A recently released Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) document titled “Domestic Terrorism Symbols Guide”* links common protest symbols to “terrorism” — another marker in a common theme of conflating militant protest for social justice with deadly terrorist violence within the United States. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Brennan Center have raised warnings about such documents, citing inadequate protections for people’s constitutional rights.
Apartheid in South Africa was solved politically. The Troubles in Northern Ireland were solved politically. The Berlin wall collapsed and the Cold War ended without violence.
Nelson Mandela was accused of being a terrorist because he was one. The ANC mostly killed civilians, “civilians” that just so happened to be key figures in apartheid politics (well, that was their goal, anyways, and it worked well enough)
Also, just how myopic do you have to be to point to the collapse as the Soviet Union as being “solved politically” while ignoring several decades of proxy wars and an attempted coup?
Shit, it didn’t even resolve that well other than independence for the satellite states, it just left Putin in charge in the end to get a million people killed himself.
Yeah and Northern Ireland involved lots of actual terrorism as well. I didn’t claim these were good people. I didn’t claim the results were a perfect world.
The point is the violence, or the threat of violence, is what forced people to negotiate in the first place.
I don’t disagree. The post I was actually responding to implied that protesting was useless and that fascism can only effectively be resisted with guns. THAT is the point I’m responding to.
Bullshit. The Apartheid-regime would never have been ended if it wasn’t for it’s military defeat in Angola and the (extremely violent) uprising in South Africa itself.
Bullcrap. If it wasn’t for the IRA, Ireland would still be England’s doormat.
The (so-called) “Cold War” never ended… the US just switched to new pretexts to wage war on the 3rd world.
It required both violence and politics to end Apartheid and the Troubles. Politics and nonviolent actions have always used some degree of violence to be successful. Even with famous nonviolent successes like the American Civil Rights movement and Indian independence movements, the potential of the movements to become violent played a large role.
Gandhi and MLK Jr were dedicated to nonviolence in the formation of their movements. Their nonviolent nature allowed them to become large and organized. Afterall, it’s hard to crush a nonviolent movement once it gains momentum. If the members stop believing that nonviolence can bear fruit, some will probably turn to violence. The goal of nonviolent movements is to change laws, constructions that require enforcement through violence.
War is diplomacy when all other means have failed. The same is true for revolution and resistance id say.
Violence isn’t the only resort. It’s the last one. And often unnecessary. Though not always.
“War is the continuation of policy with other means.”
-Carl von Clausewitz