How far does a radical violent wing help or hinder a movement?. Outline: . South Africa Indian National Movement Intifada Iran Conclusion. South Africa. - Early stages of South African resistance to apartheid saw armed struggle becoming widely used
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Indian National Movement
- Early stages of South African resistance to apartheid saw armed struggle becoming widely used
- However by the 1980’s most leaders had denounced violence, such as Nelson Mandela
- General acceptance that violence would not and could not work against the heavily armed state
Did violence compromise the movement and hinder its success?
Individuals: and attacks against government officials may well have been popularly supported in many circumstances
Empowering – a moralizing force?
Coercion – threat of reprisals create solidarity, sustain nonviolent mov?
Damage key tactic of political jujitsu (repression rebounding against the opponent)
Alienate support – amongst Israelis, internationally
Lack of strategic direction, compromised by allowing violence
Outline and background to the violent groups:
underground resistance since 1963
How did violence help the movement?
Publicity and recognition
“given the atmosphere of repression, only such acts could indicate the vulnerability of the regime.”
Used by Khomeini to consolidate his power
How did violence hinder the movement?
Justification for repressive force
Increased tendency for violence?
Violence was in many ways useful
It was, however, small in scale so it is hard to measure its impact
Martin Luther King Jr.
Robert Kennedy/ attorney general
G Mennen Williams/assistant secretary of state
Political Defiance Instructor’s Manual 1992
Robert Helvey 1992