Between 1900-2006, campaigns of nonviolent civil resistance were twice as successful as violent campaigns. Erica will talk about her research on the impressive historical record of civil resistance in the 20th century and discuss the promise of unarmed struggle in the 21st century. She will focus on the so-called "3.5% rule"—the notion that no government can withstand a challenge of 3.5% of its population without either accommodating the movement or (in extreme cases) disintegrating. In addition to explaining why nonviolent resistance has been so effective, she will also share some lessons learned about why it sometimes fails. Videography credits Jenn Calaway, Enhancer Michael Hering, Lodo Cinema Sarah Megyesy, Side Pocket Images Satya Peram, Flatirons Films Sean Williams, RMO Films Anthony Lopez, Cross Beyond David Oakley

Comments

1. Keep in mind that George Soros has been skewing these numbers with his color revolutions. Declared Purple revolution in the US underway. That's why the Clintons are wear purple a lot.
2. Interesting but I wonder if something as complex as revolutions can really be quantified with any real precision. Are we seeing a causal link here or just a correlative one. Suppose for example that certain regimes are more prone to failure and due to these same weaknesses are more likely to allow the proliferation of a peaceful uprising?
   
   It is also a bit of an omission that we're never told what qualifies as a "mixed" revolution, meaning one with both violent and nonviolent elements. Would the American Civil Rights movement have counted? Though we cherish the story of Dr. King's pacifism we tend to forget that his famed marches took place over a backdrop of race riots and mounting fears of a militant uprising.
   
   There's certainly a lot here to reenforce the idea that nonviolence shouldn't be so readily ruled out, however, unless I'm misreading the subtext, it seems to go further to suggest that violence can be ruled out, which is a stretch. What about the most vigilant autocracies? Could a nonviolent resistance movement have stopped Fascist Italy or Nazi Germany? Even at the height of their power and control? After all just because something is statistically more effective doesn't mean it can't be situationally less effective.
3. I no longer have to imagine I live in a repressive country thanks to Cheeto Benito.
4. we are doing exactly that in West Cameroons now. civil disobedience.
5. Fantastic talk, could not be more timely. A must-watch. So glad also to see her recent article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/11/21/people-are-in-the-streets-protesting-donald-trump-but-when-does-protest-actually-work/?utm_term=.0d9834bd93b7
6. She nails it on the head, our education system has failed us, as well as our parents. We need to start getting people to realize there's nothing super natural about not killing each other.
7. Sounds Liberal, but okay.
8. 이거구나
9. We live in the country she summed nup
10. Direct action. Resist the government
11. This is awesome!
12. As we look at the social unrest we are facing today, this would be a wonderful time to bring back this Talk, to infuse it in the actions that we are taking. I believe that change needs action n order to occur - but I want that in a non-violent way.
13. 0:07 "i would like you to imagine that you live in an extremely repressive country": don't need to, i am already living in one, hello form Vietnam everyone.
14. So how do you get to 3.5% of the population before you are "disappeared" by the government?
15. it agree however its crazy she dont mention Dr Martin luther king. it was non violent and made one of the biggest changes in the 21st century
16. This video has been used to promote peaceful opposition in Venezuela. The data may be correct in the lecturer's suggestion of no violence in order to achieve meaningful change. However, the forces of evil tend to fall because dictators don't perform their own studies on how to win over benign forces, in a scientific and systematic fashion. Many dictatorial forces that she mentions in the video have fallen because of this lack of scientific effort. But that has not been the case with the Castros in Cuba, who have been in power for over 50 years (not mentioned in the video). They practice their power with a high level of knowledge, and have put in practice what works best in the science of repression. The problem is that this is the mayor source of support for the government of Venezuela, with all the power and might of the Cuban intelligence. So I agree that there is great success based on the data and on study, but that may well depend of who is better educated in their purpose, the dictator or the people.
17. Why do I suspect that her research into violent and nonviolent uprisings put her name on a list in some government department somewhere?
18. Excellent points, particularly on coordinated electricity shut-offs...
    Shira, 13 July, 12016 HE
19. Can we find the data and calculus details somewhere?
20. Interesting to note that there was a non-violent revolution before the signing of the Declaration of Independence that we do not hear about versus the violence that occurred after the signing. Why don't we learn more about civil resistance instead of all the wars and violence in our telling of history?