• Chainweasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    17 hours ago

    The civil rights movement did not succeed because of Martin Luther King Jr’s peaceful speech, it succeeded because the Black Panthers bought a firearms en masse and took their rights.
    We didn’t win the revolutionary war because we asked nicely and protested peacefully, we won because we ignored the standards of chivalry in war at the time and fought like guerillas.
    Anyone who says violence isn’t the answer has never studied history.
    Violence is the only thing that’s ever worked.

    • cacheson 🏴🔁🍊@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      16 hours ago

      This is probably a bit too reductive. Violence is sometimes necessary, but isn’t always the best strategy.

      In general, the left should take an approach of nonviolent, disruptive agitation, combined with a willingness to use violence in self-defense. Arm up, protect each other, but don’t try to instigate a shooting war.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        MLK succeeded because the powers that be realized that Malcom X was the fallback plan. Malcom X did not have a problem with violence. And that’s not a dig at Malcom X.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Moderates only ever succeed with and because of a radical flank demonstrating the alternative.

    • rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It was both, fellow worker.

      We need a diversity of tactics. The literature describes a “radical flank effect” where the radical and moderate wings of social movements mutually benefit.