Lol. You would take it there. The last thing I am is a victim. This is how we got here:

Or alternatively, I have an unpopular opinion that I am choosing to voice in a comment section where the prevailing wisdom is that my perspective is outdated and out of touch.

You’re a fucking idiot. Not crying over a fucking building - which you’d know if you attempted to engage with me in good faith. But you don’t read, so that baseline fucking expectation is clearly beyond your ken. You just continue spouting your outrage at me, and bizarrely, assuming that because I believe violence…

Alternatively, I knew exactly what my perspective was, and why, before speaking, and thus was prepared to respond. I understand that you disagree with me, and thus have resorted to making the argument that I am moving the goalposts. I appreciate that this is how you feel. I do not agree, and at this point there’s…

The Indian National Army was a failure and almost every violent resistance group in India quit that approach and got in line with Gandhi.

I didn’t remove Bloody Sunday. I specifically cited it. I think maybe you don’t know what Bloody Sunday was?

No, I don’t think the Civil War was about states’ rights. Your problem is that you can’t appreciate a nuanced conversation. You crave simplicity, because your mind is simple. You’re always on the look out for an easily packaged false equivalency (e.g., if you think nonviolence is more effective than violence, you must…

Cute

I don’t agree with this:

“education and wisdom are two entirely separate things”

“Literally no major social or political revolution has happened without some level of violence.”

1. I support radical protest against white supremacy and police brutality, I just believe violence is counterproductive, as do/did many far more brilliant people who have affected social change. Fuck you and literally every other middle class hipster who has insinuated otherwise. Rioting doesn’t change the status quo.…

Did you actually read this article? Or you just read the title?

First: “drawing a completely spurious and arbitrary line between what evidence of violent protest counts as evidence”

The fact that there were violent protests during the Civil Rights era does not mean they were effective — reality is that movement was driven by persistent, visible, RADICAL, nonviolence. Any attempt to reframe it is disingenuous.

Honestly, you said it all. I wish this had been the article. 

I’ve addressed this stupid argument in the chain below so many times I literally can’t with you.

You mean, “receives multiple spurious examples”? Simply saying “this is the thing you asked for” doesn’t make it the thing.

Stop. Take a second. Read. And rethink this silly statement:

We aren’t debating the morality of American political and social foundations. I agree with you there. But that doesn’t change the fact that America is not an authoritarian state. It simply doesn’t meet that criteria.