandhian victory would be to arrive, through dialogue, at an acceptable outcome, not confusing persons with issues. An autocrat knows much about power, not only for himself, and a kleptocrat knows much about wealth, not only for himself. Make them work for a solution. If crimes have been committed, then the rule of law should prevail; but exchanging clemency for repentance, when possible, might be a wiser policy. Killing Saddam Hussein and bin Laden is no substitute for understanding something not paid attention to. Negative nonviolence is indispensable but, like violence, silences that other voice. Positive nonviolence is never afraid of dialogue and mutual learning. Use both together.

(*) Johan Galtung, Rector of the TRANSCEND Peace University, is author of "A Theory of Conflict", TRANSCEND University Press, 2010 (www.transcend.org/tup).

// NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN CANADA, CZECH REPUBLIC, IRELAND, POLAND, AND THE UNITED STATES //

© Inter Press Service (2011) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Where next?

Advertisement