Non-Euclidian Danskin

I really like seeing proper discussion of protest tactics that isn't just an excuse to dismiss goals. My only criticism is that I think there's too much focus on public perception of the protestors, which, while important, isn't the only thing protestors should care about.

we're not discussing protest at large, but the efficacy of nonviolent protest in specific, which is effective pretty much exclusively because of how it is perceived

what movie is that footage from with wendell pierce?

While I couldn't state it as eloquently, I encountered the same moral dilemma when all this started, as many did. Maybe presenting the answer I came to can help others come to their answer. 1/?

In all instances; in the over-all and over-arching fight for justice to specific instants, non-violence is attempted first. The George Floyd marches were entirely peaceful... Until the State, by the cops, made it violent. 2/?

1/ I think the thing that gets serious action isn't a Gandhi Trap ALONE. During WWII, Gandhi said that if they came, he would protest the Nazis the same way he protested the British. That plan would SIMPLY fail.

2/ Call it the King-X concession. Malcolm X has a PLAN for when the ballot fails; the people in power had better deal with MLK. We didn't get police reform or a representative Congress, but voting rights and desegregation were steps forward.