337
don't forget to vote (quokk.au)
submitted 8 months ago by to c/mop
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 8 months ago (7 children)

There were far more ICE agents deployed in Minneapolis than there were in Portland. Why was the image of the self immolating monk so powerful in protest to the Vietnam war? Malcom X’s ideology actually softened over the years before he was killed, he even saw that all out violence is not the answer. Peaceful protest is the only way this ends well for any of us

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Peaceful protest as a whole solution is how it ends well for the upper class.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    What are you talking about? The most successful movements in the last hundred years were peaceful protests. Mandela, Ghandi, MLK, were they just trying to appease the upper class??

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Completely discounting the fact that all the socialist revolutions were kneecapped by US hegemony, yes that's exactly what I'm saying. They begged the ruling class for privileges, that we are now seeing dismantled, rather than fighting for actual rights that couldn't be taken by anyone. In doing so, they co-opted broader movements that would have seen more permanent change. This is a common tactic, any time a groundswell of support comes for a leftist movement, liberals come along to make sure it doesn't have any real teeth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago

    You cannot deny that Ghandi was effective in ending British oppression in India and that Mandela was effective in ending apartheid in South Africa and that MLK was effective in winning civil rights in the US through means of nonviolent civil disobedience. It’s like you’re arguing that if you’re not being violent then you’re doing nothing. Our rights have whittled away over the last 50 years because the masses have been complacent and allowed it to happen. That has nothing to do with violence or nonviolence even. It has to do with people being apathetic. Now that things are coming to a head we stand to gain more support from the masses through non violent civil disobedience. Just because you are not throwing bricks does not mean you aren’t stopping the powerful from doing as they please

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    MLK was closer to Malcom X's position than Malcolm X was to MLK's position at time of death.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago

    King’s commitment to nonviolence never wavered. He truly believed in peaceful disobedience. He became disillusioned with gradually progressivism but that’s not the same thing at all. Of course Malcom X still rejected nonviolence but his philosophy is a dead end and it was already falling apart in his lifetime

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent