This book offers quite a bit of food for thought. I definitely recommend reading it. It's not perfect, includes some outdated language, and it would greatly benefit from a new edition that covers recent global events, but in all, it makes some fantastic points.

I had far too much to say about this book. So I had to post it here.

A page-turning and well researched take on nonviolence. My greatest takeaway is that violence is a lack of creativity.

What an amazing book. Interesting perspective and how this term was created and how it is effectively used, by just about everyone. Violent and non-violent movements are all over and sadly, it seems we use more the Violent than the non-violent for sure.

It is easier to attain power over people if they use violent means--for sure. I love all the examples Mark provides throughout this book. I sure hope we develop the ability to effectively used the non-violent means to resolve all our differences, without a need for wars. Wars are never good.

I love "history of xyz" books. And this is one of the better ones--and Kurlansky knows what he's doing (author of "Cod" and "Salt" which I now also have to read).

This book moves through many different movements, people and instances of nonviolent activism.

Lots of people you would expect, Gandhi, Tutu, Jesus and some unexpected groups, the Waldensians, lots of abolitionists, and other interesting folk.

This book points to Jesus as "yet another" more or less "equal" practicer of nonviolence. Not the reason for all other followers. So that was annoying (and heretical) but I guess that's to be expected in a survey like this written by a non-Christian.

Kurlansky's "Lessons" are woven throughout the text and I think I missed a few, but he's got a helpful reference list at the end. Not much to disagree with, but lots to ponder.

Where does the idea of Just War come from? (and I mean chapter and verse, not Urban II or Aquinas or Augustine -- where do they get the idea???)

What about violence in self defense? This book seems to over-glorify martyrs. Which, as a Christian, I guess I can't honestly under-glorify. I guess I have to just get used to the idea that vengeance is the Lord's and all that really, really means.

This book spurred some genuinely interesting trains of thought. And it was pretty well-written. Well done.

Nonviolence is the goal everybody reaches for but so few ever achieve. Nonviolence: The History of a Dangerous Idea by Mark Kurlansky is an informative look into the side of wars people don't often learn about. We know the basics about war, violence, and the good and bad guys, but this book takes a step into the lesser known, nonviolent protests that have come with every war. This book focuses on people who were not the gallant war heroes usually heard about but the people who stood up for what they believed in and may have even changed the world more than we recognize. Everyone knows that wars are revolutionary and that they have shaped daily life into what it is now, but more than we care to realize, the world is being changed by a much different kind of power; nonviolence. Growing up most humans are taught that hurting others is wrong, so why is it so hard to keep the peace among our nations?

There are hundreds of different theories on why war is the most popular way to settle disputes. Is it "the lack of mutual love" as Mozi believed, the corruptness power puts in people, or simply the tendencies we were born with through human nature. Since we know its wrong, we try to come up with these excuses to make war seem equitable and blame it something other than ourselves. Dating all the way back to early wars, humans have been trying to come up with reasons that war can be consider just. Many religions have manipulated their beliefs to justify war. Religions had lost their original meanings when they came into contact with power and turned into power hungry killing machines. Instead of turning to a safer sometimes even more successful way of handling problems, we let power and greed take over. The fact that nonviolence has been even more successful than war in many cases is constantly ignored when there is proof right in front of our faces. More Jews were saved by nonviolence than violence along with so many people oppressed in the past. Nonviolence has not always been a small movement in the background of violence. There has been countless times when nonviolence has been accepted and promoted by many great people and times when countries no longer wanted to fight. Even when war approached again and the people made up their "just" reasons for it, there were people standing up against violence and wars. 42,973 U.S. men refused to fight in World War II and sadly many of them ended up being brutally treated in prison. Nonviolence may be the smaller, quieter brother of violence, but it is always around and often changes the world for the better.

I gave this book four stars because I think it is an incredibly informative look into an important issue that is regularly pushed aside. War is a horrendous part of society that has always existed and probably always will. The best we can do is try to make nonviolence a bigger movement and have a bigger impact on the world than violence. It is necessary to know that nonviolence can have an effective and positive outcome especially in times like this when there are so many horrifying attacks going around the world. Maybe Mozi was right with his notion that we have so many disputes due to our lack of mutual love and if we all just accepted each other no matter race, gender, sexuality, or any other differences people may have, we could live in peace once and for all. Nonviolence is a work in progress and probably always will be but this book gives me hope that one day we will be able to put aside our differences and stand truly united as one.

(or maybe we won't truly be united until there is an interplanetary war who knows)

I highly recommend this.It's one of the best books ever written in the 21st century

Concise history of an important and undervalued concept.

A lot of interesting, thought-provoking stuff in here. It's a very readable introduction to the topic of nonviolence. I found it readable and enjoyable, though that may well be because I'm inclined to agree with the premise to start with.

Obviously a book like this is going to be biased, and Kurlansky does leave out some complicating details. For example, he talks about the anabaptists and their persecution partially for their refusal to bear arms, without mentioning the Munster rebellion of 1534-35. (I'm sure there are more examples, I just happened to know more about early anabaptists than about most of the other examples in the book.)

Another concern is that on some topics, his sources which should be scholarly seem to be either very old or not a scholarly (peer-reviewed and/or edited) publication. This may be due to a dearth of scholarly publications on the topic from this perspective, but I would like to find materials with the same arguments that are more academically rigorous.

However, I don't think these concerns necessarily invalidate the main thrust of the book. It makes a good jumping-off point to explore the topic more in-depth, as long as one recognizes that it is more a political than an academic piece of writing.

One thing that makes that clear, and perhaps this is more a personal taste thing, is that Kurlansky uses phrases like 'history teaches us' a lot. I hate that phrase. I've seen it used on multiple sides of arguments, and almost always by non-academics. History doesn't teach, the (inevitably biased) selected presentation and interpretation of history 'teaches'. (This is something Kurlansky seems quite aware of when it comes to how history is generally presented by war-inclined governments, but doesn't mention in relation to his own presentation of it.)

A wonderful book that I hope more people read.

Mark Kurlansky's Nonviolence is an interesting introduction to the topic of nonviolence, and a good overview of its history. Excellent sections on how the non-violent beginnings of some religions were co-opted by political (or religious) leaders and turned to endorse violence.
The sections on the American Civil War and World War 2 were short, which led to an oversimplification of various aspects of both conflicts, especially abolition and the Holocaust.

Nonviolence: The History of a Dangerous Idea is a book that I've seen many human rights activists who I admire recommend, and it's really opened my eyes to seeing things from a different point of view. In Nonviolence, Kurlansky provides an insightful overview of this powerful mindset and movement, citing its early origins in the foundations of religions such as Christianity and Hinduism, and carries it through to describing its use in relation to the fall of the Soviet Empire. He illustrates the differences between nonviolence and pacifism, draws upon how States around the world have manipulated religion to promote wars and ultimately promotes nonviolence as the only way to achieve sustainable peace. The chapters are short and accessible, yet packed full of information, and he rounds it off with a 25 lessons summary at the end to recap what you've just read.

Nonviolence is a fascinating book which will help you to think about the futility of war and violence, and hopefully it'll encourage more people to question and proactively change (through nonviolent means) the power-mad agendas of their governments. One of my favourite quotes that's stuck in my mind is one by Hannah Arendt - "The practice of violence changes the world, but the most probable change is a more violent world.".