[yellow, a finger up, looking smug]
The answer to oppression is NEVER violence
Turn the other cheek
Pacifism always wins
You could earn rights by asking nicely instead
[yellow, proudly showing us a huge book]
Don’t believe me?
Open a history book!
[yellow, looking frustrated as they are shuffling through the book’s pages]
Ok so…
Uhm…
Not this page…
Wait…
The next one…
Awkward…
Another…
Yeah but…
For sure this time…
[yellow, sweating, protecting their book, a hand raised towards us]
Can you stop looking?
You’re being rude
That’s my book
https://thebad.website/comic/please_resist_responsibly


You asked for it:
Next is Ecuador in ‘05 when they sent guiterrez to Brazil.
But here’s the third sentence in the intro paragraph of the Wikipedia article about that event:
Maybe the next one will prove your point…
South Korea! The June Struggle? Here’s the Wikipedia article on its background:
Almost like the nonviolent resolution was made possible by violence before it…
How about the next one:
Oh, the white lily student movement! Surely there’s a good solid Wikipedia article about that!
Barely past a stub? No mention of the boat people massacre three years before, changs successors recognizing the need to get international support after decades of martial law and the clear message from foreign influence in the Tiananmen protests the year before?
Must have been the wind.
Dateline - Philippines edsa 2, nonviolent government handover as long as you don’t count the precipitated edsa 3 just a few months later.
Oh, now we’re talking about Sudan, never mind that after the protest wave (not entirely nonviolent but I’ll leave that by the wayside for now) the military took over the transitional government.
Now I know I took a pretty let’s call it conversational tone in the above and that breakdown is for two reasons, one, I don’t want to legitimize that dogshit Wikipedia article by talking about it in neutral language and two, I’m tired.
The point isn’t to argue over specifics about some shitty wiki article but to recognize that things are only called “nonviolent” when arbitrary lines around them in time, place and even people that exclude the violent component of their existence are drawn.
Everything has context, but the context isn’t the thing itself. Sometimes, the context is the exact opposite of the thing.
Your claim seems to be that a nonviolent revolution is impossible if there was ever a violent attempt in the past that anybody in power remembers. If it sounds like a ridiculous idea, that’s because it is.
I don’t think this is the least bit complicated or controversial. I’m not even claiming that a nonviolent revolution is a good idea or possible in the future, only that it’s happened in the past. This is just a basic fact. I don’t think I can have a reasonable discussion with a person who rejects inconvenient facts.
At any rate, I think you’ve spurred me into doing something rather ironic in this situation. I’m just going to go ahead and block the entire lemmy.ml instance. There’s a button for it, but I haven’t tried it before, so there’s no time like the present. I just want you to know that the irony isn’t lost on me, that I’m judging others on your instance for the context of where they’re logged in from. But I suspect that anybody reasonable has already decided not to have an account over there. I expect this will save me the trouble of blocking you all individually. Adios.
You’re not even reading what I wrote.
I said that you can only call something nonviolent by drawing an arbitrary line separating it from the violence that preceded it, followed it or the violence done by someone else or threatened by other events.
Sucks to suck I guess. Bye.