this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2025
553 points (95.9% liked)
196
5436 readers
1976 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not sure what the point is here exactly. Every single country that has ever had a revolution had to deal with these things.
The point is that if you convince yourself there's no chance of succeeding, then maybe you won't feel so guilty about not even trying.
Yes let's downplay the US military like it's just any other. No biggie
the military is what the ghandi trap is for. one doesn't defeat them in combat, we be brutalized by them publicly in a way that radicalizes enough of the remaining population that they have to kill everyone in order to prevent the revolution.
so in order for it to work you have to lay the groundwork beforehand teaching people how to have empathy for the victims of systematic violence. in which your enemy isn't the military but propogandists.
I remember some guy from history saying something along the lines of "turn the other cheek", if only I could remember who that was and what happened to them and if they achieved any sort of meaningful impact on society.
George Carlin on Assassination
Don't think that was Ghandi but it was definitely a winning strategy in gaining India's independence.
however, as a counter point to that comic:
Yeah my point was rather that "we can conquer with peace" is a few thousand years old, at least. Jesus, Gandhi, all of them.
And exactly because it was working, they got killed. Little men in power got scared.
Edit Also I don't really understand what I'm looking at. Fallout 3 pipe gun prop? Prolly a diy gun. But in the US lots of those rely on parts that are free to buy. Making a pipe shotgun isn't too challenging... but something like a repeating pistol? That's a bit more work.
that's valid. I would like to propose that the ghandi trap and conquering with peace are a useful technique among many that we must use. like, it's specifically for militant violence like those individuals were facing but it's countered with proganda like the past three decades of fox News has produced.
so sometimes ducktape Shinzo Abe guns are necessary too, so is deradicalizing the old-heads, and building coalitions like the NAACP
edit: shit, yeah I should explain. that's the gun that was used to kill Shinzo Abe, former nationalist PM of Japan
You forgot to mention Abe's enabling of the Moonies cult, who exploited the assassin's mother. After that made headlines, opinions on Abe shifted and started actions to address the issue (dissolution, looking into corruption etc).
oh there's a lot about him I didn't mention for brevity. but yeah, dude was a fuckass and killing him was based. some people getting assassinated had it coming
Aah. That makes sense.
Yeah pacifism should be a priority but it isn't always the answer. Like it would not have been the right choice for Jews in WWII, it wouldn't have been the right choice in Rwanda or Cambodia, and it doesn't really work in Gaza either.
Sometimes violent resistance is necessary, yes, but for developed counties which still use the pretense of civility, at least that can be broken if nothing else. If peaceful protests are mowed down with military force, it strips all pretense of acting like a democracy.
That's probably why it's so hard for Chinese people to see any mentions of a certain place with a name that has a geometrical shape in it. I went to check the Wikipedia page for it and holy shit any mention of anything bad having happened there is pushed down to a subheading of a subheading, and afforded a whole three sentences. There's obviously a specific article on Wikipedia addressing that, but that being pushed so far down on the main article is clearly China's doing.
But seeing as the US doesn't (yet) have such extensive censorship, now would be the time to loudly and non-violently protest before they manage to set up systems which can censor any government violence used to put down peaceful protestors. Afterwards it won't matter and it's going to require something more like firebombs and guerilla warfare.
yes, that's why most revolutions result in dictators.
Yes and they had cooperation and a plan and the US population does not have either.
Given how messy many revolutions were, i don't think that to have been the case most of the time.
The plan doesn't have to be complex and e.g. the cuban revolution wouldn't have been possible without widespread support from people. Also, relatively un-bloody, comparatively, btw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Revolution single digit thousands on both sides? Bloody enough that everyone probably knows someone affected by two or three degrees separation, but besides that?