[p2p-research] Let's Roll the Tanks against the Banks!

[Michel Bauwens]

hi martin,

I agree, absolutes do not work in a world of endless relativities ... in
that sense, non-violence is a form of violence, as it seeks to impose
solutions that another side may not want, so yes, in that case, non-violence
'violates' ... and that a lesser evil or greater good violates a greater
evil is a good thing, of course ...

nevertheless, pragmatically,  non-violent strategies have worked very well
for the opppressed, think about civil rights, the strong non-violent aspects
of the anti-apartheid campaign ... but again, I'm not an absolutist in that
regard, the devil is in the details and the concrete circumstances

in thailand, I believe it was the insufficient attention to the violent
fringe, which weakened the movement and chased the middle classes away in
fear; I also feel that it is the reason for the dramatic weakening of the
once successfull alterglobalization movement ...

to be non-violent, and to be attacked with violence, may be hard to endure
and practice, but it also gives strength to social movements, and exposes
the violence of the oppression, which is often cloaked and not visible to
ordinary people

think of it as the tai chi or aikido of politics ... remember that many
radicals opted for the general strike, not violent insurrection, as the
mainstay of radical tactics

now in most cases, violence is beyond the control of any organizers of
social movements anyway, so it is something we all have to live with, but I
think it is self-defeating in most cases ..

all this being said, I think it is unwise to publish rants like patrick's in
publicly searchable mailing lists ... even though the rant is rhetorical ..

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 9:33 PM, j.martin.pedersen <
m.pedersen at lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:

>
>
> On 18/07/10 15:09, Michel Bauwens wrote:
> > "we" do not have the firepower, "they" have it to use against you if need
> be
> > .. so I must consider your rant a fantasy born ouf frustration <g>
> >
> > I personally opt for nonviolent political strategies,
>
> What is violence? Violation? In order for "non"-violence to make sense,
> do we need to understand violence, or does the term non-violence mean
> something in and of itself? Is it a philosophy of a special kind?
> Gandhi's tactics violated the well-being of Lancashire mill workers, for
> instance, and do you not want to violate the current status of the
> elite, by redistributing some of the wealth that they have amassed?
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>



-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100718/e5a025a3/attachment.html>