this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
908 points (93.7% liked)

Political Memes

8542 readers
2395 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

They actually are.

Non-violent resistances have historically had double the effectiveness of violent resistance movements. Violent resistances generally just get a bunch of people killed and only makes things worse.

The reason is simple. It's a numbers game. Only a few psychopaths want violence and those few are easily dealt with by police. Sometimes they can especially troublesome and need to be dealt with by the military (LA isn't one of those cases, Trump is just an idiot). It's only the very rare case that a violent resistance topples a government and in those cases it's just replacing one group of authoritarian psychos replacing another group. The French revolution ended up with a King being replaced by an Emperor after a whole lot of people died.

Meanwhile a non-violent movement can attract more numbers. You only need single digit percentages of the population to participate in things like general strikes to make an authoritarian regime collapse. But you aren't getting those numbers with a violent resistance, people have families to think about and violent resistances are easily vilified. An authoritarian regime can exercise violence against a violent resistance and kill it. If an authoritarian regime uses violence against a non-violent resistance it's clear to everyone who the villains are and an every broader number of people will participate and subtle and secretive ways.

History bears this out, a violent resistances don't work unless there's foreign backing and even then it's unlikely to succeed. Non-violent resistances have double the probability of success. Non-violent resistances are just about psychopaths that want to burn things down coming up with bullshit rationalizations for it.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 hours ago

They work when the dictator knows the alternative is violence and they are outnumbered. Fun fact, MLK's peaceful protests had armed security provided by an all black militia. They don't teach that in schools because no government wants their people to think that the threat of violence works on government. That being said, it's almost always best to try the peaceful options first.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

If not for Napoleon we'd still be all ruled by kings in Europe. You can argue the cost wasn't worth it, but given you didn't even give a famous textbook example of "peaceful protests work", it's safe to say your point is mostly BS.

After what happened in the 40s it's fucking insulting to say that holding hands can save the world.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

First thing coming to mind? East Germany 1989.

[–] Jax 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

But see, that happened after fascism had already been fought off — so it doesn't count.

/s , since many people here think of moving goalposts as a legitimate tactic for debate.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

A bit beside the point, but might I add, that, looking at Eastern Germany today, fashism hadn't and hasn't been fought off.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

I was looking at the list by era. First one, 1918, Egyptian Revolution.

clicks link

The revolution was successfully countered by British forces.... Victims 800-1600.

That was very insightful! Thanks, I did not know this list existed. May need it for future reference.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

What did you think the word "attempt" was pointing to here?

Since you somehow forgot how to scroll down:

4 revolutions in total were unsuccessfull

20 have lead to some kind of success (although not all lead to a "perfect" outcome, but they did topple the ruling regimes)

2 have no link and I am to lazy to google them

[–] Jax -1 points 2 hours ago

Nice, tagged you as cherrypicker