|
|
|
|
|
|
by fiala__
2583 days ago
|
|
|
Literally the first sentence of the video description: > Between 1900-2006, campaigns of nonviolent civil resistance were twice as successful as violent campaigns. You're just saying "No." without providing anything more than an opinion and some anecdotal evidence. You're absolutely right that under many oppressive regimes like China pretty much any kind of protest beside outright civil war is suppressed, but that doesn't defeat the point of the article. Also, saying things like > dirty communist pokes his finger ... really doesn't help you here. |
|
|
It does, very much. Read what is my point above. What argument they have against that?
Their reasoning is shallow, their data is very meticulously gathered, but is nevertheless massaged, and people behind the report... take a look at their bios and judge yourself.
I have a lot of anger for types of people calling for peaceful sit ins when crowds are already being showered by machine gun fire. Those share the blame for people's deaths as much as regimes doing the killing.
Doing that is an advocacy for moral frailty.