Nonviolent Protest and Resistance Privileged

[Kernel Sohcahtoa]

I've long been an advocate of nonviolent protest. It seems to me to be very effective, and I see lots of downsides to using violent means, not least of which that it seems to generate free publicity for whoever the people resorting to violence are against.

But what I'm hearing when I try to promote that kind of protest/resistance against oppression is that it's my white cis-male privilege speaking. I'm not the designated target, not obviously in an endangered group, so it's easy for me to say 'stay disciplined, don't let yourself be provoked to violence, it only serves your enemies.'

I suppose it IS easy for me to say and that I don't face the same kind of danger and don't have the same anger and fear. I acknowledge that. But it doesn't mean I'm wrong. But something else might.

Should I revisit my stance on nonviolence? Is it passé in the current situation? I don't think the people advocating violence are making much sense, does anyone else get it? I'm not asking if violence is justified, if someone is screaming in your face about what they're going to do to people like you once the law is on their side, punching them in the face may not be legal or strategic, but I'm not going to tell you they didn't deserve it or you don't deserve to do it. But I think opposing them in other ways is smarter and that hitting them is counter-productive to your aims. Am I wrong?

I really appreciate this thread.  As a student of conflict resolution and peacemaking, I have often asked myself similar questions. As a result, the only real understanding that I have reached is that the means by which humanity brings about change are everything: if it is done via destructive and violent means, then that destructive behavior will likely renew itself when encountering adversity and difference in the future; whereas, if it is done via constructive and peaceable means, then people are likely to resort to those same means when a conflict or difference of opinion occurs in the future.  

With that said, reading your op reminded me of Richard B. Gregg’s The power of non-violence, which was originally published in 1934. Posted below are some excerpts from Gregg’s book, which IMO, are relevant to your thread.  In addition, some members may also find them interesting.  With that said, thanks again for this thread.  Live long and prosper. 
 
“Violence is based upon fear and anger and uses them to the utmost.  We have seen that these two emotions are based on the idea of separation, of division.  Non-violent resistance, on the other hand, is based upon the idea of unity.  The hypothesis of non-violent resisters is that the strongest factor in human beings, in the long run, is their unity;—that they have more as a family in common than as separate individuals.  This unity is biological, psychological, moral, and, for those who believe in spirit, spiritual.  The basic assumption of these creative men of peace is that their opponents, no matter how forbidding externally, or no matter what their past history, are at bottom decent and have in their hearts at least a spark of good spirit which can eventually be aroused and strengthened into action.” (Gregg, 2007, p.65)

“Non-violent resistance is not lawless nor anarchical.  Anarchy is absence of government.  But the theory of non-violent resistance is not hostile to government as such.  It does oppose evils in government, but so would any fine and honest citizen.  Otherwise how could there ever be any hope of decent government?  Not only does non-violent resistance accept government; but in order to be successful it must also itself impose on its followers rigid discipline, self-control, strong cooperation and a sense of responsibility.
 
For the same reason true non-violent resistance is not disorderly.  The qualities it requires for its exercise are not qualities of disorder.  It asks for not less order but more, but it asks that the order be more just, more equitable, both in operation and in purpose and result, than many of the kinds of order that now prevail.  It aims to see that the prevailing order shall be truly democratic, just and fair to all groups, to minorities as well as majorities.”  (Gregg, 2007, p.146)
 
 
References
 
Gregg, Richard B. (2007).  The power of non-violence.  USA: Pierides press