Tag Archives: Nonviolence

Pope Francis and nonviolence: Let’s move towards a “Nonviolent Culture”, an “Other Way”

Nonviolent News, Readings, , , , , ,

by Sylvia Thompson, Tralee

On the death of Pope Francis, on Easter Monday 21 April 2025 an email came from Pax Christi International with the following: “A Compendium of Pope Francis’ Use of The Term “Nonviolence” in Statements, Interviews, or Other Papal-Related Texts in English: 2013-2025” https://paxchristi.net/a-compendium-of-pope-francis-use-of-the-term-nonviolence/

The Compendium was drawn up by Ken Butigan, Executive Committee Member of Pax Christi International’s Catholic Nonviolence Initiative and Coordinating Committee Member of The Catholic Institute for Nonviolence. Butigan wrote that, in a series of books, presentations, statements, and interviews, Pope Francis called us to this “other way”: active nonviolence, a core Gospel value that combines the rejection of violence with the power of love and reconciliation in action.

I found it compelling reading and will share some favourite texts and quotes from it and may this inspire you to consult it for reference, read it in full or better still, try to ensure that this legacy is not only treasured but acted on.

“Let us make nonviolence a guide for our actions both in daily life and in international relations. And let us pray for a more widespread culture of nonviolence that will progress when countries and citizens alike resort less and less to the use of arms.” – Pope Francis April prayer intention: ‘For a nonviolent culture.’ 2023.

Amid the enormous violence and injustice our world faces—what the Holy Father has called “a third world war fought piecemeal,” there is …a “global culture of violence including permanent war, growing poverty, threats to civil liberties, ecological devastation, the enduring terror of nuclear weapons, and the scourge of the structural violence of racism, sexism, and economic injustice and other forms of systemic injustice “ – Ken Butigan Pope Francis urged the world to confront this catastrophic suffering, not with more violence, but with a nonviolent revolution of tenderness and again to confront the reality of violence with active and transformative Gospel nonviolence.

This “other way” is not avoidance, or appeasement, or aggression, or attack. It is a dramatically different way of being in the world, of working for peace, of building movements and systems, and of being faithful to the vision of Jesus – a recognition of the primacy of diplomacy over the noise of arms.

“Living, speaking, and acting without violence is not surrendering, losing or giving up anything, but aspiring to everything.”

“This is not the same as weakness or passivity; rather it presupposes firmness, courage and the ability to face issues and conflicts with intellectual honesty, truly seeking the common good over and above all partisan interest, be it ideological, economic or political.”

“To be true followers of Jesus today…includes embracing his teaching about nonviolence”, “In the most local and ordinary situations and in the international order, may nonviolence become the hallmark of our decisions, our relationships and our actions, and indeed of political life in all its forms,” and may we “make active nonviolence our way of life.” – Pope Francis, Message, for the Celebration of the Fiftieth World Day of Peace, 1 January 2017, “Nonviolence: A Style of Politics for Peace”

“…I think of nonviolence as a perspective and way of understanding the world, to which theology must look as one of its constitutive elements.”

“Before the scandal of war, in the first place, our concern must not be for talking and discussing, but for weeping, for helping others and for experiencing conversion ourselves. We need to weep for the victims and the overwhelming bloodshed, the deaths of so many innocent people, the trauma inflicted on families, cities, and an entire people. …But we also need to experience conversion, and to recognize that armed conquest, expansionism, and imperialism have nothing to do with the Kingdom that Jesus proclaimed. Nothing to do with the Risen Lord, who in Gethsemane told his disciples to reject violence, to put the sword back in its place, since those who live by the sword will die by the sword (Mt 26:52), and who, cutting short every objection, simply said: “Enough!” (cf. Lk 22:51). – Vatican News, June 30, 2022:

“In our complex and violent world, it is truly a formidable undertaking to work for peace by living the practice of non-violence!” – World Day of Peace: Nonviolence: A Style of Politics for Peace, 2017

Speaking to all religious leaders in 2017, in ‘Pathways to Peace’, he said “we also have a special responsibility to be and to live as people of peace, bearing insistent witness that God detests war, that war is never holy, and that violence can never be perpetrated or justified in the name of God. We are likewise called to trouble consciences, to spread hope, to encourage and support peacemakers everywhere. –

Francis does not let anyone off the call – older age included:

“Old age is no time to give up and lower the sails, but a season of enduring fruitfulness: a new mission awaits us and bids us look to the future.” Message of the Holy Father Francis for the Second World Day of Grandparents and the Elderly (24 July 2022).

Pope Francis launched an impassioned plea for nations to set aside war and the threat of nuclear destruction. “…there is no occasion in which a war can be considered just. There is never a place for the barbarism of war, especially not when contention acquires one of its most unjust faces: that of so called ‘preventive wars.’” The choice to follow the path of nonviolence and continued existence, concluded Pope Francis, lies with us.

When asked about an encyclical on nonviolence, Pope Francis replied” “Yes, the plan exists, but the next Pope will do it… There are other projects on the back burner. One of them is on peace. It’s maturing. I feel I will do it when the time comes. …I don’t feel ready yet to write an encyclical on non-violence, I have to pray a lot and find the way.”

So now we wait or rather call on Pope Leo and I don’t think he needs much encouragement judging by his first words on being elected “Peace be with you all”.

On May 30, 2025, Pope Leo XIV issued a powerful call for nonviolence as a way of life, urging individuals and communities to resist the global surge of hostility. Addressing over 300 peace movement representatives gathered in the Vatican, the Pope declared that “nonviolence, as a method and a style, must characterise our decisions, our relationships, our actions.” This audience marked the one-year anniversary of the “Arena of Peace” gathering in Verona, where Pope Francis met with these same groups in May 2024.

Building on that momentum, Leo XIV, already known for his pastoral clarity and cultural sensitivity, offered a deeply human reflection on the moral imperative of peace: “There is too much violence in the world, too much violence in our societies,” he said, listing war, terrorism, human trafficking, and a broader “culture of aggression” that permeates daily life. In contrast, he stressed that children and young people “need experiences that teach them the value of life, dialogue, and mutual respect.”

In his remarks, the Pontiff elevated those who suffer injustice yet refuse vengeance. These witnesses, he said, are “the most credible protagonists of nonviolent peace-building.” He emphasised the need for “a different way of life — nonviolent at its core,” and challenged attendees to embody that in everyday choices.

Quoting his predecessor Francis, Leo XIV noted that peace begins by “standing with the victims and seeing from their perspective.” This outlook, he said, can disarm hearts, change minds, and expose the injustices of systems “that kill and are built on a throwaway culture.”

He also invoked St. John Paul II’s teaching that peace “is an indivisible good: it is either for everyone, or for no one,” highlighting the communal dimension of true peace. Acknowledging the long road peace requires, Leo XIV added that conflicts should not be ignored or erased, but rather “recognised, embraced, and endured together.”

The pope’s vision, grounded in Catholic Social Teaching, reaches beyond the Church’s walls. “The Gospel and the Church’s social doctrine can serve as a meaningful compass for everyone — believers and non-believers alike.” Seven Themes of Catholic Social Teaching | USCCB

The most poignant moment came when Leo XIV honoured two audience members: Maoz Inon, an Israeli whose parents were killed in the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack, and Aziz Sarah, a Palestinian whose brother was killed by the Israeli military. The Pope recalled their public embrace in Verona — a gesture of courage and reconciliation that moved the crowd to applause. “That moment remains a sign of hope,” he said. In a world overwhelmed by conflict, Pope Leo XIV offers a counter current — rooted in dignity, courage, and the conviction that peace is a disciplined act of love.

