Social justice is not only a political issue. The most important practice is certainly that of politics understood as the autonomy project in solidarity, yet there is at least one non-political prerequisite necessary for the development of social justice: art education. Thanks to the practical reflections of Montessori, Freire, Dewey, Capitini and Castoriadis, we are able to identify the non-violent sphere of this emancipatory practice.

A nonviolent, democratic approach could characterize the classroom and thus foster peaceful coexistence between people of different cultures, genders, social backgrounds, ages... Pupils could experience nonviolent decision making and grow as “mediators, bridge builders, wall jumpers, border explorers” (Langer, 1994). However, usually the dynamics at school are competitive and prevaricating, reflecting the typical interactions of our society.

In Italy, the teaching of civic education has recently been introduced (through Law 92 of 2019) to promote active citizens and full participation. This new teaching can be an opportunity for pedagogical innovation by adopting a democratic (Dewey, 1916), nonviolent and generative (Dolci, 1988/2021), transformative and engaged (Freire, 1968/2018; hooks, 1994) approach in which different perspectives can be listened to within a creative confrontation (Sclavi & Susskind, 2011). Therefore, dialogue and shared decision-making can be prerequisites for a political education and a democratic school where teachers and pupils care together for the common good. During my PhD research, a prototype curriculum was constructed – following Educational Design Research (McKenney & Reeves, 2019). According to it, teachers and pupils – as a learning community (Lave & Wenger, 1991) – co-design the lessons starting by identifying a significant issue concerning the common good. After interdisciplinary studying this problem, they decide together and implement an action to change the status quo. This process should possibly involve adults and pupils equally. To support this paradigm shift from a transmissive to a dialogic education, the curriculum foresees the learning community arranging itself in a circle, abandoning desks and chairs. The circle is a humanising dialogic practice (Veloria & Boyes-Watson, 2014) where relationships can be horizontal, and teachers and pupils can become a group. Furthermore, during civic education, each pupil plays a different role. The roles – borrowed from the German Klassenrat – foster belonging and ownership, as well as empowerment, collaboration, and power-sharing between pupils and teachers (e.g., Johnson et al., 1994).

This democratic and nonviolent prototype of curriculum was implemented in three classes of a middle school in the outskirts of a large city in Northern Italy. Teacher and student voices were collected and analysed through Qualitative Content Analysis (Schreier, 2012) to evaluate and improve the curriculum, its practices and the enactment processes. This presentation will focus on how the classroom dynamics have become more democratic and nonviolent through the circle and the roles which fostered peer dialogue, intergenerational dialogue and co-design. On the other hand, the critical issues encountered during the implementation by teachers and pupils underline how much time and care are needed to allow these democratic practices to flourish, due to the fact that they are so different from the usual and dominant relational modes. Therefore it is essential that teachers are supported through initial and in-progress training so that a nonviolent, democratic approach can take root in schools and support participation and active citizenship.

The intergenerational justice path leads us to deal both with traditional and new challenges. The first ones are returning in increasingly destructive forms and include the issues of peace, or how to remove war from history; the conviviality of differences, redefining the boundaries of the public space in which they confront each other; the growing gap between rich and poor and increasing of socio-economic inequalities. The second rightly includes the relationship between natural intelligence, AI and reality; and above all the climate crisis.

Nonviolence as a complex of principles and methods of struggle is a concrete possibility of achieving coexistence with others, making peace among humans and with the planet (Langer 2005). That is why it is also a powerful educational tool, to transform power dynamics in a multifaced way. But only is we never forget the indispensable pivots of antimilitarism and anticapitalism (Fraser, 2023).

Some years ago, I introduced the philosophical expression “climate disarmament” (Taurino, 2020), deriving it from that of “unilateral disarmament” so dear to Pietro Pinna. There is no longer the need for an optimistic appeal to make the “heroic” choice of no longer yielding to the armed defence and the waste resources caused by militarism. Nowadays we have the awareness that the effects of climate change will affect everyone. There is no planet B, say young people all over the world. The choice at the time of the climate crisis becomes then: climate disarmament or non-existence.

So, the question is: how to imagine and practice “schools of nonviolence” within this scenario? We should be able to keep together at least three things:

1. a programme of radically transformative and coherent policies with which activists and rightsholders can use when engage in advocacy;
2. a realistic approach that can also influence the transparency, metrics and accountability of our initiatives; and
3. a theoretical device to keep up with the narrative and management of the climate crisis by the military apparatus and the capitalist corporations connected to it.

This is an educational answer to the needs and future of young generations because climate crisis will play not only a direct role in precipitating armed conflicts, with weapons most likely to be purchased in the countries that bear the greatest responsibility for the climate emergency. There is also a vast network of global interests and power in the world, led by the undemocratic complex of military and fossil fuel companies and is also directly responsible for the environmental crisis (X. Bohigas et alia, 2022).

The core of my intervention is to explore together all the ways needed to cultivate the persuasion that a “hopeful tomorrow” (Capitini, 1968) can be built through nonviolence, being inspired by the words of Martin Luther King:

Every society has its protectors of the status quo and its fraternities of the indifferent who are notorious for sleeping through revolutions. But today our very survival depends on our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge of change.