|
Parent Article: Gandhi And The (establishment-supported) Myth Of Effective Nonviolence |
|
Hidden with code "Duplicate post" |
|
Bad Associations |
by Robert Porter
rwp451 (nospam) altavista.net (verified) |
Current rating: 0
29 Oct 2002
|
Hi,
I'm not necessarily a dyed-in-the-wool pacifist, and Indian history is too complicated for me to comment on intelligently, but I did find myself asking some questions here.
Does being a pacifist automatically make you an establishment stooge?
Isn't it true that violence also plays into the hands of the authorities? (I'm thinking about COINTELPRO's well-documented infiltration of the Black Panthers. The idea was to get a few agent provacatuers in there so the cops would have an excuse to take names and bust heads.)
Doesn't violence precipitate more violence in a nearly inescapable cycle?
Is violence the only way that revolutionary change is effected?
I dunno.
I want to believe that using violence is a sign that you've failed somewhere along the line.
I like the bean strategy, though.
Robert Porter |
