Rise of the Lovertarians: A Return to Peaceful Resistance

in #anarchism8 years ago (edited)

ww-nonviolentres800-770x264
Art by CreativeResistance

“Violence is a disease, a disease that corrupts all who use it regardless of the cause.” ― Chris Hedges
Humanity dwells in an increasingly hostile and dark world. People are inundated by mass shootings, warfare, and terrorism. Life is not sacred or respected. It is replete with seething anger and growing hatred. Even some voluntaryist segments of anarchism seem eager to shed blood under the alarmist call for pragmatism.

It is as if these anarchists have forgotten their roots and dispensed with the idea of peaceful resistance, communicative nonviolence, and what Gandhi called Satyagraha---nonviolent resistance to evil. My goal is to bring anarchists back this notion that peaceful resistance can incite change, and to create a burgeoning community of psychologically minded "lovertarians."

There is absolutely no need to return to government agendas under the enchantment of "realism" or "practicality," nor believe that government must be toppled with forceful aggression.

Throughout history, anarchists have rarely adopted a firm philosophy of peaceful resistance, because they have been wed to the idea of using defensive violence, which includes propaganda of the deed or retaliatory defense. But as an aside, most of this violence has stemmed from socialist anarchism. It is known that Emma Goldman harbored this viewpoint.

There simply has not been a libertarian figure who fearlessly and consistently advocated peaceful resistance. Anarchism needs a Martin Luther King JR or a Gandhi (preferably devoid of the hypocrisies). It needs someone who is willing to wield the bullhorn and call for civil resistance to foment change. There have been too many advocates for violence, even if it has been watered down with defensive rhetoric.

That is not to say that defensive violence or self-defense is morally wrong. And this position is not to paint anarchists as illogical or incorrect. It is not to create a divide between anarchist groups, nor advocate pacifism. The goal is to bring similar thinkers together for a common purpose: to spearhead an anarchist movement for the employment of peaceful resistance.

This return to the "love force" or "soul force" is critically important, because so many anarchists have sacrificed principle and duty. Several of the more popular anarchists have even vowed to use State violence to bring about anarchism.

They have infused their verbiage with the language of government, and some have even pandered to politicians like Donald Trump. This reversal of principle is now a hungry weed growing in the garden of anarchy. Many of them are dismissing the notion that change happen by noncooperation, verbal-online dispersion (employing mass change talk with people), and nonviolent deeds alone. They are watering this weed of corruption and tainting the soil of goodness. These cynical views are wrong, though. And there is evidence to prove it.

Zen mark

The Evidence for Nonviolent Resistance


Erica Chenoweth Ph.D is a researcher at the University of Denver. She is a known authority on political violence and its nonviolent alternatives. But interestingly, she was not initially interested in nonviolent resistance or dispersion techniques. She was skeptical that nonviolence could be used to depose governments and change society.

She believed that all the anecdotal evidence was not universal in cases of peaceful resistance. She thought its positive outcomes were based on luck. She admitted this in her blog Rationalinsurgent. She said,"Although I found the various cases of successful civil resistance interesting, I thought they were exceptional."

She decided to research the phenomenon and to find out if it is a viable strategy. She had to know, even if she started with an agenda. When the research was completed and the results came in, she was shocked. The meta-analysis of nonviolent resistance showed that it works much better than armed and violent insurgency. This has been true even when governments use violence to quell peaceful protests and acts of noncooperation.

In the introductory paper on the subject, she said, "Our findings show that major nonviolent campaigns have achieved success 53 percent of the time, compared with 26 percent for violent resistance campaigns." She went on:

"Our findings challenge the conventional wisdom that violent resistance against conventionally superior adversaries is the most effective way for resistance groups to achieve policy goals. Instead, we assert that nonviolent resistance is a forceful alternative to political violence that can pose effective challenges to democratic and nondemocratic opponents, and at times can do so more effectively than violent resistance."
She also mentioned that later research and analyses fleshed out the same truth and reached similar conclusions.

love

Rational Lovertarianism


One of the reasons that nonviolent resistance and forms of empathetic self-defense work is because killing innocent and peaceful protesters automatically paints a government as evil. It makes the rest of the world despise that government. It further instigates movements for socio-political change.

