This article posits a number of theoretical pointers towards a conceptual clarification of the concept of non-violence, in particular in relation to notions of conflict, pact, mediation, compromise, strength, benevolence, and truth. It sets them against the concept of violence and the behaviours which are associated with it, and is based on the thought of M. K. Gandhi and E. Weil. Finally it presents some pointers towards a strategy for non-violence and explains the sense of the principle of non-cooperation.

Herein is reproduced the text of the address of Jean-Marie Muller during the General Assembly of Iraqi groups dedicated to non-violence which took place in Erbil on 9 and 10 November 2009. Jean-Marie Muller defines six prospective forms of action for the non-violent movement in Iraq: training, information, sensitization, education, protest, and non-violent direct action.

Education has two distinct but interconnected layers. There is an outer layer concerned with knowledge transfer and skills and an inner layer concerned with the development of character and relationships with others, both individually and socially. This inner layer provides the individual with the capacity to influence and to change society. In that sense, such an inner layer is ‘political’. In this article we argue that the ‘political’ in education can take two distinct forms: either that of dialogue or of defiance. We claim that the former is epitomised by the philosophy of Martin Buber and the latter by the philosophy of Frantz Fanon. Our analysis contrasting these two philosophies clarifies the implications for education, and thereby for the individual and for society.

The pioneering ideas of Glenn D. Paige for a paradigm shift from killing to nonkilling are highlighted. The relevance of anthropology for this paradigm is advanced. The accumulating scientific evidence proves that nonviolent and peaceful societies not only exist, but are actually the norm throughout human prehistory and history. This scientific fact is elucidated through a historical inventory of the most important documentation. Ethnographic cases are summarized of the Semai as a nonviolent society, the transition from killing to nonkilling of the Waorani, and the critiques of the representation of the Yanomami as a killing society. Several of the most important cross-cultural studies are discussed. The assertions of some of the most vocal opponents to this paradigm are refuted. The systemic cultural and ideological bias privileging violence and war over nonviolence and peace is documented.

This article is focused on the relation between peace and nonviolence. It claims that the main challenge for peace comes from the power of structural violence. This is the main form of evil in history. Today structural violence is at work in the political and economic global systems. They obey a logic of conflict. The exercise of nonviolence can avoid the tendency to transform the connection between violence, evil, dehumanization, and great organizational systems into a destiny. The dynamic that is needed to effect this is to move from the primacy of automatism in political and market power to the primacy of human consciousness. Experiences such as reconciliation, democratic growth, restorative justice, and harmonization with the natural world should be considered as the effects of this systemic translation to nonviolence.