You might try thinking of violence in a more nuanced way. Gandhi was dedicated to non-violence but his movement led to considerable state violence--which he was entirely aware would happen and which was part of the point.
Gandhi expected the British to use force against his movement (e.g., Salt March, Quit India), but he urged followers not to retaliate. He believed that if the state used violence against peaceful protestors, it would expose the injustice of colonial rule.
What's the implication for The Left now? If we follow Gandhi's example, and let's throw MLK in there for good measure, The Left should not incite violence but rather put their bodies in the way of violence in the form of open resistance and protest.
It looks like Trump has learned something from Nixon and doesn't plan on shooting protesters on college campuses this time, strong-arming Universities to do that with the threat of their funding; so government offices, Tesla showrooms and other non-University locations will have to do.
In any case, Leftist blood will be shed, count on it.
This is a great comment. Saul Alinsky discusses this a bit in Rules for Radicals - I referenced this in the yet unpublished article this essay was referring to. He made a good point: that in Gandhi and MLK's case the exposed violence shamed the aggressors both to themselves and their immediate communities (children hating parents for participating) and also their broader communities (the USA being ashamed of the segregated south, the global community being ashamed of British rule in India).
But he noted that there could be cases where no such shame exists. That the community simply doesn't care what it is doing. This is NOT the same situation as Germany in the second world war, but there was likely no nonviolent protest that the Jewish community of Germany, Poland, etc., could've done to resist the holocaust.
Again, this is not that situation. The two things are not the same - but I am concerned that the people who are frothing at the mouth to support Trump are genuinely indifferent to the suffering they're causing, or worse, they enjoy it.
I am personally of the Oppressor Class rather than the Oppressed so my expertise in resistance and revolution are fully dependant on history and my imagination here.
Your point about having an authoritarian regime (and followers) that don’t care about others’ suffering is well taken. In fact, clearly the MAGA movement delights in their perceived enemy’s suffering, it may even be the whole point.
On April 13, 1919 thousands of Indians, including men, women, and children, gathered peacefully in the city Amritsar at Jallianwala Bagh, a public garden, to protest British rule and celebrate the Sikh festival of Baisakhi. Without warning, Brigadier General Reginald Dyer led a group of armed British troops into the enclosed area and ordered them to open fire on the unarmed crowd. The troops fired without warning and continued shooting for about 10 minutes, aiming at the densest parts of the crowd. Since Jallianwala Bagh had only one narrow exit, many people were trapped, leading to a massive number of casualties. As many as 1,000 civilians were killed, many stacked on top of each other in a well they jumped into for cover.
It would be hard to characterise the British as sympathetic to the plight of Indian suffering.
There’s a long-game/short-game argument to be made here. It took over 30 years from the start of Gandhi’s movement before India got its independence, and the resistance to British rule had begun even earlier. Moreover, there were other political pressure movements and armed conflict. WWII helped as well. MLK’s dream is unmet and being rolled-back some 60 years later.
I’m convinced there will be violence and that that phase will be the Eye of the Needle for The Left if it ever is to regain power. I’m persuaded that this regime will not think twice about injuring or unaliving American citizens if it feel threatened or disrespected.
This Note got way longer than expected but I’ll just say one more thing. Somehow I think the 1984 film Revenge of the Nerds is prescriptive here. America’s Second Civil War is between the nerds on the left and the jocks on the right. The nerds cannot defeat the jocks head-on in games of aggression and raw power but, after suffering Atomic Wedgies for a month, hopefully can use it's brains finally to devise some winning tactics.
You might try thinking of violence in a more nuanced way. Gandhi was dedicated to non-violence but his movement led to considerable state violence--which he was entirely aware would happen and which was part of the point.
Gandhi expected the British to use force against his movement (e.g., Salt March, Quit India), but he urged followers not to retaliate. He believed that if the state used violence against peaceful protestors, it would expose the injustice of colonial rule.
What's the implication for The Left now? If we follow Gandhi's example, and let's throw MLK in there for good measure, The Left should not incite violence but rather put their bodies in the way of violence in the form of open resistance and protest.
It looks like Trump has learned something from Nixon and doesn't plan on shooting protesters on college campuses this time, strong-arming Universities to do that with the threat of their funding; so government offices, Tesla showrooms and other non-University locations will have to do.
In any case, Leftist blood will be shed, count on it.
This is a great comment. Saul Alinsky discusses this a bit in Rules for Radicals - I referenced this in the yet unpublished article this essay was referring to. He made a good point: that in Gandhi and MLK's case the exposed violence shamed the aggressors both to themselves and their immediate communities (children hating parents for participating) and also their broader communities (the USA being ashamed of the segregated south, the global community being ashamed of British rule in India).
But he noted that there could be cases where no such shame exists. That the community simply doesn't care what it is doing. This is NOT the same situation as Germany in the second world war, but there was likely no nonviolent protest that the Jewish community of Germany, Poland, etc., could've done to resist the holocaust.
Again, this is not that situation. The two things are not the same - but I am concerned that the people who are frothing at the mouth to support Trump are genuinely indifferent to the suffering they're causing, or worse, they enjoy it.
I am personally of the Oppressor Class rather than the Oppressed so my expertise in resistance and revolution are fully dependant on history and my imagination here.
Your point about having an authoritarian regime (and followers) that don’t care about others’ suffering is well taken. In fact, clearly the MAGA movement delights in their perceived enemy’s suffering, it may even be the whole point.
On April 13, 1919 thousands of Indians, including men, women, and children, gathered peacefully in the city Amritsar at Jallianwala Bagh, a public garden, to protest British rule and celebrate the Sikh festival of Baisakhi. Without warning, Brigadier General Reginald Dyer led a group of armed British troops into the enclosed area and ordered them to open fire on the unarmed crowd. The troops fired without warning and continued shooting for about 10 minutes, aiming at the densest parts of the crowd. Since Jallianwala Bagh had only one narrow exit, many people were trapped, leading to a massive number of casualties. As many as 1,000 civilians were killed, many stacked on top of each other in a well they jumped into for cover.
It would be hard to characterise the British as sympathetic to the plight of Indian suffering.
There’s a long-game/short-game argument to be made here. It took over 30 years from the start of Gandhi’s movement before India got its independence, and the resistance to British rule had begun even earlier. Moreover, there were other political pressure movements and armed conflict. WWII helped as well. MLK’s dream is unmet and being rolled-back some 60 years later.
I’m convinced there will be violence and that that phase will be the Eye of the Needle for The Left if it ever is to regain power. I’m persuaded that this regime will not think twice about injuring or unaliving American citizens if it feel threatened or disrespected.
This Note got way longer than expected but I’ll just say one more thing. Somehow I think the 1984 film Revenge of the Nerds is prescriptive here. America’s Second Civil War is between the nerds on the left and the jocks on the right. The nerds cannot defeat the jocks head-on in games of aggression and raw power but, after suffering Atomic Wedgies for a month, hopefully can use it's brains finally to devise some winning tactics.