Scan barcode
A review by raccoongremlin
How Nonviolence Protects the State by Peter Gelderloos
2.0
This book voiced so many feelings and what I've been thinking about Non-Violence in so many ways. However there were also lots of things I didn't agree with about the book and overall I didn't particularly like it and I'm not sure that I'm a fan of Peter Gelderloos' writing though perhaps he has better work.
Many other reviews spoke better and voiced how I felt far better then I ever could such as the way he spoke about the Patriarchy and "women and Transgender people" as if it's some monolithic group and the only marginalised and oppressed group that would benefit from self defense. It feels very obvious that this is written by a man and not someone who has experience of the oppression of patriarchy or even being marginalised in any other way. It lacked a lot of nuance and made quite broad sweeping statements about Non-violence which I simply felt were untrue. He seems to believe in a diversity of tactics yet it seems Non-Violent Direct Action (NVDA)is not included in that which seems odd.
A definition of what he considers Violent Direct Action and what is NVDA would have also been helpful, I personally wouldn't consider smashing the windows of an Arms Factory Building or blowing up a pipeline as violent as its against a building and in retaliation of something far more dangerous (bombing civilians and climate change) which are obviously inherently violent, but it seems that perhaps Gelderloos thinks this is part of Violent Direct Action ?
It seems perhaps that Gelderloos think only vigils, little marches and hand holding count as NVDA? Whereas I have personally seen quite a mixture, from smashing, gluing and locking on, occuping spaces, blocking, shouting at arms dealers and more covert sabotage. Many Non-violent Direct Actionists may not all be pacifists that fully believe in non-violence but are using it as a current tactic and acknowledge when things get to a certain point NVDA will no longer be a possibility.
Also part of my irritation to this book may be because I listened to it as an audio-book and found the readers voice highly irritating (sorry AudibleAnarchist on YouTube)
Many other reviews spoke better and voiced how I felt far better then I ever could such as the way he spoke about the Patriarchy and "women and Transgender people" as if it's some monolithic group and the only marginalised and oppressed group that would benefit from self defense. It feels very obvious that this is written by a man and not someone who has experience of the oppression of patriarchy or even being marginalised in any other way. It lacked a lot of nuance and made quite broad sweeping statements about Non-violence which I simply felt were untrue. He seems to believe in a diversity of tactics yet it seems Non-Violent Direct Action (NVDA)is not included in that which seems odd.
A definition of what he considers Violent Direct Action and what is NVDA would have also been helpful, I personally wouldn't consider smashing the windows of an Arms Factory Building or blowing up a pipeline as violent as its against a building and in retaliation of something far more dangerous (bombing civilians and climate change) which are obviously inherently violent, but it seems that perhaps Gelderloos thinks this is part of Violent Direct Action ?
It seems perhaps that Gelderloos think only vigils, little marches and hand holding count as NVDA? Whereas I have personally seen quite a mixture, from smashing, gluing and locking on, occuping spaces, blocking, shouting at arms dealers and more covert sabotage. Many Non-violent Direct Actionists may not all be pacifists that fully believe in non-violence but are using it as a current tactic and acknowledge when things get to a certain point NVDA will no longer be a possibility.
Also part of my irritation to this book may be because I listened to it as an audio-book and found the readers voice highly irritating (sorry AudibleAnarchist on YouTube)