And finally in July 2025 in a message to participants in Pax Christi USA’s annual National Assembly, a conference focused on “Reclaiming the power of nonviolence in a broken world”, Pope Leo says “efforts to promote nonviolence are all the more necessary” in a world facing the challenges including war, division, and forced migration.

“In the midst of the many challenges facing our world at this time, including widespread armed conflict, division among peoples, and the challenges of forced migration, efforts to promote nonviolence are all the more necessary. Pope Leo invited participants to recall that “after the violence of the Crucifixion, the Risen Christ’s first words to the Apostles offered peace,” a peace that is “unarmed and disarming, humble and persevering”.

“Jesus continues to send His followers into the world to become creators of peace in their daily lives”. Therefore “it is all the more important for a Church capable of reconciliation to be present and visible” in parishes, neighbourhoods, and especially on the peripheries of society. Pope Leo expressed his hope that the National Conference would inspire members of Pax Christi USA to work to make their local communities “‘houses of peace’ where one learns how to defuse hostility through dialogue, where justice is practiced and forgiveness is cherished”.

By doing so, he said, “you will enable many more people to embrace Saint Paul’s invitation to live at peace with their brothers and sisters”.

So now we call on Pope Leo to issue a much needed and urgent encyclical on nonviolence, maybe it is already in preparation!

–

INNATE is pleased to publish input on nonviolence from religious or secular viewpoints and contributions have included reflections from Buddhist and Jain perspectives. This valuable contribution on nonviolence in the Catholic tradition, with relevance to others, is from long time peace and green activist Sylvia Thompson in Co Kerry.

Readings in Nonviolence: Nonviolence and climate change – Healing our relationship with the Earth

Nonviolent News, Readings, , , ,

by Kate Laverty

Nonviolence is often spoken of in the context of human conflict, but its scope is far broader. To live non-violently is to reject harm in all its forms—including the harm we inflict on the natural world.

As I water the plants in our community garden in Forthspring, and tenderly feed the olive trees from Palestine we’re keeping safe for our partners in Gairdin An Phobail, I am reminded that climate change, deforestation, pollution, and mass extinction are not merely environmental issues; they are forms of violence. They are violations of our sacred relationship with the Earth and with each other.

Pope Francis, in Laudato Si’, his landmark encyclical on the environment, writes:

“The earth herself, burdened and laid waste, is among the most abandoned and maltreated of our poor… We have forgotten that we ourselves are dust of the earth.”

His words call us to recognize ecological degradation not just as a crisis of the planet, but as a moral failure—a betrayal of our interconnectedness. In this light, ecological action becomes an act of nonviolence: a commitment to preserving life, honouring creation, and repairing harm.

Islamic perspectives also offer profound insight into this ethic of care. Renowned scholar and peace activist Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, a Muslim practitioner of nonviolence, taught:

“Violence begins when man sees himself as master, not servant, of the world.”

He urged Muslims to embrace rahma—compassion—as the lens through which to relate not just to other people, but to all living beings. In the Qur’an, humans are called khalifah—stewards of the Earth. Stewardship implies responsibility, humility, and restraint. It is a sacred trust, not a license to dominate or destroy. I am mindful of this as I stand with the loppers in in our community garden in Forthspring, preparing to prune back brambles which have overtaken the pathway – every cut must be intentional.

The violence we do to the environment mirrors the violence we allow in our societies: exploitation, neglect, and short-term thinking at the cost of long-term peace. The burning of fossil fuels, the razing of forests, the poisoning of waters—all stem from the same root causes as interpersonal violence: greed, disconnection, and disregard for life.

Practising nonviolence for the Earth

If we accept that ecological destruction is a form of violence, then we must also accept that ecological protection is a form of nonviolent resistance. The methodologies of nonviolence—well established in social justice movements—can guide our response to the climate crisis.

In Kingian Nonviolence, developed from the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., six core principles form the foundation of practice. Among them:

  • Nonviolence seeks to defeat injustice, not people

  • Nonviolence chooses love instead of hate

  • Nonviolence believes the universe is on the side of justice

These principles challenge us to confront the systemic roots of environmental harm—colonialism, capitalism, and extractivism—without turning to dehumanization or despair. They encourage creative, disciplined action: organizing, educating, lobbying, marching, blockading, and building alternative systems rooted in equity and care.

Nonviolence is not passive—it is active resistance rooted in moral courage. Movements like Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future, and countless Indigenous-led land protection campaigns are expressions of this active, compassionate resistance. They use tactics such as civil disobedience, symbolic protest, community organizing, and storytelling to call attention to the urgency of climate justice.

Another methodology—Gandhian Satyagraha (truth-force)—calls us to live in alignment with truth, even when it means sacrifice. For Gandhi, nonviolence was a way of life grounded in simplicity, humility, and service. Applied to climate change, it urges us to reduce our consumption, live closer to the Earth, and reject systems that thrive on domination and excess.

A revolutionary kindness

To practice nonviolence in the age of climate collapse is to live differently. It is to advocate for sustainable systems, to support climate justice movements, to hold corporations and governments accountable, and to make personal choices that reflect reverence for the Earth. It is also to listen—to indigenous wisdom, to frontline communities, and to young people crying out for a liveable future.

Thich Nhat Hanh, a Zen Buddhist monk and peace activist., wrote that “When we harm the Earth, we harm ourselves. The Earth is not just our environment. The Earth is us.”

The same forces that exploit the planet also exploit people. Environmental nonviolence is therefore deeply entwined with social justice.

And perhaps more than anything, nonviolence calls us to believe that healing is possible—not only between people, but between humanity and the Earth. By living with intention, compassion, and courage, we help craft a future rooted in justice and peace for all beings.

–

As reported in Nonviolent News 328, Kate Laverty as director of Forthspring Intercommunity Group in Belfast is working for it to become the Nonviolence Institute in Northern Ireland. https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/2025/04/01/readings-in-nonviolence-nonviolence-and-plans-for-a-nonviolence-institute-in-belfast/ You can contact her at phone 07746984833 or email director@forthpsring.com

Readings in Nonviolence: Nonviolence – and plans for a Nonviolence Institute in Belfast

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

by Kate Laverty

Nonviolence is more than the absence of physical harm; it is an active principle that shapes how we engage with the world, fostering compassion, understanding, and justice. In an era where violence—both in words and actions—permeates our societies, nonviolence stands as a necessary antidote, offering a way to cultivate peace in our daily lives.

At its core, nonviolence is about intentionality—choosing to respond to conflict with patience rather than aggression, with dialogue rather than hostility. It calls us to recognize the humanity in others, even when we disagree, and to resist the temptation to dehumanize those we oppose. Small acts of nonviolence—listening without judgment, speaking with kindness, refusing to perpetuate cycles of harm—create ripples that extend beyond our immediate surroundings, influencing communities and cultures. I’ve learned to practice this life in my work with the Nonviolence Institute Rhode Island. Here, Kingian nonviolence is taught over 3 levels in successive years. As a youth worker in St. Peter’s Immaculata Youth Centre, I’ve been privileged to accompany youths on their journey to the States to learn the key principles of the practice.

