Those people know what non-violence is but they also know that language can be used as a weapon to silence opponents. By simply changing the definition of non-v

Those people know what non-violence is but they also know that language can be used as a weapon to silence opponents. By simply changing the definition of non-violence to mean supporting our cause they can justify this abuse of the term and claim whole-heartedly they are non-violent. This is the same type of language weaponisation which has led to words causing physical harm, thereby completing the circle - words cause harm, physical violence is non-violent - and leading to absurdities like news reporters standing in front of a burning city block speaking about fiery but mostly peaceful protests.