Nonviolence

The Independent reported last week on a bestselling American author, Mark Kurlansky, whose new book is entitled Nonviolence: the History of a Dangerous Idea:

Shaped like his bestselling works of micro-history, Salt and Cod, it culls the past two millennia, examining moments when non-violence flourished. It ends with a list of 25 pithy lessons, from "Practitioners of nonviolence are seen as enemies of the state" to "A propaganda machine promoting hatred always has a war waiting in the wings."

Kurlansky has been on and off the road with the book already in America, where lists and pithy ideas are a good thing, but questioning the idea of a "just war" a bit more complicated. "Europeans are far more anti-war than Americans," Kurlansky observes mildly, "they've had more wars and they really just don't believe in it any more. But Americans do." It doesn't help that Kurlansky has taken on three of the most sacred "just wars" in the pantheon of US history: the Revolutionary War, Civil War, and Second World War.

Kurlansky is in London at the moment expounding the themes of his book. He appeared on Radio 3's NightWaves last night, and is in conversation with the philosopher A.C. Grayling at the South Bank this evening. Tomorrow, unless we are bumped off the schedules, he and I will be on Sky News at 8.30am, debating the philosophy and practicality of nonviolence. Having read Kurlansky's book, I certainly am flabbergasted by some of his historical assertions, so I hope he will have time to explain them.