Nonviolence is also a practice of inner discipline. It requires us to confront our own tendencies toward anger, fear, and reactivity, replacing them with a commitment to understanding and reconciliation. This daily practice helps us build resilience in the face of adversity, allowing us to stand firmly against injustice without resorting to the same destructive methods we seek to overcome. In my decades as a youth worker, this has included democratic advocacy, peaceful protest, funding discipline lead contact sports such as Brazilian ju-jitsu where there are no strikes – only defensive grapples.

In a world filled with division and harm, nonviolence is not passive; it is revolutionary. It is the quiet, persistent force that counters cruelty with care, ignorance with education, and hatred with love. By embedding nonviolence in our everyday interactions in Forthspring Intercommunity Group, we contribute to a world that values dignity, respect, and true peace.

And I can delight in sharing how our vision in Forthspring is to step into nonviolence as the core methodology across our services which will see us through the next decade of our peacebuilding mission. In the coming year, we’ll welcome trainers from the Nonviolence Institute to deliver their Level 1 course in Forthspring, enabling people in the field to apply the practice in their daily work.

I’ve rejoiced in researching the emerging science of behavioural systems analysis to the practice of nonviolent struggle and civil resistance. I’ve found strength in recognising all the ways in which nonviolent action remains a viable solution; in ending violence against women and girls, in transforming racial hatred, in dissolving the walls of otherness between us.

But this is a call. I am asking for help. I am reaching in to a community already wise in the practice of nonviolence. I am asking you to meet with me, to talk to me, to teach me. If you would like to craft the Nonviolence Institute in Northern Ireland, call or email and help us in our goal to nurture a community at peace with itself.

– Dr Kate Laverty, Director, Forthspring, ph 07746984833, director@forthspring.com

INNATE Annual Report for 2024

Annual reports, Nonviolent News, , , ,

2024 was another year of ‘heavy going’ for those believing in nonviolence and the nonviolent resolution of conflict. Wars in Sudan, Ukraine and Gaza – and in particular European, including often Irish, responses to these illustrated a staggering lack of humanity, imagination and any meaningful resolve in moving to deal with them and then beyond them to grapple with the wider tragedies of global heating and global poverty and injustice.

In relation to INNATE’s media work, Nonviolent News was published in its full 10 monthly issues, with news supplements for the other two months. https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/category/nonviolent-news/ Issues for the email and web editions were typically 12 pages; the paper edition is just the first two pages of news. There is a huge amount of other material on the website and some of it is listed there (see home page). INNATE also published an account of Laura Coulter’s peacebuilding work in Northern Ireland context as a pamphlet, Building bridges, Bridging gaps https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Laura-Coulter-Building-Bridges-Final-24.12.pdf

The INNATE photo and documentation site https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland seems to have become an overnight success – after 16 years! Before August 2024 there had been typically 1,000 photos opened a week (you can see photos without opening them but to see the accompanying text or more details in the photo then it needs clicked on to open). The rate at which photos have been opened tripled or quadrupled in August and the period since then. There are 56 album topics on the site including a new one on Lex Innocentium/The Law of the Innocents 697 CE / 1997 / 2024. The INNATE coordinator spoke on Irish peace history at the Birr launch of Lex Innocentium 21st C. https://lexinnocentium21.ie/

StoP/Swords to Ploughshares Ireland, an anti-militarist and arms trade network which INNATE was involved in setting up in 2020 on an all-island basis, continued its work including trying to raise the issue of protection of the ‘Triple Lock’ on the deployment of Irish troops overseas which much of the Irish establishment, including Fianna Fáil, is so keen to ditch in an effort to be ‘good Europeans’ (= believers in EU militarisation) and NATO fellow travellers. Through involvement with Afri, the INNATE coordinator was part of a presentation on the Triple Lock to an Oireachtas committee. https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/53739610022/in/dateposted/

Although FOR England was the lead party in a webinar with Majken Jul Sørensen on nonviolent resistance in the context of Ukraine, based on her pamphlet on that topic, INNATE was a sponsor of this, along with Cymdeithas y Cymod in Wales, and initiated the discussion which led to the webinar. https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/2024/04/02/the-possibility-of-nonviolent-resistance-in-the-contemporary-world/

INNATE also hosted political philosopher Ramin Jahanbegloo during a visit to Northern Ireland in November in which he spoke at events for the Hume O’Neill Chair of Peace at Ulster University, Conflict Textiles, and INNATE, including an INNATE webinar on Nonviolence and Democracy Building. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sp0OJ8mH2fA We have also been involved in discussion to help find suitable speakers on Northern Ireland for a major peace conference in Germany.

Meanwhile peace movement materials from and collected by INNATE covering nearly fifty years and which were donated to PRONI, the Public Record Office in the North, are being catalogued – 481 pages to date….

While wider work on peace trails has been in abeyance since Covid, there were numerous Belfast city centre and Ormeau peace trail walks run for individuals and groups, including one for the Migrant Centre Peace Project for whom we will be running a workshop on approaches to conflict in early 2025. https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/54080114989/in/dateposted/ As usual there was an INNATE summer social event in Belfast.

INNATE exists on a financial shoestring, is entirely voluntary, and depends on subscriptions and donations to keep the lights on, and we appreciate people’s generosity. A financial statement is available on request. There is the opportunity for anyone anywhere to be involved with work supporting INNATE, and most meetings are held remotely; if you might be interested in looking at involvement, we can have a chat. We also welcome unsolicited articles and photos for possible publication.

Rob Fairmichael, Coordinator, February 2025

Ramin Jahanbegloo webinar on nonviolence and democracy

Latest News, , , ,

Canadian-Iranian political philosopher Ramin Jahanbegloo was in Northern Ireland in November 2024 and provided programme for Conflict Textiles, Ulster University Hume O’Neill Chair in Peace, and INNATE.

He spoke at an INNATE webinar on Nonviolence and Democracy Building on 28th November 2024. This was recorded and the video is available at https://youtu.be/sp0OJ8mH2fA?si=0GeaoahYVjGbwDYv     

The photo of Ramin Jahanbegloo below was taken in the Ulster University, Belfast, video suite at the start of the webinar

There is also a photo of Ramin Jahanbegloo at https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/54213009123/in/dateposted/ when he was speaking on Nonviolence and Empowerment the same afternoon.

Readings in Nonviolence: Sharp non-shooting – Gene Sharp book review

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

Gene Sharp – A life devoted to exploring nonviolent actions, edited by Craig S. Brown, Irene Publishing, 2024, 256 pages, price c. UK£22. https://irenepublishing.com/

Reviewed by Rob Fairmichael

In reading this book, I expected to learn a bit more about Gene Sharp, what shaped his life and work, and some more about things like his theory of power. I was wrong. While some of it is not an easy read, particularly if you are new to nonviolent theories, I found it also contained a massive amount of very useful information and reflections on many different aspects of nonviolence. So, while it is not a primer on nonviolence the contents from the different writers – including Christine Schweitzer, Brian Martin and Craig Brown himself – cover a very considerable number of issues in the field of peace and nonviolence.