However, peaceful anarchists should also remain rational while engaging in peaceful resistance. It is easy to get angered or become violently crazed when preparing for action.

Sadly, Many anarchists lack patience for these activities. But it is good to remember that abolishing the system takes time. It could even be a many-generational process. It will not happen overnight. Thus, it is the rational and patient anarchist that becomes the lovertarian and the harbinger of positive change.

With time, this rational focus on the ideas of lovertarianism will generate a consensus on how to make the world a better place. But liberty minded people must take the high road of peace and noncooperation. As Henry David Thoreau said, “Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them.” The last thing anarchists want to do is go to the grave with the song of peace in mind. That would mean they deserted principle. It would mean they chose the path of destruction.

Instead, anarchists must yank the weed of corruptibility from the garden of truth. They must go forward with reason and compassion, and water the seeds of liberty through Satyagraha. It is the only way to obtain what they so longingly covet: absolute liberty.

This is a video of Erica Chenoweth explaining her research:

Ukrainian woman places carnations into shields of anti-riot policemen standing outside the ...


My name is Sterlin. Follow me @ Psychologic-Anarchist. I also run the Psychologic-Anarchist Facebook page and produce many YouTube videos. My interests lie in the intersection of counseling psychology and anarchism. I write about the depredations of psychiatry, and also the new philosophy of compassionate anarchism. We have a large community devoted to discussing psychology and relational voluntaryism.

Me Drawing

Sort:  

Nicely done man, I am a supporter of nonviolence.

Thanks a lot Raymon. I posted this many months ago on my blog, but it didn't catch a lot of attention, so I reposted it here, modified of course, with the hope of expanding the reader base.

My pleasure can we trade follows?

Everyone needs NVC!

Yes sir. It is so important.

FYI: I have been keeping up with your Youtube posts. I really like it.

Thank you! I haven't really been much of a YouTuber. Steemit's getting me into all kinds of things I haven't done much of lately... writing, videos, video editing, etc. Pretty fun stuff. :)

Yes. The issue always pops up with nonviolent resistance.

The thing that makes it so effective is the very thing that makes it so hard sometimes. That "thing" is the general human tendency to support and advocate a reasonable response to wrongdoing. When an authority lashes out in retribution far in excess of what supposed wrong has been done, it makes people look upon that authority as less legitimate and good.

But at the same time, it's so hard for those being punished, and their friends and relations as well, to -refrain- from responding in kind, because that -would- be a reasonable response. Not to escalate, but to respond in kind.

But the problem with that is then the authority can point at that and say "aha, look at these violent people" and muddy the waters and make it confusing enough that public sentiment against the authority doesn't have the momentum to build to a point that it could simply compel change.
It's not quite a catch 22, but it sometimes feels that way.

So true. One can't defeat violence with violence. That only feeds it. One can only defeat violence with its opposite--peace (or love). Even thinking that violence is okay if it is in "self-defense" defeats peace (and love) by preventing one from coming up with better strategies for self-defense.

"Lovertarians," yes! I have studied the concept of passive nonresistance, via Gandhi, as well as the Woodstock festival of 1969. It's amazing—the power of peace and love—capable of transmuting the ugly into the beautiful. I appreciate your evidence here, and your rallying cry to keep the love alive.

Thanks for sharing. And absolutely. I believe strongly in these ideas as method for transforming society. Hopefully we can make it happen.

