I think you've missed what I said entirely while going on to agree with my point with another commenter.

The system is unjust, built on violence. That is the only language it now understands.

As you, yourself, say, change has bot been effectual without a sufficient threat of violence from another group. Capitulation of the wealthy and powerful. Would you rather deal with MLK or Malcolm X? Both were necessary to change, only one is lauded as a hero and he was killed for choosing the peaceful route.

I'm not advocating for violence outright. I'm advocating for disruption. Block off roads, in fundraisers, interrupt closed door meetings that sell your parks for data centers. Make people uncomfortable, force them to notice the status quo is broken.

Historically, has violence, which is monopolized by the state and effectuated on the people through financial hardship, healthcare denials, homelessness, incarceration, police brutality, surveillance, and more, been effective at forcing change? Historically? Yes. That's an observation as opposed to romanticization.