I have been a fan, hopefully not an uncritical fan (a ‘Sharpie’?), of Gene Sharp for many years. While it is possible to overstate his role, see below, and he was a theorist more than an activist, even if a theorist of action – that does not mean he is not one of the most important figures in nonviolence in the second half of the twentieth century and the start of the twenty-first. Brian Martin says “Sharp’s pioneering contributions have shaped the study and understanding of nonviolent action today. Among his most influential ideas are the classification and documentation of hundreds of nonviolent methods, a theory of power to explain why the methods work, and a strategic, agency-oriented framework for understanding nonviolent campaigns. These are facets of what is commonly called the ‘pragmatic approach’ to nonviolent action, providing an argument that nonviolent action is more effective than violence.” (pages 55-56)

The training/exploration workshop which INNATE has used the most is one on nonviolent tactics and this has Sharp’s “198 varieties” of nonviolent action tactics at its core (from his 1973 “The Politics of Nonviolent Action”). This workshop takes participants through some relevant historical examples from Sharp – and he has numerous Irish ones – before doing individual ‘risk lists’ (the kind of things people feel comfortable doing or could at least could push themselves to do with support and preparation) and then moving on to brainstorm on the particular issue or issues of concern that those present wish to address. It thus expands people’s horizons on nonviolent possibilities before personalising it and focussing on the matter for which people are together. https://innatenonviolence.org/workshops/workshop1.shtml

I met and heard Gene Sharp just once, at a conference in Bradford on social defence in 1990 (see Dawn Train No.10, page 18, available at https://innatenonviolence.org/dawntrain/index.shtml ). I was not perturbed by the issue for which some peace activists would criticise him, namely that he was only advocating nonviolence for pragmatic and not moral grounds (for ‘moral’ here, read also philosophical and religious/spiritual). Since in general I see no contradiction between the positions of being morally or pragmatically committed to nonviolence, and this informs my practice despite being morally committed to nonviolence as well as pragmatically, I was certainly not worried about this aspect of Sharp’s stand.

One of Craig Brown’s conclusions on this area is that “it is notable that Sharp suggested the ‘pragmatic-principled’ split in nonviolence is overstated, seeing the dynamics of both being mutually reinforcing and advocating a ‘mixed motivation’ of ‘practical considerations’ and ‘relative moral preference.” (page 158)

However it is clear from this book, and to a considerable extent the earlier part of Gene Sharp’s life, that deep down there was very considerable commitment to a moral stand against war and violence. Michael Randle in his piece states, (page 9), that “In later years, Gene declared he was no longer a pacifist, but there is no reason to believe his thinking changed on this point.” He did, however, distance himself from the peace movement to a considerable extent and would have been critical of ‘them’. Part of Michael Randle’s conclusion in his chapter is that “The thread that links the earlier pacifist Gene with the more pragmatic Gene of the latter period is the commitment to the same basic values, to developing nonviolent action as a strategy against dictatorship and oppression, and as an alternative to reliance on the military for national defence.” (page 20).

The book also demythologises the deification of Sharp and his role in relation to the 2010/2011 revolutions in MENA/WANA countries, the ‘Arab spring’. It is not saying he had no influence here, or in Baltic countries throwing off the rule of the USSR, but that these revolutions and movements were largely situated within indigenous forms of protest, and western emphasis on Sharp’s work and thinking was misplaced. The distribution or knowledge of work by Sharp was not a major factor in these revolutions; that does not make Sharp a less important figure on the world stage in working for peace and justice.

Especially in a chapter by Craig Brown himself (which has been available previously), this work effectively defends Sharp against the accusation that he was a tool of neoliberalism and US foreign policy. While there is the possible interpretation that he may have been naive at times in relation to arms of the US state, or others (which of us has not been naive?), it would seem to clear him unequivocally of the accusation of him being neoliberal or assisting neoliberalism, indeed positing him as closer to anarchist traditions.

I want now to examine some more detailed aspects of the book, mainly working from start to finish. The first two chapters, by Michael Randle and Andrew Rigby, are very interesting reflections on some of Gene Sharp’s early life, especially his time in Britain – he became an assistant editor of Peace News in 1955. Admittedly in you are not interested in Gene Sharp you are perhaps not going to be interested in this – but then if you are not interested in Gene Sharp you are unlikely to read this book. One fascinating aspect of the coverage here of 1950s British action is, perhaps tragically, how modern much of it feels – like it could be action taken today (and some of the issues were the same or very similar).

One point I learnt was that Sharp had taken his typification of the mechanisms of change, or different ways nonviolence can be successful – conversion, accommodation or coercion (the last has been controversial for some pacifists) from George Lakey, though Sharp added a fourth point, disintegration (of the oppressor or coercer), page 10. The realisation that nonviolent action is not the preserve of pacifists (page 25) – a key point in perhaps all of Sharp’s work – is so fundamental, and yet so ignored, that it is likely to be an essential understanding in any nonviolent movement for change. However that should not mean ignoring the importance of the involvement of nonviolent activists in keeping a movement nonviolent (page 41).

I often quote Sue Williams about there always being people, in the most violent of situations, trying to deal peacefully with the issue concerned. This comes to mind in the coverage of ‘islands of peace’ in civil wars (page 42) in Christine Schweitzer’s piece where she considers key factors in such phenomena including anticipation of the coming conflict, choosing a ‘non-war’ identity, a legitimate leadership structure, and contact with the different belligerents. It would be interesting to apply this broadly to what took place in the Troubles in Northern Ireland and peace efforts there. In relation to civil strife and war, she goes on to point out that, since we all have to live together in peace again, and that this is much easier if there has been no massive bloodshed, “…..still, what is needed is conflict transformation, not just winning a conflict like a war is being won. This is an aspect that does not play a big role, if any, in Sharp’s writings.” (page 46)

Christine Schweitzer’s chapter is on social defence (a less statist approach to protecting civilian populations which is covered in the concepts of nonviolent or civilian based defence). It is difficult to underestimate the importance of making progress in this area for avoiding the plague of wars which currently exist, and the risks of widespread annihilation which threaten. In this area, Sharp is your man, while of course others have taken the issue forward, though progress is slow and intermittent.

The deliberate avoidance of this issue by the Irish Government’s ‘Consultative Forum on International Security Policy’ in 2023, called by Micheál Martin, is almost criminal negligence – and if I hadn’t voluntarily left under protest a Dublin Castle session of this ‘Forum’ I would have been thrown out for trying to point out this wilful ignoring of the matter. They seem incapable of thinking outside an EU/NATO box and static military thinking. https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/53003786126/in/dateposted/ Or am I being simply as naive as Sharp is sometimes accused of in expecting real interest from governments? (see above.) And a question arising is if the government of a relatively non-militarist ‘neutral’ state cannot or will not, refuses to, see the real possibilities here, what hope is there of others? But we must live in hope (and effort…).

A valid criticism of Sharp by Brian Martin, page 77, is that he “…never made an analysis of strategy to transform the military-industrial complex. He somehow assumed that defence policy-makers are primarily concerned with their nominal tasks, defence against foreign enemies.” And while the long interview with Gene Sharp in the book by Jørgen Johansen and Stellan Vinthagen has many useful takeaway points, it also shows the extent to which Sharp had neither studied nor claimed to have answers to many questions. But he was also being very honest.

One aspect of Sharp’s thinking, as shown in the Johansen-Vinthagen interview, is portraying two levels in Gandhi’s thinking, lifestyle and spiritual discipline compared to the political level, and the confusion this sometimes caused as to what level he was operating on. (page 93). Sharp elucidated this in response to a question about Gandhi’s influence on him – and he had a book exclusively on Gandhi, “Gandhi as a Political Strategist”.

