Comment on YSK: US Senate offices pay attention to how many constituents are calling them on a topic. Democracy doesn't end at the ballot box

• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  I haven’t read this book, but I’m pretty skeptical of how they define nonviolent resistance and what makes a revolution “successful”

  The Iranian Revolution, 1977–1979 5. The First Palestinian Intifada, 1987–1992 6. The Philippine People Power Movement, 1983–1986 7. Why Civil Resistance Sometimes Fails: The Burmese Uprising, 1988–1990 Case Study Summary

  Are the revolutions they are principally utilizing, and that makes me think this book isn’t exactly the most academically honest study around.

  The Iranian revolution had battles in the streets and plenty of deadly clashes with the Shahs regime. It also led the the largest political massacre in the country’s history.

  The Philippine People Power Movement

  The yellow revolution funded militant groups, featured a helicopter attack on the president’s compound, and only didn’t devolve into a massacre of civilians because a marine commander refused to participate in the wholesale slaughter of tens of thousands of people.

  The First Palestinian Intifada

  Led to the deaths of over a thousand civilians and is a precursor the the genocide we are currently witnessing.

  The Burmese Uprising

  Started fairly similar to the Philippine uprising, except their military commanders were perfectly fine massacring civilians, with a death toll of 3k-10k people…

  I am willing to give this a read, but I would also suggest other people read “Setting Sites” by Scott Crow as a counterpoint.

  source

  • cymbal_king@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    The book does acknowledge and analyze the violent and nonviolent aspects of the resistance movements in the case studies, and how they impacted each other. Thanks for the suggestion on Setting Sites

    source