Answer to question 4:

When nonviolent methods are used strategically, they are often more effective than violence in achieving regime change. (As previously emphasized, nonviolent action is more than holding protests and petitions; consider methods that involve refusing cooperation such as in a strike or work slowdown, or an intervention such as blockade or occupation). Chenoweth and Stephan’s (2011) comprehensive empirical study of 100 different campaigns showed that nonviolent action is twice as effective as violence in abolishing foreign invasions, ending occupation, and changing a government or regime: 53% of nonviolent campaigns achieved their goals, versus 26% of violent ones. Moreover, nonviolent resistance contributes to a nonviolent transition that more often results in a democracy in the long term.

For example, read more about the nonviolent revolution in Chile that ended Pinochet’s dictatorship in 1988 and/or the nonviolent revolution in the Philippines against dictator Marcos in 1986.