When asked in the interview about the universal applicability of nonviolence, with an interviewer saying he has the feeling that Sharp is suggesting that “nonviolent techniques are a universal technique that is possible to apply more or less everywhere”, Sharp responds to say “I am not sure I would put it that way. I think they are universal in the sense that they have been so widely practiced. But there may be certain kinds of situations in which they would not be effective for achieving the ends that a particular group might want to achieve…..” I think this is probably an important qualification in avoiding the impression that ‘one size fits all’ and that you can simply transfer a technique from one situation and culture to another; perhaps you can, perhaps you can’t. (page 119)

The interviewers also critique peace research departments in universities saying that “With extremely few exceptions they study everything but peace…”, and Sharp then shares his frustration with peace researchers. (page 129)

Craig Brown critically examines Sharp’s influence, or lack of it, in relation the independence of the Baltic states (page 138 and following) and “The So-called Arab Spring” (page 158), the conclusion in relation to the latter being that “Sharp’s purported influence was overblown and overstated.” (page 159). The lack of economic analysis in Sharp’s work is acknowledged. (page 153)

Before a listing of Gene Sharp’s writings in a final chapter or appendix, two relatively short, old works of Sharp’s are reproduced. The first is a study of nonviolence, and nonviolent possibilities, in relation to the Welsh nationalist adoption of nonviolence; this was written in 1957 when he was in Britain. It is entitled “Which way to freedom? A study in non-violence”.

The second short work, published in 1958 in serial form in ‘Peace News’, focuses on the history of Norwegian teachers’ resistance to the fascist government of Vidkun Quisling, installed by the German Nazi regime. Sharp spent quite some time researching this and it is a fascinating account of resistance in a harsh environment, both politically and in relation to physical cold. It is a tremendous example of nonviolent resistance when violent resistance was impossible and where the enemy could be extremely brutal. The end result, or part of the end, is typified by Quisling’s well known quote that “You teachers have ruined everything for me!” This writing is an important telling of an extraordinary, stunning piece of resistance.

Gene Sharp wasn’t necessarily sharp in his writing style, in this book his writing is described as prosaic, but he is also depicted as the most influential figure in modern times on nonviolence. While centred on the person of Sharp this is a book which includes, admittedly sometime in summary form, a huge number of the issues in relation to nonviolence. And if you are trying to get to grips with Sharp’s thinking it is certainly a book to read; it is also, by itself, a valuable addition to thinking about nonviolence and its role in building peace and social or political change, wherever you are.

Readings in Nonviolence: Review of “Constructive resistance – Resisting injustice by creating solutions”

Nonviolent News, Readings, , , , , , ,

Building the uncompromised alternative

A review of “Constructive resistance – Resisting injustice by creating solutions” by Majken Jul Sørensen, Stellan Vinthagen and Jørgen Johansen, Rowman and Littlefield, 2023, 219 pages.

Reviewed by Rob Fairmichael

This is an important book in exploring, in some detail, the concept and practice of ‘building the alternative’ without being compromised and/or bought out by the state or capitalism. Emphasis is put on both being ‘constructive’ and ‘resistance’ and in integrating the two; it was Gandhi who coined the term constructive resistance and it was an important construct to him (think weaving khadi cloth). However the authors do analyse different movements in different parts of the world and the extent to which they meet these values (e.g. charts on page 41) with some fascinating detail. The evolution of women’s shelters, the first arguably in London in 1972, transformed the debate about gender-based interpersonal violence and put the focus on men as perpetrators, and therefore patriarchy as a problem, in giving women an out from being trapped in so-called ‘domestic’ violence.

The authors are themselves well known, in some circles, activists and theoreticians. INNATE was a co-organiser of a webinar with Majken Jul Sørensen earlier in 2024 on nonviolent alternatives to the war in Ukraine.

An initial definition of constructive resistance in the book (page 1) is “initiatives where people start to build elements of the society they desire independently and in opposition to the dominant structures already in place.” The examples they give immediately following are of squatted, previously empty, houses being used for people to live in or for self-organised community centres, and Wikipedia as an example of challenging experts’ ‘truth’ and ‘knowledge’.

Moving to a ‘new society’ of any kind is difficult when the old elites, or perhaps new but equally repressive ones, are so good at regaining power; “When constructive elements are left out, old elites can use the uncertain situation to their advantage to regain power, as we have witnessed in many of the recent unarmed political revolutions” (page 101) – think the ‘Arab Spring’ of 2011. I might add that while the Irish Free State did undergo a civil war at the start of its existence, the new regime became even more reactionary on many social matters than the old, and something like the Sinn Féin/Arbitration courts, imperfect as they were, disappeared into the woodwork and ‘the law’ reasserted itself in conservative form.

Of course the action by councils and MPs of republican persuasion transferring their allegiance from Westminster to the first Dáil in 1919 could also be considered as constructive resistance in creating the new entity they wanted, unshackling from the British state. However on a social and economic level it would be difficult to think of examples in Ireland which fitted both ‘construction’ and ‘resistance’. Important as credit unions are in Ireland they are hardly trying to overthrow the existing financial system, and agricultural coops, essential in rural development in years past, are now large scale economic units within the existing system (and, it can be argued, essentially part of the problem of methane production by cattle).

One example given in the book is the development of nonviolent accompaniment and monitoring, partly developing from Witness for Peace (the US organisation, not the Northern Irish one) noticing that the Contras in Nicaragua did not attack while US citizens were around (in the period around 1983). We can learn and develop new methodologies as we do things.

An ongoing issue in the book is about compromise and being compromised: “A recurring dilemma for those involved in constructive resistance is how much to compromise radical ideals in order to become “mainstream” and make the alternative interesting and available to broader audiences…” (page 183). They cover Thomas Mathiesen’s concept of being ‘in defined’ or ‘out defined’ by the existing powers; ‘in defined’ is to be judged as no threat and therefore ‘one of us’ in essence whereas to be ‘out defined’ it to be depicted as a beyond the pale rebel, past redemption. Successful movements need to avoid either definition so as not to be either co-opted or cast out and rejected as crazy hippies or crackpots.

In dealing with the example of the Transition Movement (on a non-carbon future) the authors place this relatively high on the constructive scale but low on resistance to existing dominant structures. The Fairtrade movement is similarly placed.

The book has detailed studies of Polish resistance to the state and state (Soviet style Communist) control in the 1980s, the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, the peasant-based MST movement in Brazil, and the Zapatistas in Chiapas, Mexico. Partial success – before temporary failure – came for KOR and then Solidarity in Poland by being factory-based rather than street-based (where the state security could easily get people) and in having support from the Catholic church and farmers. “When the factory occupations became widespread in 1980, Polish workers had found a way to build small communities, minimizing the interference from the state. Solidarity set up a democratic structure with transparent decision-making, mutual aid, and solidarity alliances, and continued the development of independent free media. These were elements of the kind of society they wanted to see in Poland in the future….” (page 113).

The authors pinpoint the Freedom Charter process of 1955 as a key element of democratic involvement in the South African struggle. MST in Brazil and the Zapatistas in Chiapas are the current examples given of large scale constructive resistance. However nothing is simple and the authors analyse difficulties and possible pitfalls (e.g. the involvement and participation of women) as well as successes, though the distribution of land to 350,000 landless farmers in Brazil by MST is a success by any progressive definition – and some of the details of the organising involved is astounding.

300,000 people are involved in the Zapatista movement, in 1,000 communities, and it is based among Maya people. While they did have a short violent phase, and still have an army for defensive purposes, if they had continued with war against the state then, as the book states, they would have been wiped out by that state. Instead they have built self-governing and self-sustaining structures with the goal of changing relations between rulers and ruled without taking (state) power. Both MST and the Zapatistas have impressive grassroots decision making structures and processes. A European example in the book is analysis of an anti-dam campaign in Innerdalen in Norway 1978–82 which faced many of the questions that activists reading this may be familiar with.

