Non-violent protests and their leaders are heralded by the establishment for a reason. They want non-violent protests because it’s an outlet that doesn’t actually affect their power. Martin Luther King gets credit for civil rights but really the rioting and violence on the periphery of that movement is what scared the powerful into bargaining. Symbols can be useful for rallying people, but in the end, it’s always direct action against the interest of the powerful that works. Large scale general strikes, riots, and political killings have always been the catalyst of major change.
Also, even if all that happened in the US, we still need some kind of leadership to pick up the pieces that will actually do something lasting to change things. The Democrats certainly aren’t that.
non violent protests only go so far, they would be scared if magats are also doing it, because how trigger finger they are. i think the strike that was truley effective, is the one they quashed, the railroad workers, the us is entirely dependant on this. Having these tiny protests, comparetively to what EUROPEans are doing.
Non violence brings people together so that violence can be enacted in a directed, efficient, and useful manner. So the least amount of incidental harm can be caused to those it’s not directed at. And those who it is directed at can see and feel it in ways that are the most impactful and visible.
Cause even if violence is enacted. If it’s not see far and wide, then it is little more than the tantrum of a child easily swept into their room and kept invisible from the public.
Non-violent protests and their leaders are heralded by the establishment for a reason. They want non-violent protests because it’s an outlet that doesn’t actually affect their power. Martin Luther King gets credit for civil rights but really the rioting and violence on the periphery of that movement is what scared the powerful into bargaining. Symbols can be useful for rallying people, but in the end, it’s always direct action against the interest of the powerful that works. Large scale general strikes, riots, and political killings have always been the catalyst of major change.
Also, even if all that happened in the US, we still need some kind of leadership to pick up the pieces that will actually do something lasting to change things. The Democrats certainly aren’t that.
non violent protests only go so far, they would be scared if magats are also doing it, because how trigger finger they are. i think the strike that was truley effective, is the one they quashed, the railroad workers, the us is entirely dependant on this. Having these tiny protests, comparetively to what EUROPEans are doing.
Non violence brings people together so that violence can be enacted in a directed, efficient, and useful manner. So the least amount of incidental harm can be caused to those it’s not directed at. And those who it is directed at can see and feel it in ways that are the most impactful and visible.
Cause even if violence is enacted. If it’s not see far and wide, then it is little more than the tantrum of a child easily swept into their room and kept invisible from the public.