There must be 50 ways: Participating in democracy #23: Stick to nonviolent peacekeeping

The UN peacekeepers have tried unarmed peacekeeping and when someone got hurt, they switched to "lightly armed." Their purpose was to keep people safe in conflict zones, especially at the borders of such zones, but some studies are showing that armed UN troops may actually facilitate an ascension of a military faction to power in the affected country (Cunliffe, 2018).

This is also resonant with an earlier study that showed a greater chance for the rise of an autocracy or dictatorship when violent insurgents succeeded in effecting a regime change than if the revolution had been nonviolent (Karatnycky & Ackerman, 2005).

Obviously, this is participating in democracy from the origin story of any given democracy, and it is not to say that establishing a democracy by violent means dooms that democracy to a violent end, but the idea of any great struggle is to choose methods that afford the best chances for success. Nonviolent methods are not foolproof--another study shows that nonviolent insurrection only succeeds about half the time, but also that violent revolution is far less effective, succeeding only about a quarter of the times it's tried (Stephan & Chenoweth, 2008).

Arguably, the closer our actions and approaches are to nonviolent, informed by the practices of conflict transformation and attempted with commitment and resilience, the closer we get to a practice that is strong and sustainable democracy. Creating and defending democracy is the bedrock of participating in democracy.

References

Cunliffe, P. (2018). From peacekeepers to praetorians – how participating in peacekeeping operations may subvert democracy. International Relations, 32(2), 218–239. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/10.1177/0047117817740728

Karatnycky, Adrian & Ackerman, Peter (2005). How freedom is won: From civic resistance to durable democracy. New York, NY: Freedom House.

Stephan, Maria J., & Chenoweth, Erica (2008). Why civil resistance works. International Security, 33(1), 7-44.

There must be 50 ways: Participating in democracy #22: Inside game and outside game

Historian Mary Frances Berry is an activist scholar, a pracademic who vacillates between her role as an educator of students in the classroom and educator of the public and powers that be via her activism. She describes the dynamic between the inside game--legal, normal political involvement at any level--and the outside game--direct action with a willingness to confront and even be attacked or arrested or both. 

In a way, her strategy is one developed over millennia by militaries--flank the enemy so he can be brought down from a variety of directions. Doing this using nonviolent methods is a smart and adaptive way to participate in democracy. 

Identifying which practices are strategically advantageous and which are harmful to any effort to participate in democracy is a key component of not simply participating but of doing so in a way that promotes democracy is key. 

For example, violence tends to work against democracy. Nonviolence tends to work to strengthen, preserve, or even create democracy. This leads to one obvious conclusion, that of all the ways to participate in democracy, they will fall on the nonviolent side of action. 

However, there are few hard and fast rules after that basic understanding. In a way, if we tweak what Malcolm X advised we can more helpfully categorize the path to democracy: "By any nonviolent means at our disposal." 

There are those ideologues who reject any aspect of the inside game as being part of the structural violence of any governmental system. That's purist and understandable, just hopelessly impractical. The realpolitik of the inside game/outside game strategy is important and effective. Splitting philosophical hairs around what is violent at multiple orders of remove is not always helpful. 

This is especially the case when the advantages of the synergy between the inside game and outside game is considered. 

If your arrest for a nonviolent direct action brings you into court and you have assembled a legal team that affords you a reasonable chance for victory, that brings the outside game directly into the literal court of the inside game. A victory in the legal defense of your nonviolent direct action can impact other arenas in both the inside game and outside game, eventually (or sometimes quite quickly) leading to the actual policy change you seek. 

Think Rosa Parks. She played the outside game, sat down, got arrested, and the outside game ramped up into a bus boycott, also suddenly shoving a new young minister into the national spotlight, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. That outside game precipitated some upheavals in the inside game as the public began to increasingly sympathize with the African Americans who were playing the outside game, causing public opinion to change the political positions of elected officials. The dialectical relationship between inside game and outside game can be momentous. It is participating in democracy at a profound level.

There must be 50 ways: Participating in democracy #21: Host a candidate canvass

Volunteering in general for any political campaign is a way to participate in democracy, and hosting a canvass is a next-level step. Tell the field director in the campaign that you are volunteering to do that, if the campaign can use it. If another volunteer in your neighborhood has already scheduled such hosting events, you can let that person know you are happy to help with several aspects of hosting, such as bringing coffee, cans of sparkling water, donuts, ordering some pizza for the end of the day for the crew, or just being there to help her or him with the hosting. 

The field coördinator for the campaign will need table space for clipboards, handouts, and other canvassing materials. You will need table space for snacks and beverages. Be sure to get an estimate ahead of time from the field coördinator of numbers so you have enough chairs arranged in a room big enough to accommodate it all.

The canvasses I've hosted have met mid-morning and everyone gets oriented by the field coördinator while enjoying coffee, tea, water, a donut, muffin, or healthy granola bar. Then they all hit their assigned blocks for a couple hours while you clean up and get some more robust refreshments going for noon time. Finally, they finish their third canvass, all recorded and organized by the field coördinator, and, if it is okay with her or him, you have beer and pizza and sodas waiting for everyone in the mid or late afternoon. 

The field coördinator decides the purposes of the canvass. It may be generalized promotion, in which case canvassers learn talking points and protocols for delivery (e.g., never argue, listen more than talk, be respectful, smile a lot). Or it might be a show of candidate care and issue market research, in which case the field coördinator may have explicit detailed sheets with specific addresses to attempt contact and which to avoid, based on party registration.

I've hosted a few of these and the hospitality shown by the host is generally part of the spirit and resilience of the canvassing crew experience. If they feel like they are returning to a spartan barracks workspace that may affect their willingness to continue. If they feel like they are appreciated and part of a little purposeful community they may be more likely to continue and to volunteer to canvass again. Veteran campaign directors have strong feelings and war stories about canvassing and its role in the difference between winning and losing a campaign. There is a reason it is a common and repeated practice--and a deep way to engage in a democracy.