Without vision the people may not perish but they certainly won’t get very far. The conclusions in the book include that “If movements were more focused on putting their visions into practice through direct actions, creating some of the necessary solutions, people might be more able to envision future societies free of at least some of the major systemic dominations, violences, and injustices. But in order for that to happen, people also need to nurture visions of a different society.” (page 202)

There are other examples of possible positivities from social movements which may or may not fit the category of constructive resistance. One generally problematic area I would certainly identify would be decision making within social and political movements; do we model inclusion, and how do we a) hold together with differences of opinion, b) allow different routes to be taken internally, or c) split amicably? Any large scale social movement is likely to get disagreements which risk the integrity of the movement or may necessitate different people going in different directions. Do we look on the ‘dissidents’ as traitors to the cause or do we celebrate different flocks flying in roughly the same direction but by different routes? Do we encourage involvement and grassroots input? Clearly this latter happens with the likes of the Zapatista movement in Chiapas.

One example of what could have been constructive resistance from the peace movement is Ireland is the “People’s Campaign” associated with Ciaran McKeown in the Peace People in the period around 1994. https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/21987821321/in/album-72157613614963634/ This sought to develop an alternative assembly model for Northern Ireland based on the experience of the basic democratic model of the Åland Islands in the Baltic; each of the 570 electoral wards in Northern Ireland would have discussions locally and two representatives elected. However this plan was decided on by using traditional majoritarian decision making internally and the task – of persuading people in general that it was a good idea let alone operationalising it – was massive and it disappeared without trace after a few years. Whether such a system would have been any more or less positive or workable than what came to pass is open to debate which I won’t go into here. It could also be said that many community groups in the North during the Troubles provided a space for trying to build a non-sectarian or less sectarian future.

Mediation is another area in Ireland where there has been construction but extremely low resistance. In four decades mediation has gone from the far margins to the mainstream, with mediation looked on favourably by the legal system (in both jurisdictions in Ireland). It relieves a bit of pressure on the legal system, and is obviously preferable from the disputing parties’ point of view both in potentially avoiding legal divisiveness and cost. And lawyers have not lost out since they joined the mediation bandwagon as well in training up as mediators. Outside of that, at a community level, mediation has largely been professionalised which raises questions about accessibility for all (in terms of cost). But we are still in a better place to have what we have though community-based mediation systems are very limited.

In the political process, especially later on, in the Troubles in Northern Ireland, conciliation, communication and mediation efforts by individuals and groups helped in an enormous way to bring about the Good Friday Agreement, imperfect as that was and is. This mirrored the inclusiveness which those involved sought to foster. At the time some of this was considered traitorous by the state and by right-wingers who wanted to ‘root out the men of violence’ – even though the state itself secretly engaged in such contact when it felt it appropriate throughout the Troubles.

As stated at the start, this is an important book; it asks peace, social and political activists fundamental questions about how we go about trying to reach our goals. The problem for us is that we may feel so far from the possibilities of building a challenging alternative that we feel it cannot be done or at least that we cannot do it. ‘Living the revolution’ is always a big challenge but our work and witness can add to positive possibilities for the future. This book can be of considerable assistance in thinking about such possibilities.

Readings in Nonviolence: Aesop’s Fable – The Wolf and the Lamb

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

l See https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/53493251185/in/dateposted/ for Jean-Baptiste Oudry’s pictorial take on ‘The wolf and the lamb’

Story and analysis by Gearóid Ó Dubhthaigh

There are many versions of this disturbing fable; here is my presentation of it.

One morning a hungry wolf, who was out hunting stopped to drinking at a brook. A short distance downstream he caught sight of a young unsuspecting, vulnerable lamb – a farm animal – that had become separated from his flock.

The wolf set his eyes upon the lamb and thought to himself: “There’s my dinner, delivered to me on a plate!”

Because the lamb looked particularly helpless and innocent, the wolf felt he ought to pick some quarrel to excuse his intention to seize the lamb.

So, drawing near he accused the lamb, saying: “How dare you muddy the water I’m drinking?”

The lamb, frightened at this threatening charge, said, in a tone as mild as possible, and trying to not exacerbate the wolf’s feelings: “Don’t get angry with me! It couldn’t possibly be me who is muddying the water you are drinking as the stream flows from you towards me.”

“Very well,” said the wolf; “but I know you spoke ill of me a year ago.” “I couldn’t have done so; I wasn’t born until this year.” bleated the trembling lamb.

“Well, then it must have been your brother,” growled the wolf.

“It cannot have been so, for I never had any,” answered the Lamb.

The wolf, finding it impossible to come up with a plausible pretext, rejoined “’Tis all the same to me, if it wasn’t you, it was one of your lot. Fortune has conveniently brought us together so I can avenge the wrong done to me.”

At this he leaped upon the distraught lamb, and ate him on the spot.

Comments

Let us begin by looking at the story itself.

Who is involved?

Do animals speak to each other like they do in this story? No.

And we all know that in real life wolves must eat other animals to survive.

So, this story is not about animals, it is about people. Aesop used animals and birds as characters through whom he could gently and memorably present moral lessons, about people: human nature, us, what we see around us – we may see ourselves in the characters.

In this fable we have one who is very powerful and is intent upon depriving a weaker one of something that is his by right (his life). There is a clash between what a powerful one wants (having his way, his will, his desire), and (doing) what is just.

Let’s examine the story of the Wolf and the Lamb, and see what lessons we can gain from it. You may draw many other thoughts from it

1. “The wolf set his eyes upon the lamb and thought to himself”, and we might say that he thought only of himself.

(i) Somebody who is hungry or full of fear will find it difficult or impossible to hear the concerns of another. People who are dying of hunger are known to become like mad men, doing things that they could never otherwise conceive of doing.

(ii) The same can be true of those deprived of sleep or are under the influence of mind-altering substances such as alcohol and drugs; their judgement and self-control is impaired.

(iii) Similarly, emotions can blot out reason. Someone who over a period of time – in a similar manner to how we Adore and Worship God – can become fixated (obsessed, full of lust, infatuated, terrified, paranoid, full of vengeance, envy, etc.). In this state they can become overpowered by their emotions concerning wanting this very thing that they don’t have, and merge the importance of having it with their ego. They become blind to reality and will not be open to listening to reason, nor will they be capable of giving consideration of what is Just; they will pursue their objective regardless.

2. Why might the wolf want to vindicate, to justify, to excuse his intention to seize the lamb?

(i) Perhaps other wolves might think less of him for seizing such an easy prey – they might hold a wolf who hunted for his food in much higher regard.

(ii) More importantly there could be repercussions for this wolf if it became known to the farmer that a wolf was lurking in the vicinity of his flock liable to attack any one of them.

(iii) Furthermore, as the wolf was too lazy to go out and hunt for his food, rather than poaching lambs, there could be repercussions for other wolves; as the farmer would not know which wolf had done this, and so he might kill any or all of them. The other wolves in his pack might feel their lives were unnecessarily endangered and force this deviant, careless wolf out of the district.

3. … he accused the lamb …

– What do you think of the wolf’s excuses; were they based upon reality or were they exactly that, excuses; the skin of a lie?

– Did he use them to distract from reality?

– Can we learn anything about the wolf by looking at the accusations he makes?

