On the topic of violent vs. non-violent: What this statistic completely fails to take into account is that violent protests on average have much more radical demands/goals. So their demands are much less likely to be met from the start because of the nature of the demand.
Also: what does success mean? Often times, non-violent protests are met with delay tactics and empty compromises until they've died down, only for the protested thing to happen anyway. It could be that the 26% have a much larger percentage of their goals met.
Fuck off with this peace police bullshit. Define violence? Are you including property destruction, obstruction of movement? Where are these studies? How are they are defining success, violence and what movements to include? Just complete nonsense meant to police a movement to inaction.
The existence of a violent radical fringe is what shifts the Overton Window to make the peaceful movement look moderate by comparison. MLK "succeeded" where Malcolm X "failed," but it was the presence and threat of Malcolm X as the alternative that made the Powers That Be realize that it behooved them to work with MLK.
On the topic of violent vs. non-violent: What this statistic completely fails to take into account is that violent protests on average have much more radical demands/goals. So their demands are much less likely to be met from the start because of the nature of the demand.
Yeah, violence happens because you've pushed those people WAAAYYYYYY further.
This post is a classic case of correlation is not causation.
Also: what does success mean? Often times, non-violent protests are met with delay tactics and empty compromises until they've died down, only for the protested thing to happen anyway. It could be that the 26% have a much larger percentage of their goals met.
Not a single right that we have was given to us
Every single right we have was won from bloody conflict against oppressors.
The status quo depends on us never truely forcing change to happen.
Peaceful protests working is American revisionist history.
Fuck off with this peace police bullshit. Define violence? Are you including property destruction, obstruction of movement? Where are these studies? How are they are defining success, violence and what movements to include? Just complete nonsense meant to police a movement to inaction.
What is a violent protest? Isn't that just a riot? Pretty sure if 3.5%+ of the country was rioting there would be some change.
The existence of a violent radical fringe is what shifts the Overton Window to make the peaceful movement look moderate by comparison. MLK "succeeded" where Malcolm X "failed," but it was the presence and threat of Malcolm X as the alternative that made the Powers That Be realize that it behooved them to work with MLK.
lol
May 1st is the next one, right?
Tell that to the Tiannanmen people...
The guys that stole automatic weapons and fired on civilians?