Book: How Nonviolence Protects the State Chapters: Introduction / Terminology Author: Peter Gelderloos Published: 2018(?) / Active Distribution & Detritus
Because I want to ensure my criticisms are accurate, I also hunted down the republished version of this book. It is probably pointless to have done so because... it's roughly the same other than a superficial attempt to address criticisms he likely received (I haven't looked for any, but if those were my first thoughts, I'm not going to be surprised when other people had similar thoughts).
Anyway, the introduction remains largely the same. The first four paragraphs are the “Introduction” and the Terminology part takes the rest of the Introduction and relabels it. It deletes the following sentence from the fifth paragraph:
We might say that the purpose of a conversation is to persuade and be persuaded, while the purpose of a debate is to win, and thus silence your opponent.
and also removes the following clause from the end of the same paragraph:
indicating how disempowered and delegitimized we are.
For some reason it combines three paragraphs and adds the word “And” to the front of the second one. Not sure why, as it worked better the way that it was before. It also adds more adverbs for some reason ('emphatically') and applies parentheticals to sentences when they were originally sentences on their own.
Another added bit is to say that something will be expounded upon in a future chapter, which is... hilarious to me. Academics do this, and I find it to be lazy writing. It's a way of saying “I've already addressed your criticism here,” but that can't be proven until I get to that section; I still don't understand why he wouldn't try to define terms or explain why he can't define them in a basic format. He's front-loaded other “criticisms” with a lot of preconceived negativity, but he hasn't done that for things that address his own argument.
Otherwise, there really aren't any changes. They're all minimal, and I don't understand why many of them were made because he still managed to not engage with the criticism of terminology. He dedicated a whole section to it but made no changes to the previous writing other than to rework sentences while changing no meaning.