Your claim was that the movements did not have violence at all, not that the violence featured in them didn't accomplish anything. You're moving the goalposts.
Fatticus
joined 1 year ago
Stonewall, the catalyst for LGBT rights, was a brick throwing riot, you could not be more wrong here.
I think that's the spirit of the text, but he's very careful not to actually call for violent protest. Instead, he repeatedly just says that it should be considered for obvious reasons. The text has a "won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest" effect. Regardless, he makes a compelling argument and the violence he considers is purely against property and not people so, unless you're a property fetishist, the degree of violence being considered is nothing compared to the violence of climate change.
Man the air feels good on my neck!
KBBL is gonna give me something stupid!
This is a contest for children!
Yeah, and he beat their brains out.
The Thompsons
Spotted Cow, it's a beer that I think is still only available in Wisconsin.
Two paragraphs only detailing what the review shows, not a single sentence about why this would remind anyone that the switch is old. Trash.
view more: next ›
There have been successful progressive movements that have achieved their goals through violence as well though. If you don't limit the actions of progressives to the last century, the abolitionist movement and the civil war were incredibly violent and achieved their goals through that violence.