It’s not necessarily your opponent who has to have a conscience. Sometimes it can be people they depend on.
Like, with Gandhi, the British Empire didn’t really have a conscience. But, there were reporters present, and they reported on what happened. The story got out to regular people in Britain, to regular people in India, and to people worldwide. The British empire knew that if they let Gandhi die, India would erupt, other countries would boycott them, etc.
It’s not necessarily your opponent who has to have a conscience. Sometimes it can be people they depend on.
Like, with Gandhi, the British Empire didn’t really have a conscience. But, there were reporters present, and they reported on what happened. The story got out to regular people in Britain, to regular people in India, and to people worldwide. The British empire knew that if they let Gandhi die, India would erupt, other countries would boycott them, etc.
In order for nonviolence to work, you or your allies have to implicitly threaten violence
I don’t know, non-violent work strikes can be effective.
I’ve heard traffic blockades for climate protests classified as violent, i am sure any work strikes could be classified in a similar manner.
Hunger strikes are hard to deal with. They force fed suffragettes, or kicked them out right before they were about to die.
No problem letting Bobby Sands die though.