Efficacy of Nonviolence

Running head: RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Research Proposal
Student’s name
University
Author’s note

1
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Title
The Efficacy of Nonviolence: the Defiance Campaign and the Lunch Counter Sit-ins Compared
Introduction
In the history of protests and resistance, nonviolence has been long recognized as a
significant tool for civil reforms and political emancipations. Nonviolence does not only indicate
the refrain from exerting coercion or violence on the opponent; rather it has a positive or
constructive approach inherent in it. It essentially indicates a personal philosophy that stipulates
the individual practice of being harmless physically, verbally and psychologically to self and to
others. Nonviolence has a deep-rooted underpinning that believes that inflicting harm to anyone
for achieving an end goal, including human beings, animals or the environment as a whole, is
unnecessary and unethical. This notion may be grounded in moral, philosophical or spiritual
basis, or may be used for purely pragmatic or strategic reasons (Gregg, 2018).
While its ideological underpinning remains the same, the efficacy of nonviolent protests
and resistance varies in different countries and their respective political, cultural and historical
contexts. Hence, to determine the efficacy of nonviolence as a successful tool of social and
political resistance, the present research proposes a comparative analysis of historical and socio-
political backgrounds of particular nonviolent movements. To this end, the research will compare
and contrast two significant instances of nonviolent movements, i.e. the Defiance Campaign and
the Lunch Counter Sit Ins, and examine their political, social and cultural backgrounds to
contextualize the nonviolence approach of these movements. The broad area of research being
African American History, the research chooses these two particular cases, one set in the
American backdrop and the other in South Africa. To gain an insight on the theoretical

2
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
framework of the issue, the proposal will first provide a brief historical background of nonviolent
movements. Further, in an attempt to compare and contrast the cases, the research will
investigate the logic of similarity and the logic of difference between the two case studies.
Thereafter, the research proposal conduct an in depth literature survey to identify the
historiographical contexts of the two backdrops and finally coming up with relevant secondary
research questions that would further the research.
Background
Historically, the political and sociological efficacy of nonviolence as a tool of resistance
was made popular by Gandhi. In the context of the freedom movement of India, Gandhian
nonviolence, or ahimsa, took a central role in organizing mass resistance and oppose the colonial
rulers in their course of incessant oppression, deprivation and forced subjugation of the native
Indians. Gandhi, in his philosophical and socio-political understanding of resistance and
nonviolence, was immensely influenced by Tolstoy and the philosophical teachings of Buddhism
and Jainism (Campbell, 2019).. For both Gandhi and Tolstoy, nonviolence was a philosophy as
well as a strategy to attain social change, but at the same time it was used as an alternative to
passive acceptance of coercion or oppression (Guseynov, 2019).
Apart from the Gandhian model of ahimsa and satyagraha, there have been many
evidences of nonviolent resistance in the form of civil disobedience, non-cooperation, unarmed
direct action, and various social, political, economic and cultural reforms over the course of
world history. Martin Luther King Jr. and James Bevel adopted the nonviolent model in their
campaigns for the African Americans’ civil rights movement. The Velvet Revolution of
Czechoslovakia was one of the most notable forms of nonviolent resistance that overthrew the

3
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Communist regime. In the most recent times, the nonviolent movement of the Liberian women,
led by Leymah Gbowee was one of the successful revolutions that achieved peace in Liberia
after a 14 year long civil war (Barash, 2017).
Some historians and scholars of political science may argue that nonviolence could be
effective in certain cultures, although it cannot be applied as a universal socio-political tool.
However, this notion has been strongly objected and refuted by most of the scholars in the field
of civil resistance, as they provide historical evidences of successful nonviolent protests and
resistance throughout the course of world history, up until the contemporary history of civil
conflicts. Moreover, they argue that the Middle East, the region which has been repeatedly
written off as a cauldron of hopeless violence and strife, has experienced several successful
nonviolent protests even before the Arab Spring. The Iranian Revolution to bring down the
dictatorial regime of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the Palestinian protest during the First
Intifada that compelled the Israeli army to cease arms and the Israeli leaders to hold talks with
Palestine, which eventually culminated to the successful Oslo Accords (Chenoweth, 2017).
Besides, most of countries suffering under dictatorial regime, including Argentina, Venezuela,
Chile, Brazil and Egypt etc. have achieved significant socio-political reforms through effective
non-violent movements (Barash, 2017). Hence, it can be argued that the efficacy of nonviolence
resistance does not depend on the cultural and historical backdrops of their respective
communities, although the culmination and nature of such protests may vary from country to
country.