A very interesting point of view! I also adhere to this point of view! I think why not to exercise violence against the government, everything can be solved peacefully. I know this way - "Any city enough to make the most simple action. Is not to go with posters. Do not build a barricade. All that is necessary for all citizens. (absolutely all) Do not go to work. just imagine the scale of the disaster if all the citizens of the city to stop working.....?Electric, Taxes will not be there will not be water. Rubbish flood the whole city. Government - with its violent methods and the regular army can not do that. But unfortunately it does not work ..... Why The problem lies in the multi-nationality citizens. The government specifically dilutes a glass of water to the unity of the germ is not increased, the heart of people. But this is only one of the control of government methods and the formation of many heads of citizens flock. (drug news and religion (none of you thought about why the book at all different ?)) So maybe it's working in a specific example of Erica Chenoweth. But it does not work in the country live. While all people do not understand one thing: "We are all the same - we are a single unit - a family - blood brothers" And believe me there is no one to evidence to the contrary !!!

Sterlin Luxan, how do you define "peaceful resistance"? To me, resistance implies some form of defensive force. To not use defensive force (or defensive violence, assuming you conflate "violence" with "force" in this case) implies non-resistance (or am I misunderstanding?).

The strategy this article appears to be advocating is "civil disobedience paired with peaceful non-resistance."

Am I misunderstanding you?

The strategy is correct, sir. Resistance does not imply use of force. It just means using various nonviolent techniques to curb government abuses and hopefully thwart government altogether. I mentioned this idea by invoking Ghandi's concept of Satyagraha, which involves demonstrating without using violence or initiating violence.

Good post. I really enjoyed it. When I saw Lovertarians I had a totally different image than you intended. It is because I am a demented person who is a great fan of H.P. Lovecraft. So I imagined Lovecraft mixed with Libertarian. :)

Ia Ia Cthulhu F'tagn!!! Cthulhu will free us all!!!

Of course that imagery and humor only lasted a little bit until you quickly explained the concept. It was such a wonderful and demented momentary vision of a world of tentacles and freedom.

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster would have fit right in. Ramen!!
May his noodley appendage touch you for writing such an interesting post.

Keep it up, you convinced me to follow you a couple days ago. I believe doing so was a damn good idea.

i am forced to post this in your comments becuse the following error wont let me make it a story as well as all the other bullshit it has cuased

every time i try to vote i get this error

Transaction failed: abs_rshares > 50000000 || abs_rshares == 1: voting weight is too small, please accumulate more voting power or steem power

i cant even vote on comments

and too top it off my account is losing value for some god forsaken reason.
help me steem, help me!!
do you care about your site or are all the rumors true, are you in it for the cash?

I am in it for the site. I can tell you why some of that is happening to you.

  1. the value in your account is tied to the actual monetary value of the steem currency. So as the value of steem fluctuates (just like bitcoin, gold silver, us dollar, etc) the value of your steem in your wallet fluctuates. This also impacts vote value before the payout. Not really under their control that is a market thing.

  2. As to not enough power. You start with 100% voting power... everytime you vote that % drops. It regenerates over time. So if you vote a lot that % will get low. You can check your power by looking at your profile. Normally you look at https://steemit.com/@kingsjack123 change the steemit.com part to steemd.com and you get a different site that shows you some details you normally don't see including your current voting %. Your steem power is currently 3. Your voting power is 98% though so I'd expect you to be able to vote. I am not a developer by the way. Just a user but I really like steemit.com as you post people will vote on your comments (replying to other people helps too) and you'll get more than 3 pretty quickly.

I've never considered myself an anarchist, or an anything, until coming to this site in the past week. My interests and passions have always been in gaming, math, and science, so all of this is a bit new to me, so apologize for basic questions. But after reading falkvinge yours, and other anarchist framed posts it seems the main tenet is to decrease force based regulation, and while self-defense is always acceptable, there was always an undertone of hatred for aggression. Has that not been the case in real world anarchism? If so, that feels contradictory

Sure. Great question @daut44. I didn't mean to give the impression that I hated aggression per se. I only really dislike INITIATORY aggression. However, I do tend to think since dispersion and peaceful resistance works to thwart evil, that it could be used on a grand scale to help deescalate government violence. On a philosophical level, however, I am not opposed to defensive violence, nor did I intend to argue that.

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

Does "lovertarian" mean the same thing as relationalism? If so, then why you are bother to reinvent the semantic wheel?

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.16
JST 0.030
BTC 65709.94
ETH 2699.12
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.86