(i) The wolf had seen that the lamb looked particularly helpless and innocent. By making an allegation, he placed an emotional barrier between him and the lamb; in effect he was labelling the lamb a deviant, an enemy. He was refocusing the encounter with the lamb, making it less likely that his intentions would become stymied by empathy.

(ii) Often, we will present ourselves as victims of injustice – some hurt inflicted by another – in order to justify an attack upon somebody.

Much of Scripture can be summarised by saying:

Do not use the sins of another to justify your own wrong-doing.

(iii) Often the accusations we make concerning others are more applicable to ourselves; they tell our own story.

The wolf’s allegation that the lamb was muddying the water maybe a subconscious recognition of his ploy to muddying the situation, so that the thinking become “muddied”, in other words we are distracted from the truth of the situation, reality.

The allegation that someone spoke ill of him, may reveal his true fears; he may be looking for an excuse so as to prevent others from speaking ill of him, for doing such a cruel and imprudent thing.

4. Those who are intent upon doing something wrong will come up with any excuse, no matter how improbable. Even so those with overwhelming power seems to have a need to justify their disregard for right order, with a fake appeal to reason and conscience. Yet their cover for their arbitrary cruelty and tyrannical use of power, can be an extraordinary flimsy excuse, having little connection with reality. It may merely serve as a distraction from reality. Perhaps we perceive ourselves as in some way dependent upon the compliance and even complicity of those around us (our reference group) so that we must justify our actions, less they become alarmed and think we might do the same to them, and so if they have the means and the audacity, they may turn upon us.

The first accusations were easily disproven as the details were evidently not true. The final justification presented by the wolf was guilt by association, where it was not almost impossible to prove or disprove the validity of the injury the wolf claimed he suffered. In any case the alleged offences were clearly irrelevant; the wolf was determined to make a meal of the lamb.

They say that the first casualty of war is the truth.

Violence cannot (continue to) exist without lies, and lies can’t exist without (being backed up by) violence (or the threat of violence).

Jesus Christ said to His Disciples:

I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. (Mt.10:16)

–

Nonviolent News note: We are happy to publish relevant material with a religious ethos or background whether it is Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Jain or whatever (material from these faith backgrounds, for example, can be found on our website). We are equally happy to publish material with a secular, atheist or agnostic ethos.

Readings in Nonviolence: The life and death of Francis Sheehy Skeffington (1878 – 1916)

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

By Gearóid Ó Dubhthaigh

The circumstances surrounding the murder of the life-long pacifist Francis Sheehy-Skeffington during the 1916 Rebellion probably did more than any single incident to bring British rule in Ireland into disrepute. Although his memory has been largely neglected in Ireland it is honoured by pacifists throughout the world

He was born Francis Skeffington, an only child, in Bailieboro, Co. Cavan, in 1878, and was educated by his father, a medical practitioner, whose idealism was infectious.

As a student at University College Dublin, Francis Skeffington – or “Skeff” as he was now known among his friends – earned a reputation as a nonconformist; he didn’t shave, was a tee-totaller, a vegetarian, a suffragist, and a pacifist. He was a contemporary of James Joyce. When their writings were turned down by the college magazine, they collaborated to publish their rejected articles in a pamphlet. Despite this success, their partnership did not persist; Skeffington regarded Joyce’s elopement with Nora Barnacle as contemptuous of women, while Joyce considered Skeffington to be ridiculously idealistic and much too radical in his feminism.

Another student, Hanna Sheehy (1877-1946) became his wife in 1903. She was born in Kanturk, Co. Cork, where her father was an Irish Party MP and her uncle, a priest, was a member of the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB). At an early age she became an outspoken suffragette. When they married he prefixed Hanna’s surname to his own, and hence forth called himself Francis Sheehy-Skeffington. Together they pursued social and political ideals through their involvement in many radical societies.

After graduating he served as editor to various publications and wrote for a variety of periodicals, urging political leadership. Among his more important works are a biography of Michael Davitt (1846-1906), founder of the Irish Land League, whose idealism and life he so admired; a one-act feminist comedy “The Prodigal Daughter”; and a novel “In Dark and Evil Days” which offered a quasi-historical account of the rebellion of 1798.

During the Lock-out of 1913, his efforts to encourage negotiations between employers and the workers came to an abrupt end as riots erupted. When the Irish Citizen Army was formed, he was named vice-chairman, after it was decide that the organisation would remain purely as a defence front against police brutality. He left when it took on a militaristic character.

When the first world war broke out in 1914, he began a campaign against recruitment. In May 1915 he delivered a lecture pledging to resist the introduction of conscription and was sentenced to six months hard labour for “seditious acts”. However, after a six-day hunger-strike, he was released and his sentence suspended, under the “Cat and Mouse” Act. His wife had gone on hunger-strike in 1913 when she was imprisoned for throwing stones at Dublin Castle.

As a friend of a number of key figures in the IRB, he attempted to convince them to forego violence and to arm themselves with “weapons of the intellect and will”. On bank holiday Monday, April 24th, 1916, the Easter Week Rebellion broke out in Dublin. The unarmed metropolitan police abandoned the city centre resulting in shops being looted. On Tuesday, April 25th he went into the city to put up notices to discourage this looting. Returning home in the early evening, he was arrested at Portobello Bridge as an enemy sympathizer and taken to Portobello Barracks, which garrisoned about 300 soldiers mainly from the Royal Irish Rifles and the Ulster Militia Battalion.

Later that evening, Captain Bowen-Colthurst, who hailed from Dripsey, near Cork city, gathered a picket of about 40 soldiers and marched them towards Kelly’s tobacconist shop, at the corner of Upper Camden Street and Harcourt Road. Francis Sheehy-Skeffington was brought as a human shield. Bowen-Colthurst seemed to be under the impression that Kelly was a supporter of the insurrection, and that the declaration of marshal law allowed him to take the law into his own hands. In fact, Alderman James Kelly was a prominent conservative nationalist.

The picket had only reached Rathmines Road when Bowen-Colthurst struck and then shot dead in cold blood a 19-year-old youth J.J. Coade, who was returning home from a sodality meeting at Rathmines church. Bowen-Colthurst then led his men towards Kelly’s, firing shots at random. There he arrested two newspaper editors who happened to be in the shop at that time; Thomas Dickson and Patrick McIntyre. Together with Francis Sheehy-Skeffington they were marched back to the barracks and placed in the guard room for the night. No charge was made against them.

On the following morning Wednesday 26th, all three prisoners were told to stand against a wall and before they realised what was happening, they were shot dead on Bowen-Colthurst’s orders. A cover-up began immediately, led by the commanding officer in the barracks. Royal Engineers removed and replaced the bullet-marked masonry. Bowen-Colthurst himself led a raid on Sheehy-Skeffington’s home in an effort to find incriminating evidence. However, the case became a cause célèbre, thanks to the efforts of Sir Francis Fletcher Vane (1861-1934), an officer of exceptional moral courage in the Royal Munster Fusiliers.

Vane was a hereditary peer born in Dublin of an Irish mother and English father. Although an army officer he wrote against the atrocities committed during the Boer War in South Africa. Retired from the army he subsequently stood unsuccessfully for parliament as a Liberal candidate, and was active in the anti-war and suffragette campaigns. At the outbreak of the First World War he returned to the army, and with the rank of Major he was sent as a recruiting officer to Dublin. He was stationed at Portobello Barracks but was not present when these acts of violence were taking place.

