The Challenges and Transformative Experiences of Promoting Nonkilling with Anti-Nuclear Weapon Activists and Realists

Roland Joseph, Nova Southeastern University

Abstract

Decades ago, Glenn D. Paige questioned killing and violence in politics, presenting nonkilling political science as an alternative. Activists and researchers from other disciplines have joined the movement by considering this new paradigm in their disciplines. Since then, some scholars analyzed the experience of activists promoting notions related to nonkilling, including peace and nonviolence. However, no previous research focuses specifically on the experience of scholars promoting nonkilling to anti-nuclear weapon activists and realists. To fill this gap and give voice to nonkilling and nuclear weapon risks, a qualitative phenomenological study using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was conducted to answer the following research question and sub-questions: How do scholars describe their experiences promoting nonkilling perspectives to anti-nuclear weapon activists and realists? How do scholars get involved in the nonkilling movement, and what are their perceptions and ideas about nonkilling and other related concepts? What meaning do scholars provide to their experience, and what do they propose to address the risk associated with nukes? Sixteen scholars participated in this research using a semi-structured interview via Zoom meeting. It was essential to conduct this research because the risk of nuclear weapons being used is at its highest level despite some scholars and activists in the field of nonkilling believing that one can achieve a global society where there is no weapon made to kill. The findings indicate that teaching nonkilling can transform people, even if it is challenging for nonkilling scholars to convince others to believe in a nonkilling political science and society.