4
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Logic of Similarity
The key to link the Defiance movement and the Lunch Counter Sit-In movement is both
the protests were aimed to redress the ongoing oppression of the people of color. Both the
countries have a long, tormented history of racism, where the white majority has held a position
of supremacy and denied the people of color—blacks, Indians and any person with a mixed race
origin access to social, political and economic opportunities. They were deprived of their
fundamental rights; their dignity and freedom were violated, as well as they faced a staunch
discrimination in every walk of the social and cultural life (Berry, 1995).
The oppression of colored people in America has its roots in the heinous custom of
slavery system which prevailed in the society as a direct result of the colonial history. Africans
were bought and sold as objects, by the white elites and farm owners, to provide physical labour
in their farms and households. Even after their emancipation from slavery system after the Civil
War, the former slaves, along with all the people of color were considered as second-class
citizens, and were given very limited access to social and economic capital. Systemic
discrimination, racial segregation and disenfranchisement were prevalent in the American
society, which restricted the people of color from participating in social, economic, political and
cultural activities. This widespread discrimination and segregation eventually culminated to the
decade long Civil Rights Movement, which fought for the emancipation of colored people from
all sorts of discrimination and segregation (Green, 2017). It is important to note that the majority
Civil Rights Movement was essentially a nonviolent resistance against the discrimination and
racial segregation practiced by the white supremacy. And it was carried out through several
boycotts, non-cooperation, sit-ins, demonstrations and conventions held across the country. The

5
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Lunch Counter sit in, also known as the Greensboro sit in was a part of such nonviolent civil
protests, spontaneously organized by a group of students (Levy, 2019).
Similar to the American Civil Rights Movements, the Defiance Campaign in South
Africa was also an organized response to the apartheid—a systemic oppression over the native
Africans, Indians and mixed race origins. In the world history, the apartheid was also an instance
of black versus white, where the white majority repressed the civil rights and dignity of black
people through systematic legislative, political economic and social restrictions. Apartheid
signifies an institutionalized racial segregation that prevailed in the South Africa and Namibia
(formerly known as South West Africa) from 1948 until the early 1990s. In 1948, the National
party of South Africa, by virtue of winning the national elections and gaining the political control
over the country, imposed apartheid laws against the black, Indians and mixed race citizens of
the country. Through this imposition, the National Party restricted the political power within the
grasp of white people alone, and allocated specific areas for different races. Not only the people
of color in South Africa had been assigned with segregated residential areas, they were also
denied access to political activities, higher education, public offices, positions of authority as
well as higher economic echelon. However, a nationwide protest soon erupted as a response to
this tyrannical rule. Trade unionists, workers and other labourers were the first ones to speak out
through political strikes. Soon after, beginning in the 1949, the African National Congress
(ANC) along with the African Congress Youth League (ANCYL) launched Programmes of
Actions against the apartheid laws. However, the Programmes of Actions advocated a militant
approach in the protests and resistance. Further, since 1950, the ANC initiated a series of mass
actions, demonstrations, boycotts, civil disobedience and non-cooperation to protest against the
apartheid laws, and the movement took a more non-violent approach eventually. The Defiance

6
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Campaign was launched in 1952, through collaboration between the ANC and ANCYL, as an
organized nationwide movement against the prevalent racial segregation and discrimination
imposed by the apartheid laws (Clark & Worger, 2016).
Apart from the fact that both Civil Rights Movement and the Defiance Campaign were
organized protests against racial segregation and discrimination, another factor that links these
two instances as significant evidences of nonviolent movement is that both of the protests were
directly influenced by M.K. Gandhi himself. During the launch of the apartheid laws, Gandhi
was serving in South Africa as a young barrister, and being a non-white himself, faced several
backlashes of racial discrimination. Historians also note that Gandhi, who popularized the notion
of ahimsa and satyagraha in the world through his active advocacy in the Indian freedom
movement, has started his practice of nonviolent movements in South Africa. He was also a
close ally of Nelson Mandela, while the later was reportedly influenced by Gandhi’s satyagraha
model and eventually inspired to form the ANC fortified by Gandhi’s belief in shared humanity
(Jahanbegloo, 2018).
Similar to Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr., who was regarded as the key figure for
organizing the culmination of Civil Rights movement and mobilizing the masses, was also
heavily influenced by Gandhian teachings of nonviolence and satyagraha. From his writings and
memoirs, several historians and biographers quote him as a disciple of Gandhi. King himself
asserted that he gained his regulating Christian ideals from Gandhi’s teachings of the faith in
God. Also, he recognized Gandhian nonviolence as the guiding principle of his advocacy for the
social change (Hiller, 2016).

