RE: Nonviolent Protest and Resistance Privileged
February 17, 2017 at 10:24 am
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2017 at 10:26 am by Mister Agenda.)
Sorry to bring this back around to me, but I'm a little upset with a conversation I've been having with a RL friend, though I think she may not consider me one, anymore. I didn't notice a post calling for punching racists in advance of them doing anything had been shared by her and opined that getting punched seems to work in their favor, that the guy that got punched is now more famous than ever and more people are aware of what he had to say now than before he got punched. Since we had a similar conversation before, I wouldn't have replied if I'd realized it would show up in her feed. I earned this reply:
"Mansplain to me yet again how well nonviolence works, oh great cishet white man! My poor widdle queer girl brain can't handle it. Not like I haven't had this fucking conversation with him on literally everything that suggests we don't calmly let literal fascists spread hate speech that encourages our fucking genocide."
I probably shouldn't have 'mansplained again' that nonviolent protest isn't about letting fascists spread hate speech encouraging genocide but opposing it by other means than violence, but I did when I probably should have dropped it. It's just an example though of what I'm seeing that prompted me to start this thread. I'm concerned that the resistance's Id is taking over the movement, as this attitude seems to be widespread. How did the civil rights movement manage civility with each other? The unity required was critical but they had this same divide. How did the believers in nonviolent action win out? Was it just a separation of those who could not commit to nonviolent resistance into other groups? And did those more violent groups play an important role as 'bad guys' that made MLK's group look preferable?
"Mansplain to me yet again how well nonviolence works, oh great cishet white man! My poor widdle queer girl brain can't handle it. Not like I haven't had this fucking conversation with him on literally everything that suggests we don't calmly let literal fascists spread hate speech that encourages our fucking genocide."
I probably shouldn't have 'mansplained again' that nonviolent protest isn't about letting fascists spread hate speech encouraging genocide but opposing it by other means than violence, but I did when I probably should have dropped it. It's just an example though of what I'm seeing that prompted me to start this thread. I'm concerned that the resistance's Id is taking over the movement, as this attitude seems to be widespread. How did the civil rights movement manage civility with each other? The unity required was critical but they had this same divide. How did the believers in nonviolent action win out? Was it just a separation of those who could not commit to nonviolent resistance into other groups? And did those more violent groups play an important role as 'bad guys' that made MLK's group look preferable?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
