Not only well written and engaging, this book is most important to anybody who is engaged in any form of social-justice and/or peace-activism. It provides a very thoughtful if short assessment of the views of religions about violence and then follows with a historical (again, quite brief) of the evolution of both violence and non-violence. Along this effort, it distills a few (25) very succinct and well established lessons about nonviolence that I found superb (even if I do not fully agree with all).

Highly recommended book - especially in these times of excess violence in inter-country conflicts in the Middle East and Eastern Europe and many social-justice struggles in many parts of the world.

Really good history and an important perspective to learn from. In the end I don't agree with the author's conclusions and their bias became more and more apparent. All writers are propagandists though. This book should have been much longer.

One of the most important and informative books that I’ve ever read. What would the history of the world have been without violence in the pursuit of wealth and power? Without war? Mark Kurlansky adroitly illustrates this thesis of nonviolence with several examples of historical figures who had the courage to stand against the Sturm und Drang of conformity. Everyone should read this book. Especially in this day and age.

A lovely little book with a nice organizational conceit: a list of lessons. The author makes arguments that will be impossible to disagree with, even if they are hard to put into practice. Others are less obvious and might make some readers question the assertions made. But that's good. I found myself questioning some assumptions I had labored under for some time (e.g., was WWII really a good or even necessary war?).

The folks who will find this book most useful are those of us who are drawn to the idea of nonviolence and have a strong conviction about its rightness, but who still need some intellectual convincing themselves (and the means with which to convince others) to support this conviction.

Those who are highly skeptical of nonviolence may not be persuaded by such a thin tome (although it will at least raise some interesting questions). Of coruse, such people are not likely the actual or even intended readership.

mark kurlansky's," nonviolence: the history of a dangerous Idea" explores the history of violence from it's "imperfect beginnings" through the world's present day permutations. the author also explores the possibility of active non-violence as an alternative to religious and political justification for acts of aggression, and gives concrete historical examples of how active resistance through non-violent means has been effective. along the way, kurlansky presents 25 lessons, which he summarizes in the last chapter. of interest to me was how the world's great religions evolved and set forth written rationalizations for just acts of war. the overriding rationalization for war seems to be power, political and monetary gain. the soldiers of power are the poor and the officers are the powerful states, but no matter how many "wars to end wars" and wars to protect nations, there is no foreseeable end... this, for me is the most important justification against the practice of violence as a means of solving our differences, protecting our borders, bringing about justice or promoting human rights.

Strong rebuttal to the idea that war is ever necessary. I still don't know how much I agree or disagree with the author, but he sure made me think.

Intriguing and eye opening. I understand more now that peace against violence is a dangerous endeavor.

I’m grateful to have read this book so I’m able to see how flawed we are to our roots, but not impossible to change our minds for a better humanity.

As a big believer in love always prevails, this was a much needed read for 2021 and the coming years in my own life. I feel A renewed sense of the possibility of peace in our societies.

Push out more love to the kids. Complete love. Let them know that we’re not meant to kill other humans that are just like us. No matter what war propaganda or how brave people say we are to fight in a war that people lose their children, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins, moms, dads.

Push out more love. More love.

Darkness doesn’t like the light so much, but it doesn’t mean the light can’t fill the darkness.

I first read this when I was 17. My age of awakening - of sorts, and Kurlansky really helped shape my worldview at a time when I was reading Martin Meredith's State of Africa, Hochschild's King Leopold's Ghost, Dowden's Africa. Kurlansky's words were a necessary balance and timely light to the darkness I was discovering.

5 years later, I read it again and my soul resonates with so deeply but these idylls take courage, courage that most of us lack, that most of us are not willing to search for.

Importantly, I have learnt that non violence resistance =/= Pacifism. I've learnt that truth takes patience to understand. For example when Jesus says "turn the other cheek", New Testament Scholar Walter Wink deduces that the act of showing the other cheek is non-violent resistance, it creates a situation where the superior will have to treat the peasant as a peer. The peasant is in effect saying, "I am your equal. I refuse to be humiliated anymore."

It takes a deep inner courage and patience to live the way Jesus commands, it takes an unshakable understanding of love to follow these 25 lessons.

So again, Kurlansky shapes my worldview. Fantastic read.

There are so many things packed in here that I had NEVER heard about! Why aren't we talking more about all of these peace activists?

Anyway, as someone ideologically committed to nonviolence, I was already on board with the general argument of the book. Though its somewhat polemical nature was sometimes off-putting, and definitely would be for someone less sold on its argument.

I want to read books on all of the different people and historical moments that Kurlansky mentions throughout this slim volume, which I suppose is a good thing. And I'd love a more rigorous, academic treatment of nonviolence. This is a good primer and very readable for providing an alternative view on war in the US and some other places.

Victim blaming—
I wanted to like this book since I’m a believer in non-violence. However this book was very focused on the white, male history of non-violence and tended to overlook and even denigrate the contributions of women and non-white communities. When non-whites were discussed, it was frequently in the context of discussing the white men who had influenced then. There was also a lot of really repugnant victim-blaming. The countless nonviolent genocide victims in history were just were not doing non-violence well enough or it would have worked.

So gross.

I've been a non-agressionist my entire adult life and a pacifist for almost a decade. I should be the choir this book is preaching to. However, this book is let down by partisanship.
Don't get me wrong.This book gets a tremendous amount right, and the 25 rules as a list are not bad rules for advancing the pacifist and non-violent position. The problem lies in the framing of the pacifist movement as solely a spiritual and moral movement of true believers and near zealots.

While certainly true example, the author frames them as the main driving force for the global decline in violence. They choose
to ignore the effects of trad and interdependent supplychains on the 20th centurys transformation from world wars to what would have been considered skirmishes at the beginning of the century.

I am the touchy feeley pacifist who hates the idea of causing harm but I have to recognize as should these authors, That it is the pragmatic tradesman and Merchant class that have driven the engines for global peace as much as idealists like us. To ignore that because of the unpopularity of such ideas in the academic left is to be disingenuous. If the global reduction in violence is the goal, we must accept.However, many strange bedfellows it takes to end the carnage.

The only reason this isn’t a five star book is it needed to be longer. Some parts, especially in the start of the book could have done with more explanation.