Track_ShovelLooking for answers
go $fsck yourselfThere’s a lot of evidence that says that non-violent resistance is more often more effective than violent-based resistance.
Can’t grab the source info link at the moment, but this video talks about it.
IS Violence the Answer?
non-violent resistance is more often effective
It’s only ever effective when a credible violent alternative is present.
No oppressed person in history has ever gotten their rights by appealing to the better nature of their oppressor.
Civil rights weren’t won when black people asked politely and just moved everyone’s heats at how unjustly they were being treated, when MLK died, he had a 75% disapproval rating, but through repeated demonstrations of power and showing what would happen if their demands weren’t met.
Essay: Why Martin Luther King Had a 75 Percent Disapproval Rating in the Year of His Death | History Department
"Why Martin Luther King Had a 75 Percent Disapproval Rating in the Year of His Death. His Crusade to Confront Economic Injustice and the Vietnam War Angered Whites, While Younger Black Activists Had Lost Patience With His Nonviolent Tactics." By James C. Cobb | April 4, 2018
You’re jumping the gun and assuming a lot.
I mean, you literally said:
the rest of the information and studies that accompany it,
(Emphasis mine.)
I only saw only one study referenced, which seems to be a book, not an academic paper.
Appreciate the data sources though. I’ll take a look.
The book itself is based on multiple studies. Here is the first part of the second paragraph for the book’s description:
Combining statistical analysis with case studies of specific countries and territories […]
The website has some other studies referenced and such. It kinda seems that you barely opened either of the links.