When he returned on Wednesday 26th, Vane was outraged that Bowen-Colthurst was allowed to carry out his duties as if nothing had happened. On reporting the matter he found no support for decisive action. Vane obtained leave, travelled to London and managed to secure a meeting with the private secretary to Prime Minister Asquith and Field Marshal Kitchener, Secretary of State for War. As a result Bowen-Colthurst was tried and found guilty but insane by a military court martial held in private so as to spare the Government adverse publicity. Initially imprisoned in Broadmoor Criminal Mental Asylum, he was released in 1922 to settle in Canada where he died in the mid-1960s.

Vane was dismissed from the army, or as official papers released decades later put it: “this officer was relegated to unemployment owing to his action in the Skeffington murder case in the Sinn Féin rebellion”. For a number of years he waged an unsuccessful campaign for reinstatement, even appealing to the King. In addition manuscripts of various books he wrote were seized and suppressed by the military censor.

When the details of the murder of Francis Sheehy-Skeffington were first made known in the British House of Commons by the nationalist MP John Dillon they aroused widespread indignation. Hanna was devastated by her husband’s senseless execution and was disgusted by the way in which British authorities handled the affair. Soon afterwards she travelled to the United States and even succeeded in enlisting the interest of President Theodore Roosevelt in her campaign to uncover the truth. Eventually the British Government offered her £10,000 compensation which she promptly refused, since she fiercely opposed the partition of Ireland.

She supported the anti-Treaty side during the Civil War, was a founding member of the Fianna Fáil Party, but later left it to act as assistant editor of the Republican paper An Phoblacht during the 1930s.

Although Francis Sheehy-Skeffington was raised as a Catholic it seems that by the end of his life, he had become what would today be known as a secular humanist. His only child, Owen Sheehy-Skeffington was an outspoken Senator.

–

This article by Gearóid Ó Dubhthaigh cultureofpeace@gmail.com has been issued as a leaflet for Pax Christi.

Readings in Nonviolence: Resources on nonviolence in Ireland, past and present

Nonviolent News, Readings, , ,

This piece is based on a handout which was part of a presentation by INNATE coordinator Rob Fairmichael on Nonviolence in Ireland, past and present to a Pax Christi/Loyola Institute seminar on Advancing nonviolence held in TCD in October.

See the February 2023 issue of Nonviolent News for a different take, listing all of INNATE’s online resources, covering both the main INNATE site and the Flickr photo/documentation one. See https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/2023/02/01/archival-documentary-and-campaigning-materials-available-from-innate/

Please get in touch at innate@ntlworld.com if you are think INNATE can assist you in exploring any of the INNATE material concerned, you have suggestions for additions, or would like to explore being involved in any projects such as peace trails.

–

Introduction

There are many issues regarding definitions of what is ‘nonviolence’ which cannot be fully explored here. This includes differentiating between ‘non-violence’ (action which is not violent) and ‘nonviolence’ (committed either ideologically/philosophically/religiously, or pragmatically as with Gene Sharp – ‘it works’). All of this determines what actions and groups we consider to be non-violent or nonviolent.

The term itself is difficult as it contains a negative (April Carter compared it with the original term for a car as a ‘horseless carriage); there have been suggestions in other languages for different terminology, e.g. ‘relentless persistence’.

We need an analytical but not imperialist (grabbing and labelling) viewpoint as to what is nonviolence/non-violence, and appreciation of different campaigns working non-violently for social change, saving the climate, etc, While we can understand other people’s actions for social or political change as part of non-violence or nonviolence we have to understand that they may not understand it that way and therefore we have to be careful and sensitive in our labelling; however there is nothing to say we cannot understand particular actions in a different way to those involved.

And is nonviolence a) an ideology, b) a spiritual or life imperative, c) a methodology, d) a pragmatic choice, e) all or some of these? f) other?

And where is the greatest imperative to be involved?

What follows are primarily resources from INNATE –

lNonviolence in Irish History pamphlet (Dawn, 1978) – covering O’Connell, Davitt, Quakers, Boycott, US ‘westward’ moving Irish, peace groups; link at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/pamphlets/

lNonviolence – The Irish Experience Quiz link at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/resources/ This is a short attempt at a ‘prejudice reduction exercise’ to show Irish history, distant and contemporary, consists of a lot more than violence…. It starts off with a mention of the Céide Fields where people lived peaceful, settled lives 5,000 years ago, with no evidence of enemies or violence, and in 15 different examples includes the classic non-violent action of switched allegiance and setting up alternative institutions when republican MPs in 1919 set up the first Dáil rather than attend the Westminster parliament.

lPeace groups in Ireland through the years

With the notable exception of Corrymeela https://www.corrymeela.org/ (which predates the Troubles in the North) and possibly Cooperation Ireland, all the Troubles-era peace and reconciliation groups in Northern Ireland are defunct or inactive. However this pamphlet covers all groups from the early 19th century onwards in the whole island. Download from https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/pamphlets/

This draws for some early history on Richard Harrison’s “Irish Anti-War Movements 1824 – 1974”; his Stair na Síochána in Éirinn [le Risteárd Mac Annraoi, as gaeilge] is to be published by Coiscéim and is currently at the printers – 300 pages and illustrated.

lThe Peace People Experience (Dawn Train, 1986), this is a detailed study of the most prominent Northern peace group which began in 1976, link at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/pamphlets/

lPeace People and other peace groups

INNATE’s photo site is also a documentation site with information and links. Peace groups covered, North and South, include (in alphabetical order) Afri, CND, Corrymeela, Dawn, Drumcree Faith and Justice Group, Fellowship of Reconciliation, Glencree, INNATE, Irish Pacifist Movement, Northern Ireland Peace Forum, Pax Christi, Peace and Reconciliation Group, Witness for Peace, Women Together. Go to https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/ and select ‘Albums’.

lNonviolence in Ireland: A study guide

A short study guide for individual learning and reflection or group use. Download at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/resources/ It consists of 16 or 17 short parts with online resources and questions for individual or group reflection.

lMy kind of nonviolence

Fifteen people from different parts of Ireland, and with different takes on the topic, write about what nonviolence means to them, available online at https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/pamphlets/

lINNATE’s photo site has over 2,600 photos or entries, historical and contemporary, and the easiest way to use it is through the albums (groupings of photos on a particular topic or group) of which there are 54.

Go to https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/ and select ‘Albums’ from the toolbar, scroll down to see the ones that interest you. It includes albums on individual peace groups, and subject albums such as monitoring and accompaniment, Troubles and peace in Northern Ireland, disarmament and particular campaigns in this area.

lPeace trails – telling local stories of work for peace, justice and inclusion – plans got derailed by Covid but will take off again. https://innatenonviolence.org/wp/peace-trails/

lVideo of seminars on recent peace movement history from seminars organised by INNATE, 2021. https://www.flickr.com/photos/innateireland/51689114275/

lEco-Awareness

Larry Speight’s column in Nonviolent News (since 2004) has been an important part of INNATE’s insistence on ‘nonviolence towards the earth’.

Issues more generally include local and global justice, climate justice, peace and neutrality, social and cultural inclusion, interpersonal and ’domestic’ violence issues.

Current groups: Just some include Afri, Alternatives to Violence Project/AVP; CND/Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament; Corrymeela: Glencree: PANA/Peace and Neutrality Alliance; Pax Christi, StoP/Swords to Ploughshares; Financial Justice Ireland, Green groups (nonviolence towards the earth and thus humanity) including FOE, Feasta, Stop Climate Chaos, Friends of the Irish Environment, Eco Congregation; civil liberties groups inc, ICCL, CAJ.