7
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Logic of Difference
While both the Defiance Movement and the Lunch Counter sit in (as a part of the Civil
Rights movement) as a resistance against the white supremacy and racial segregation, the key
difference between the two movements is identified as the historical and socio-political contexts
of the two countries. Racism and oppression of colored people has been a long standing feature
of the American society since the British colonial era. The African Americans, unlike the Native
Indians in America, were never given autonomy and freedom in the social and political life
(Acharya, Blackwell & Sen, 2016). The majority of them were former slaves, who never had the
chance to participate in the social or political arena. Hence, the oppression and racial
segregation, therefore, was deep rooted in the structural system of America (Roediger, 2019).
In South Africa, on the other hand, the blacks were native to the land and had a long
history of fighting Dutch and British colonial rules. The early African population were composed
of San, Khoikhoi, Bantu, Zulu, Nguni, Xhosa, Sotho and other communities. Despite the Boer
enslavement and British oppression, the native African retained their fighting spirit as the
children of the land, the free men battling for their rights. Similarly, the Indians coming to seek
new economic opportunities in South Africa were not slaves. Many of them came to the country
independently, who paid their travels by themselves and not as the servants of their British
masters. These Indians, known as the “passenger Indians”, were also subjected to the staunch
discriminations inflicted by the Afrikaners and the European colonists (Jaffe, 2017) Hence, the
apartheid hit the people of color in South Africa worse than it affected the black people in
America. Therefore, it can be said that the movement in America was a call for a social reform
from the existing injustice, while the people in South Africa fought against the draconian law to
reclaim their rights.

8
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Histiriographic Context
Investigating the historiography of the Civil Rights Movement in America, one feature
that stands out as a major gap in the historical discourse is that the entire discussion regarding the
movement revolves around King’s role and his influence on the nonviolent movement. This
approach poses as a challenge to the histirographic endeavour of the resistance, as there were
numerous other protests that stood out as significant cases of resistance against the ongoing
racial segregation and discrimination. The Lunch Counter sit ins, also known as the Greensboro
sit ins gain significance in this discourse as it provides an opportunity to reviews the independent
protests that contributed to the success of the Civil Rights Movements. A significant primary
source to know more about the incident is Edwin Randall’s The Sit-In Story: The Story of the
Lunch Room Sit-Ins (1961). The audio recording, conducted by the author and published by the
Folkways records, contains the physical recordings of the interviews of several sit in participants
of the Civil Rights movement and a speech by Rev. Ralph Abernathy, a Civil Rights activist and
a close ally of King. Also, the oral documentary Voices of freedom: An oral history of the civil
rights movement from the 1950s through the 1980s by Henry Hampton and Steve Fayer (2011)
presents a series of interviews of the Civil Rights activists who took part in numerous sit in
protests during 1950s and 1980s. These interviews provides a first-hand account of the sit in
protests , including the Greensboro sit in. Also, Francesca Polletta, in her article Plotting Protest
presents an elaborate narrative on the spontaneity and the nonviolent nature of the particular sit
in, drawing on several narrations and framings of the series of protests. She notes that the
participants of the Greensboro sit in were the members of NAACP youth council and were
trained by NAACP officials in the techniques on nonviolence. Thus, she connects the sit in

9
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
movement directly with the Civil Rights movement and acknowledges the indoctrination of
nonviolence (Polletta, 2002).
Similarly, nonviolence also stands out as the central theme of the Defiance Movement as
well. However, some historians and scholars of political science argue that Mandela was ready to
embrace armed struggle as a means to end the apartheid. To this end, it is important to review the
incidents during the anti-apartheid movement to critically review the role and extent of
nonviolence in the protests. A very helpful resource in this regard is The Heart of Hope-- the
interview collection of Padraig O’Mally, which contains the interviews of key personalities who
influenced the South African history and politics during 1985 and 2005. The collection offers
different perspectives and events that occurred during the anti-apartheid movement, which could
shed light on the efficacy and realization of nonviolence in the Defiance Movement. Besides, F
N Nesbitt, in his book Race for sanctions: African Americans against apartheid, 1946-1994
provides a historical and political analysis of the Defiance Movement, linking it with the overall
anti-apartheid resistance in South Africa.
Secondary Questions
i) How did racial identity play an instrumental role in the formation of Defiance
Movement?
ii) To what extent Martin Luther King Jr.’s notion of nonviolence was influenced by the
Gandhian notion of ahimsa?
iii) On what grounds Mandela deviated from the nonviolent approach in his advocacy of
anti-apartheid movement?

10
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
iv) How did independent and spontaneous protests such as Lunch Counter sit in
contribute to the American Civil Rights Movement?
v) Is the application of nonviolence similar in the contexts of South African and
American movements against racial segregation?

