Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Fighting with non-violence (As a result of multiple conflicts, multiple…
Fighting with non-violence
Conflict between social groups inherently have more than one level of conflict
Conflict always = social change
Conflict has to happen within a group - a social change - creation of self-image
What makes us common and together
What are we fighting for
Movie example would be the bombing to sabotage in Denmark
As a result - lead to a social change and ultimately a split between the ideologies of the Danish people who wanted to protest and the danish government lead by the Scavenius administration
This is not the change that they wanted, in fact while violence always elicits some sort of social change, it is volatile in the sense that the results are not always what were intended and sometimes even undesirable
Follows Deutsh idea of competition and destructive conflict, in which he states competition will breed a loser, or sometimes both sides will lose.
Also coser idea that conflict is synonymous with social change...not only is there conflct between the danish and germans but also within the danish population as well
Entering conflict automatically builds or changes some sort of relationship or norm within the social group
As a result of multiple conflicts, multiple interdependent relationships exist
Positive interdependence within their own groups
bound together by oppression from a common authority
Achieve the same goal by working together
Have a solidarity based on cultural identity
Negative interdependence between the two groups
mutual dislike of the other group
in the case of India, britain gets reward to oppressing indians
The more power the oppressor has, the more power the oppressed have to relinquish
The movie says nonviolence means fighting back, but youre fighting back with other weapons
Power discovered by Gandhi that changed conflict as we know it throughout the 20th century
Nonviolence destroys an opponent just as much, but through different less harmful means
Thesis: Conflict involving social groups inherently have more than one level, and as a result have more than one interdependent relationship. The success of non-violence movements shows how the asymmetries within these interdependent relationships always favors the non-violent over the violent.
Asymmetry favors the non-violent
Deustch - asymmetry
In all the cases in the video - asymmetry existed between the oppressor and the oppressed on 2 levels
The oppressor had more violent power than the oppressed
The oppressor was more dependent
Shows that non-violence has greater power
Turns out the oppressor was more dependant thatn the oppressed
Non-violence brings the dependancy to the surface for all to see
Capacity and willingness to suffer of the oppressed outweighed any power the opposition had
As a result, the oppressors response to the movement has little to no effect
Violence used in 3 ways: intimidate, terrorize, undermine/humiliate
Mandela went to prison believing in violence, came out with his opinion changed