Gene Sharp, Politics of Nonviolent Action

This is an excellent three-volume description of the use of nonviolent means in a confrontation between a dissident group and a state government, or state organization. I was interested in reading this book because it interests some potential collaborators of mine, and I’m very glad I did. First, it’s the closest thing I’ve read in a long time to the sort of work I do, and the sort of book I write, although frankly, this is much more detailed and comprehensive. Second, it made me think about what my own work is and is not – this is a philosophical read of the book in the manner of Berdiaev, but it is very useful to me. It’s on this last point that I would like to elaborate.

First, Sharp does not distinguish between psychological violence and physical violence, and I do. Mind you, this was written in 1968 or so, when no one was yet thinking about psychological violence except in the most unsubtle terms.

Second, the methods he recommends are limited to uses between a dissident group and a government. My work on strategy applies to the full spectrum of possible interactions between actors: person to phenomenon or event, person to person, person to group, person to international group, person to government, person to group of governments, group to phenomenon or event, group to group, group to international group, group to government, group to group of governments, international group to government, international group to international group, international group to group of governments, international group to phenomenon, government to phenomenon, government to government, government to group of governments, group of governments to group of governments.

Third, the politics of nonviolent action only really apply to a conflict or a confrontation. Strategy is applicable to conflict or confrontation as well as exploiting opportunities or making the best of a situation.

Fourth, to work, the politics of nonviolent action require the confronted government to have an audience about whose opinion it cares – in other words, there has to be the potential for that government to be embarrassed. It doesn’t work in the case of, say Communist China under Mao and Tibet, because Communist China didn’t care what the West thought of it.

Fifth, to work, the politics of nonviolent action requires there to be some value placed on the dissident group. Again, with China and its periodic target of certain types of crimes or criminals, the government places no value and does not care if it executes a hundred of them within a few days of arrest, because its values are on preventing a certain type of crime, as happened with embezzlement a few years ago.

Sixth, my work is about strategy, and Sharp’s work really is about tactics and counter tactics. This means that my work would complement Sharp’s to the extent that it would explore and train in detail how to use those tactics.

Seventh, my work is at a higher level of generality, hence the comments about greater than confrontation, greater than nonviolent means, etc. But strategy can make nonviolence better, in terms of understanding the power that is to be confronted, and underdog strategy can make nonviolent action even better too.

Eighth, strategy does not require success to be an equalization of power. Strategy can help assure survival.

Ninth, underdog strategy assumes a constant state of unequal power throughout the period covered by the strategy.

Tenth, strategy can be used by the powerful as well as the underdog. Fortunately, powerful people, groups or governments usually practice strategy of the strong, and they are usually bad at it.

Eleventh, nonviolent action requires the participation and long-term mobilization of a significant proportion of people. That doesn’t happen very often, it’s a tall order, and if a regime is long-lived enough or brutal enough, it can literally beat the life out of the people it is oppressing.

Twelfth, Sharp will work with liberal democratic countries and authoritarian regimes, but not the totalitarian ones unless they are already weakened for other reasons.