The Paradox of Repression and Nonviolent Movements

Dear Colleagues,

Just came across an amazing new book that I wanted to plug, and it comes at a pertinent point in writing thesis findings. The new book, The Paradox of Repression and Nonviolent Movements, is the kind of analysis we need where movements are nothing more than a group of decent people, with good intentions, few resources, no money, but a powerful, aggressive enemy.

Thus the book draws on the experience of the US civil rights movement to ask how repression was a a force for solidarity and galvanisation. There is a lengthy outline by the books editors here on the Waging Non-Violence blog: 

https://wagingnonviolence.org/feature/how-repression-can-fuel-a-movement/ 

The relevance to my thesis is asking how the movement came to learn generically to generate strategy, and how it came to turn the practice of repression into a theory of resistance. Here is the first paragraph from the book review:

From Bull Connor’s dogs and fire hoses attacking U.S. civil rights demonstrators to the massacre at Amritsar in colonial India, the use of coercive force against dissidents often backfires, becoming a transformative event that can change the course of a conflict. Rather than demobilizing a movement, repression often ironically fuels resistance and undercuts the legitimacy of a power elite. Although a long scholarly tradition explores the unintended consequences of martyrdom and other acts of violence, more attention could be paid to what we call the paradox of repression — that is, when repression creates unanticipated consequences that authorities do not desire. Efforts by power elites to oppress movements often backfire, mobilizing popular support for the movements and undermining authorities, potentially leading to significant reforms or even a regime’s overthrow.

Please read the entire article and post thoughts/views.

In Solidarity

Ian