3 ms·

Well I personally contend that it's never worked at all. Do you have any specific examples?

• gruseom 14y ago
  Given that you credit Martin Luther King's success not to nonviolence but to the Black Panthers, who didn't even exist until 1966, I believe no example will convince you. This is one of the low points of a thread with a lot of low points. I regret posting the article. It was borderline to begin with (political, but intellectually interesting), but the toxicity of the discussion it immediately gave rise to shows that I made the wrong call. It's not just that it's toxic, it's atypically toxic – significantly more malignant than usual. HN has enough local species of weeds to tend to; this is like an ecological invasion (or would be if it got out of hand). Edit: a more positive spin is that this is a good limit case showing that the guidelines are about right.
  • flyinRyan 14y ago
    I was quoting from memory. So it wasn't the Black Panthers but there was targeted violence going on. Of course if you're going to give in you want to give credit to someone like Martin Luther King so hopefully in future people will imagine that non-violence works and you can be safe to ignore them. It was certainly wrong of you to try and forward the propaganda machine of claiming the nonviolence on its own is an effective mechanism against dictatorships. None of us want violence, but many of us don't want lies either.
  • ScottBurson 14y ago
    I'm very glad you posted it, as I don't know if I would have heard of Gene Sharp any other way. The fractiousness of the discussion is unfortunate, but nobody has to read it.
    • gruseom 14y ago
      Thanks for saying so. I'm glad I peeked back in here and saw it. Yes, Sharp is genuinely interesting.