The Curiously Selective Virtues of 'Nonviolent Resistance'
The article, based on a new study, posits that 'nonviolent resistance is twice as likely to succeed as violent resistance' and claims, rather broadly, that 'the primary reason for this success is the ability of nonviolent movements to attract more participants and diverse coalitions.' One might wonder why, then, certain nonviolent movements in countries deemed 'adversaries' rarely seem to attract
the same international media fervor, governmental accolades, or financial backing as those aligned with Western geopolitical interests. Curiously, the article fails to mention the hundreds of millions of dollars funneled into various 'democracy promotion' programs that often underwrite these very nonviolent movements. For instance, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), founded in 1983, has
openly supported 'nonviolent pro-democracy groups' globally, often in nations whose governments are out of favor with Washington, such as during the Color Revolutions in the early 2000s (NED 2006 annual report). CASE A: The Sanctified Nonviolent Protest The DW article focuses on movements that align with Western democratic ideals, citing, for example, 'nonviolent activities against ICE in
Minnesota.' The piece implies a natural, organic process: 'more participants and diverse coalitions.' It paints a picture of inherent moral superiority and strategic efficacy. THE FRAMING: "History shows that nonviolent resistance can topple authoritarian power." CASE B: The Unmentionable Nonviolent Protest Contrast this with, say, the vast, sustained, and largely nonviolent Palestinian BDS