3 ms·

What if you don't want nonviolent communication? I can think of many examples; an oppressive government, a physically oppressive/abusive relationship or rape, a

What if you don't want nonviolent communication? I can think of many examples; an oppressive government, a physically oppressive/abusive relationship or rape, a religously delusional cult, etc. Maybe the assumption is that you are excluding such situations? Sometimes you have to fight for justice. What is your priority, peace or truth? I understand that point 1. should address this, but the opposite can happen as well: downplaying facts. Maybe that's not the point of this, but I don't by default think you have to be nice to people with whom you disagree. If you try to understand someone you may become like them.

Uhuhreally 7y ago
"when you beat me I feel pain...I don't like to feel pain, perhaps you could stop beating me" "I enjoy inflicting pain...your pain makes me happy...perhaps you could continue feeling the pain I inflict on you"
- mikorym 7y ago
  What I mean is if the other person is oppressive, then you shouldn't give them control over you.
stinos 7y ago
What if you don't want nonviolent communication? Isn't the whole point that you should want it? Why would you not default to being nice to people? Or, as the article says, default to unbiased evidence and specificity? Sure if that fails and you're into it, try violent communication. But defaulting to it for disagreements doesn't exactly sound like the easiest nor best idea. Anecodtal, but the disagreements online and IRL which I have solved were never by being not nice. Being not nice results in driving the parties further away from each other. Whereas being nice opens the way for constructive talking. Which is excatly what the typcial COC for software these days is about, for instance. Now, I don't know a lot of history, so wrt your first example for instance I don't know how many conflicts were resolved through non-violent protests vs straight up civil menace for instance. I.e. I don't know if the principle which applies to a basic disagreement also works on larger scales.
soared 7y ago
This is explicitly covered in the reading. > We think it's important to note that NVC should only be used in situations where people have each other's best interests at heart. It isn't helpful in abusive relationships....
- mikorym 7y ago
  I missed that part, and I think that is a rather necessary assumption.

Uhuhreally 7y ago

"when you beat me I feel pain...I don't like to feel pain, perhaps you could stop beating me" "I enjoy inflicting pain...your pain makes me happy...perhaps you could continue feeling the pain I inflict on you"

mikorym 7y ago
What I mean is if the other person is oppressive, then you shouldn't give them control over you.

stinos 7y ago

What if you don't want nonviolent communication? Isn't the whole point that you should want it? Why would you not default to being nice to people? Or, as the article says, default to unbiased evidence and specificity? Sure if that fails and you're into it, try violent communication. But defaulting to it for disagreements doesn't exactly sound like the easiest nor best idea. Anecodtal, but the disagreements online and IRL which I have solved were never by being not nice. Being not nice results in driving the parties further away from each other. Whereas being nice opens the way for constructive talking. Which is excatly what the typcial COC for software these days is about, for instance. Now, I don't know a lot of history, so wrt your first example for instance I don't know how many conflicts were resolved through non-violent protests vs straight up civil menace for instance. I.e. I don't know if the principle which applies to a basic disagreement also works on larger scales.

soared 7y ago

This is explicitly covered in the reading. > We think it's important to note that NVC should only be used in situations where people have each other's best interests at heart. It isn't helpful in abusive relationships....

mikorym 7y ago
I missed that part, and I think that is a rather necessary assumption.