مقاومت خشونت‌پرهیز: درآمدی فلسفی

by Todd May, محمود حبیبی (Translator), تاد مِی

«هیچ‌کس حقی برای حکومت کردن ندارد.»
کرامت و برابری ما را بر آن می‌دارد که در مقابله با ظلم و بی‌عدالتی به مقاومت خشونت‌پرهیزانه رو بیاوریم. تاد مِی در این کتاب، که خود اولین تأمل فلسفی دربارۀ خشونت‌پرهیزی و مقاومت خشونت‌پرهیز می‌داند، ضمن اشاره با تاریخچۀ این نوع از مقاومت در تاریخ انقلاب‌های جهان، با اتکا به این دو مفهوم اخلاقی و بهره‌گیری از نظریات فیلسوفان معاصر نشان می‌دهد که چرا و چگونه باید مقاومت خشونت‌پرهیز را رویۀ اصلی مبارزۀ اجتماعی و سیاسی قرار داد.
از متن کتاب: «خشونت‌پرهیزی آن خشونتی را نفی می‌کند که ناقض کرامت دیگران است، چه فیزیکی باشد، چه روانی یا ساختاری. ریشۀ این کرامت هم در توانایی دیگران اعم از دشمنان ما برای داشتن یک زندگی انسانی نهفته است؛ منظور یک زندگی توأم با طرح‌های هدفمند و رها از تهدید مرگ یا فقر تحمیلی است.»

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Politics

200 pages, Paperback

First published February 27, 2015

About the author

Todd May was born in New York City. He is the author of 18 books of philosophy. He was philosophical advisor to NBC's hit sit-com The Good Place and one of the original contributors to the New York Times philosophy blog The Stone. Todd teaches philosophy at Warren Wilson College.

Reviews

[Filiz Kasap · Rating 4 out of 5]

Politik şiddetsizlik üzerine dünya üzerindeki eylemleri, şiddet tanımlarıni ve siddetsiz ligin hangi şiddet biçimlerine karşı mücadele içinde olduğunu anlattigi ilk iki bölüm var. Daha sonraki bölümlerde ise şiddetsizlige ve hangi değerleri içeriğine ilişkin tartışmalar yer almakta. Çevirisi de benim için gayet anlaşılırdı. Şiddetsizlikle yeni tanisanlarin kafalarındaki pek çok soru tartışılıyor. Bazı soruların yanıtları tatmin etmese de referansları ile içine çekiyor. Şiddetsizligin ne olduğu veya şiddetsizlige neleri dışarda bıraktığını anlamak isteyenler için gayet anlaşılır ve pek çok isim/kaynak içeren bir eser.

[Anita · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is kind of well-written but the thing I was most impressed by was quote choice? It is hard to paraphrase philosophers because their job is kind of to map concepts to word combos and if you mix up those combos then well you're not really truly saying what they're saying are you? But May picks some pretty excellent quotes and good illustrative examples and on the whole even though I still have no useful opinions about "moral jiu jitsu" and such I think I can probably parrot back what Ranciere and Kant and Deming think which has got to count for something, right?

basically: (1) nonviolence requires a definition (2) which implies a definition of violence (3) but we should limit it to "violence that nonviolent resistance should avoid" (4) because defining violence is very difficult. Then: (1) nonviolence works because it destabilizes state power (2) but not in a violent way (3) there is a difference between destabilization and the meaningful impediment to someone's ability to lead their lives. There are also great examples of nonviolence past just the salt march and the civil rights movement which is helpful because I'm ignorant and don't know any world history

[Rhys · Rating 4 out of 5]

I nice introduction to the philosophical grounding of nonviolent resistance as defined by the author as: "political, economic, or social activity that challenges or resists a current political, economic, or social arrangement while respecting the dignity (in the sense defined above) of its participants, adversaries and others."

Much of the book is dedicated to parsing 'respecting the dignity of participants' through Kant's categorical imperative and Ranciere's notion of equal intelligence. The author also acknowledges the modern challenge of overcoming the 'erosion of social solidarity' in the neoliberal order with its 'more elusive structural violence'.

[Babis Kokovidis · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well made analysis of non violence with examples both from the past and the present in order to follow for the future.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Todd May's core argument for tactical nonviolence hinges on Kant's categorical imperative; basically, act with the means to the end you seek. So, if you want to create a more just, more peaceful world, your means ought to be just and peaceful. ("Transfiguration," it's sometimes called.) Instead of killing oppressors, throw them out by mounting incredible pressure and/or stunning the institutions in power into inaction.

Clearly it's not a universal principle. May claims that self-defense does not technically count as violence, which I'm skeptical of. But the book raises interesting questions and provides unique insight into what might be the most morally "pure" way to achieve major social change.