The discussion of Roger Mac Ginty’s account of everyday peace power in this chapter is a continuation of his understanding of everyday peace presented in the last chapter. Self-restraint and disruption, according to Mac Ginty, are not opposites but rather a balanced pair of orientations toward power capable of limiting anger on an informal and everyday basis so that it does not escalate into violent hatred. Martha Nussbaum provides a more expansive conception of self-restraint as part of the concept of non-anger. Carolyn Forché takes this notion of wide self-restraint one step further by connecting it to the resistance of oppression. Resisting oppression, she shows, depends upon an historical understanding of the origins of violence so that fear and hope, witnessing and resisting, and remembering and imagining can be coordinated to constitute a more democratic body politic. Mac Ginty, Nussbaum, and Forché, coming from very different disciplinary perspectives with equally different practical experiences, add to our understanding of the competing demands for self-restraint, resistance, and radical poise that an emerging demos needs to break the cycle of political violence.