Comment on YSK: Non-violent protests are 2x likely to succeed and no non-violent movement that has involved more than 3.5% of the country population has ever failed

DerArzt@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

• bobs_monkey@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  I’ll give you a hint, it rhymes with cocks

  source

  • neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Socks?

    source

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Rocks.

      source

      • Denvil@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Docks!

        source
    • Vandals_handle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      And Birkenstocks

      source
  • al_Kaholic@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    It’s it wrong to throw rocks when people are shooting you with rubber bullets?

    source
  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Rocks?

    source
  • shalafi@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    The guys with Glocks? Agreed.

    source
• Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Cops are great at making any protest violent.

  source
• LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  This is an important question. I believe the research in question was defined by the predominant tactic used, even if there was a small amount of violence.

  So protests like the anti-ICE ones in LA would probably count as non-violent in the research.

  source

  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    History is written by the victors.

    source
• lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Okay but who’s the one defining a protest as violent?

  From the article

  Perhaps most obviously, violent protests necessarily exclude people who abhor and fear bloodshed, whereas peaceful protesters maintain the moral high ground.

  Chenoweth points out that nonviolent protests also have fewer physical barriers to participation. You do not need to be fit and healthy to engage in a strike, whereas violent campaigns tend to lean on the support of physically fit young men. And while many forms of nonviolent protests also carry serious risks – just think of China’s response in Tiananmen Square in 1989 – Chenoweth argues that nonviolent campaigns are generally easier to discuss openly, which means that news of their occurrence can reach a wider audience. Violent movements, on the other hand, require a supply of weapons, and tend to rely on more secretive underground operations that might struggle to reach the general population.

  Violent protests seems to mean a violent campaign of armed, planned attacks.

  I doubt that would include unplanned outbreaks of violence from people not organized for that purpose.

  source
• itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  We can have a little violence. As a treat!

  source
• merc@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Okay but who’s the one defining a protest as violent?

  The same people who write the history books. History is written by the winners, and when they write those books the protests that led to them winning are written up as being non-violent. It’s like “terrorists” vs. “freedom fighters”. If they succeed, they get to write the history books and they’re freedom fighters. If they lose, the other side writes the history books and they’re terrorists.

  source
• ragingHungryPanda@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  I don’t want to ask about the chocolate

  source
• callouscomic@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Are you arguing “it’s just a few bad apples” in defense of protests?

  This is awkward.

  source

  • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    YES, protesters are freely associating members of the general public, whereas the police are vetted and trained professionals, payed by taxes to “uphold the law”.
    They should be held to a higher standard!

    source

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Well duh. Just was kind of funny.

      source
  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    I assume you’re comparing this to rhetoric around cops. Cops are ideologically and organizationally unified with top down command structure and they protect one another even in cases of wrongdoing or violence.

    Most modern protests are just random people who chose to show up. These are totally different situations.

    source

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Of course they’re totally different. But it’s a funny comparison since the two groups are so related.

      source
  • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    You’re right. We should fire the bad protestors.

    source

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      And end qualified protestor immunity!

      source

      • callouscomic@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Bravo. I laughed. I just thought the initial comparison was silly.

        source
    • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Soros HR is no joke!

      /s

      source
  • MotoAsh@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    What us awkward is how you failed to realize how insanely dumb and context-free your logic is to come to such an assinine conclusion…

    source

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Or how you presume there’s any conclusion or point. Just a silly observation. The two groups, protectors amd cops, are very related. It’s just a silly comparison. I’m not arguing any actual point.

      Sensitive bunch. I’ve literally agreed with ACAB for a long time.

      source