11
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
References and Bibliography
Acharya, A., Blackwell, M., & Sen, M. (2016). The political legacy of American slavery. The
Journal of Politics, 78(3), 621-641.
Barash, D. P. (2017). Approaches to peace (Vol. 199). Oxford University Press.
BENJAMIN. HOUSTON. (2020). 1960 LUNCH COUNTER SIT-INS: Standing Up for Racial
Justice. TAYLOR & FRANCIS.
Berry, M. F. (1995). Black Resistance/White Law: A History of Constitutional Racism in
America. Penguin.
Bundy, C. (2019). The Challenge of Rethinking Mandela.
Campbell, M. (2019). Religious Nonviolence: An Analysis of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther
King Jr., and Thich Nhat Hanh. The Hilltop Review, 11(2), 6.
Carl, E. L. (1960). Reflections on the Sit-Ins. Cornell LQ, 46, 444.
Chenoweth, E. (2017). Democracy as a Method of Nonviolence. In RJ Rummel: An Assessment
of His Many Contributions (pp. 107-115). Springer, Cham.
Clark, N. L., & Worger, W. H. (2016). South Africa: The rise and fall of apartheid. Routledge.
Gladwell, M. (2010). Small change. The New Yorker, 4(2010), 42-49.
Green, M. (2017). Racism in America: A Long History of Hate. Greenhaven Publishing LLC.
Gregg, R. B. (2018). The power of nonviolence. Cambridge University Press.
Guseynov, A. (2019). Tolstoy and Gandhi. Voprosy filosofii, (11), 153-163.

12
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Hampton, H., & Fayer, S. (2011). Voices of freedom: An oral history of the civil rights
movement from the 1950s through the 1980s. Bantam.
Hiller, P. T. (2016). Bidyut Chakrabarty. Confluence of Thought: Mahatma Gandhi and Martin
Luther King Jr. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. Peace & Change.
Isaac, L. W. (2019). Evidence from US civil rights movement campaigns. Social Movements,
Nonviolent Resistance, and the State.
Jaffe, H. (2017). A history of Africa. Zed Books Ltd..
Jahanbegloo, R. (2018). The Global Gandhi: Essays in Comparative Political Philosophy. Taylor
& Francis.
Knight, T. A., & Burrow Jr, R. (2019). Martin Luther King Jr.'s Doctrine of Nonviolence and
South Africa. Western Journal of Black Studies, 43(1/2), 22-35.
Laff, E. (2017). A HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE WOOLWORTH? S LUNCH
COUNTER CIVIL RIGHTS DEMONSTRATION.
Levy, P. B. (2019). The Civil Rights Movement: A Reference Guide. ABC-CLIO.
Maylam, P. (2017). South Africa's racial past: The history and historiography of racism,
segregation, and apartheid. Routledge.
Meyer, S. (2017). Nelson Mandela: South African President and Anti-Apartheid Activist. The
Rosen Publishing Group, Inc.
Nesbitt, F. N. (2004). Race for sanctions: African Americans against apartheid, 1946-1994.
Indiana University Press.

13
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Nimtz, A. H. (2016). Violence and/or Nonviolence in the Success of the Civil Rights Movement:
The Malcolm X–Martin Luther King, Jr. Nexus. New Political Science, 38(1), 1-22.
Polletta, F. (2002). Plotting protest. Stories of change: Narrative and social movements, 31-51.
Randall, E (1961) The Sit-In Story: The Story of the Lunch Room Sit-Ins, Folkways records.
Roediger, D. R. (2019). How race survived US history: From settlement and slavery to the
Obama phenomenon. Verso.
Ruma, M. B., & Leon, C. E. (2017). AUTOBIOGRAPHY, IDENTITY, AND THE
PHENOMENOLOGY OF VIOLENCE IN NELSON MANDELA’S LONG WALK TO
FREEDOM. SARJANA, 32(1), 1-10.
Schmidt, C. W. (2016). Why the 1960 Lunch Counter Sit-Ins Worked: A Case Study of Law and
Social Movement Mobilization. Ind. JL & Soc. Equal., 5, 281.
Schmidt, C. W. (2018). The Sit-In Movement. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American
History.
Shafer, M. T. C. (2017). Between mediation and critique: Quaker nonviolence in apartheid Cape
Town, 1976–1990. European Journal of Political Theory, 1474885117721414.
Stephan, M. J. (2016). Advancing Just Peace through Strategic Nonviolent Action.
Wolff, M. (1970). Lunch at the five and ten: the Greensboro sit-ins: a contemporary history.
Stein and Day.

14
RESEARCH PROPOSAL