A good history of nonviolence and some lessons we can draw from it. It doesn’t teach you how to conduct a nonviolent campaign (there are other books for that), but it’s rare to find a history of nonviolent action from the ancient world to the 21st century.

This book is what it says it is… oops. Too much history for me.

One of the most important books I have read.

This book really disappointed me. It was a great concept, but the execution wasn't that great. A few interesting characters show up - Mozi, a pacifist opponent of Confucius, and some groups in the Reformation/Early-American era - but the general narrative lacked cohesion and vision. Not really worth the read.

25 Lessons- all worth understanding…

This book was absolutely captivating.

The history of non-violence is unrepresented in our educational system. In fact, it is quite the opposite: our educational system presents history almost entirely as a progression of violent acts.

Kurlansky's book is remarkable for several reasons. It is a fascinating, lucid account of the non-violence movement throughout history, most of which we have never before encountered. His writing is excellent - clear and concise, and yet descriptive. And the story is so engaging it draws you in like a fiction novel.

Kurlansky contrasts the non-violence movement from that of the pacifist's. Gandhi was in fact antagonistic to the inaction in pacifism. Kurlansky quotes Ghandi, "Violence is any day preferable to impotence. There is hope for the violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." As you read this book, you become aware of the incredible bravery of those in the active non-violence movement. As one non-violent leader was quoted as saying, it requires far more bravery to be an active non-violent protestor than a warrior.

Some of the writings from the non-violent movement of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are amazingly powerful. It makes one wonder how we could still be fighting wars in the twenty-first century. I can only think it is because we have leaders who lack imagination, intelligence, and yes; bravery.

I believe every teenager should have this book as required reading.

I rarely keep books. After I have read them, I put them out in to the world for others to enjoy. This book I will keep and read again many times. I would put it in my top ten of all time. Along with "All Is Quiet On The Western Front", it is a cry to humanity to stop the madness of war.

I've never been a pacifist, but as I've gotten older I've pleasured in the fact that my mind can now be more flexible. I was much more rigid in my thinking and my politics as a young man. My girlfriend's parents were hippies, and I used to argue with Roger that if you see someone being raped in a park at night, you have to use violence to defend and protect the disadvantaged, and I could not understand his non-violent approach. I naturally extended this to nations defending other nations through violence. However, neither are black and white scenarios with no other options. You don't have to be a "wimp" and do nothing when confronted with violence. And, you may have to become violent. But there is a whole world of options between these extremes. He described how some monks in the Middle Ages would carry clubs rather than swords. A rapist might stop if you yelled at him, and he most likely would stop if you beat him with a club. But, that doesn't necessarily mean you have to shoot him with a gun. I didn't agree with all aspects of the book, such as the author's pointed anti-Catholic opinions, but I really appreciate the opportunity to think about issues in new way, which really should be a major point of writing and reading literature.

Charts a course of nonviolent action and thought from ancient times (India, China, Japan), through a mostly Western track through the middle ages and finally to the 20th century. The actual 25 lessons are excellent, and take up a mere two pages in the appendix. Their explication comes in the preceding history. Kurlansky assumes some familiarity in his readers about such prominent nonviolent events as Ghandi's campaign in India and the Civil Rights Movement--I was with him on most of it but would have preferred a more welcoming approach. Perhaps what is most fun about the book is the outright hell he gives to Churchill, Lincoln, John Brown, the Founding Fathers (Jefferson comes off a bit better), and others of our heroes who were only too happy to pull out the rifles even when nonviolent action was obviously working.

This book, especially as I'm reading it now, is deeply interesting and applicable. The raw truth about the warlike necessity of power, the contamination of religion through its consorting with statehood, and all the millions of people who have laid down their lives throughout history to make the world better, all of this is so disheartening and uplifting. Disheartening because I suspect we will be battling hatred and intolerance until the end of time, and uplifting because of the same reason. Nonviolence enters the arena earlier than we remember, and I was shocked at the widespread use of the movement throughout history. I never learned about any of this in school. We ought to read more books, oughtn't we?

Short and excellent book that serves as an overview of the history of nonviolent actions. Nonviolence is something I've been interested in ever since I read Johnny Got His Gun when I was a teenager (prompted by the Metallica song "One" I might add...). As I'm sure I've written before, I was two classes shy of a minor in Peace Studies as an undergraduate, something I've regretted not finishing many times. Nonviolence is a fascinating and effective strategy in facing powerful, malevolent forces in the world, but it requires an astonishing amount of bravery and discipline to implement.

One of the author's main points was that early religious figures like Jesus and Mohamed were apostles of non-violence, but their followers found ways to weaken, or soften, or ignore their radical message and go back to making war and murdering people, only now with the imprimatur of God. Throughout history, many people have acted nonviolently and met success, or been horribly oppressed and killed by the Powers That Be. I was especially fascinated to read about the anti-war movement in the 70s, and the Black Power Movement in the early 70s, and how they moved from nonviolence to violence, and were destroyed. One cannot help but wonder what would have happened if Dr. King had lived and Stokely Carmichael had died, or if the Weathermen never started their bombing campaign.

In today's environment (late summer 2020) we are seeing largely peaceful protests for the Black Lives Matter movement being sullied by looting, burning, shooting, and fighting. This, of course, plays directly into the hands of those who wish to kill the protesters, and to paint their movement as dangerous thugs. And, it's true: there is a violent element to the protesters (mostly white dudes, so far as I can see). Unsurprisingly, armed 'patriot militias' are showing up and shooting and fighting (and using bear repellent, believe it or not), which leads to more fighting and burning and rioting. I'm trying to imagine what a BLM movement would look like now if it had the Christian basis, and self discipline, of the Civil Rights Movement in the 50s and 60s. Pretty unstoppable, I think.

Anyhow, great book. Short and hopeful. A much needed refresher course for me.

I believe that the author convinced me that I can’t truly rationalize the use of violence. However, I’m not fully convinced that non-violence can work. I’ll be wrestling with the implied task: “Somebody must begin taking no part whatever in violence, and be ready to suffer every persecution that this abstention brings.”

Very interesting overview of nonviolence in various religious traditions, and then an overview of the almost constant drive to military action throughout United States' history.