Political Disagreement, Violence and Nonviolence

Violence and Nonviolence descriptively analyzes numerous examples of theorists’ definitions and characterizations of varying types of violence, arguing that a commonsense view of violence and nonviolence is based on paradigm cases that most people generally agree consider as kinds of violence and nonviolence. Beyond these cases, however, McCreery argues that collectives of individuals form into politicized groups that share visions of these types of violence and nonviolence, particularly in terms of what they believe to be legitimate kinds of violence and nonviolence in contrast to illegitimate kinds. An understanding of violence and nonviolence requires a perspectival, relational approach that situates the vulnerable human body as primary. Furthermore, if nonviolence is to succeed as an effective political strategy, then it must work as a kind of violence, at least from the perspective of the adversary.