Throwing stones in social science: Non-violence, unarmed violence, and the first intifada

Abstract

Social scientists treat stone-throwing as a non-violent act or argue that protest movements may be primarily non-violent despite stone-throwing. However, this study of an iconic example, the first intifada (Palestinian uprising, 1987–1993), demonstrates that stone-throwing is better characterized as unarmed violence. Definitions of violence underscore that throwing rocks is a violent act. Moreover, informed observers and data collected on stone-induced injuries during four years of the intifada illustrate the bodily harm caused by stones. The throwing of stones was central to the intifada and its identity and definition. Stone-throwing was the most visible tactic Palestinians used in the first intifada. Lastly, most scholars emphasize the protestors’ perceptions when it might be that the targets’ perceptions matter more for understanding definitions of (non-)violence and subsequent policy changes. These findings challenge important social science work and the mainstream Israeli and Palestinian narratives about the first intifada.

Violence on Many Sides: Framing Effects on Protest and Support for Repression

“…The Israeli–Palestinian conflict illustrates both of these dimensions related to the type of tactics used in a contentious event. Pressman (2017) considers rock-throwing events in the First Palestinian Intifada to be violent since they involve an intentionally harmful, threatening act. He categorizes rock throwing as unarmed violence because it is capable of causing physical harm to others.…”

“…We show that the identity of an actor affects the public's willingness to justify a repressive state response. Thirdly, we contribute to the study of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and political violence in the United States, a highly salient issue in both cases in which the causes and effects of contentious events are debated (Canetti et al 2017; Pressman 2017; Zeira 2018). Our framework offers a lens with which to interpret these events, framing effects and how these effects vary across contexts.…”

Sticks, Stones, and Molotov Cocktails: Unarmed Collective Violence and Democratization

“…See here a useful article by JeremyPressman (2017), who anticipates our argument in his characterization of stone throwing by Palestinian youths as acts of "unarmed violence. "5 Molotov cocktails are improvised incendiary weapons typically used by civilians and so fall within our definition of unarmed violence.…”

Debunking the Myths Behind Nonviolent Civil Resistance

“…Among the first scholars to point out these inconsistencies noted that actions such as rock throwing (as observed in the first Intifada, Palestine) are considered to be nonviolent in quantitative research on civil resistance (Pressman, 2017). To overcome these shortcomings, Pressman (2017) proposed that rock throwing be viewed as unarmed violence, and for nonviolence to be conceptualized along a “spectrum” that begins with full nonviolent resistance and ranges all the way to “catastrophic violence” involving nuclear weapons. Anisin (2018) similarly proposed for scholars to observe violence/nonviolence at an event-level when analyzing dissent and repression, specifically by disaggregating different strategies according to a semi-continuous measure ranging from 0 to 1 [0 – Violence (lethal weapons, arms, knives); .33 – Lesser violence (Rocks, stones, harmful blockades); .67 – Small scale/scattered violence (physical confrontations); 1 – Nonviolence (civil resistance, no physicality)].…”