ekay @ewankeep@mspsocial.net

I think people on the ground need to make the call about their level of violence or non-violence to protect their homes and families. In terms of mass movements, the inclusion of a diversity of people and actions is vital, as is the building of parallel institutions for media, shelter, food & healthcare along with methods of community organizing and conflict resolution. And for that, non-violence is strategically important.

We didn't have to use violence. But we did stop a few punks from starting fires in the bushes and dumpster around our apartment building just by having teams of the watch armed with sticks standing guard. People who had tried to stop these guys individually and unarmed had been beaten up badly. Note, we were protecting kids and grandmas.

No one even had baseball bats or Maglights. Luckily I practice martial arts and have a 'stick collection'. I gave out my stick collection, gave a 1 minute training in escalation of violence in response to escalating threat and a 1 minute training in how to use a stick for defense - take out knees first, only go for head shots if your life or someone else's life is in danger (i.e. stop someone from torching an apartment building with kids in it.)

I lived a mile down the street from George Floyd Square (Cup Foods) during the Minneapolis Uprising. A gas station and auto parts store down the street was torched and I breathed toxic air for days. Black and minority owned businesses went up in flames and no one has rebuilt them. I organized a neighborhood watch using small group democracy, and when Nazi's with AR15's were in our 'hood and torching apartment buildings people wanted weapons.

The regime cracks down on mass protest and mows down students with bullets? Have a Stay-Home. Go on your roof and bang pots and pans. Park buses on the highways. Have small, fast strike, bicycle parades or leafleting campaigns that the police can't find till after the fact. Again, this is an academic book, not a How-To, but I think it's still an important read for those in the struggle. Or for those watching the Jan 6 failed Putsch.

While a violent faction only builds expertise in violence as a means of solving conflict and they have a harder time sharing power and working with others post revolution. Another key point of the book is that non-violence campaigns have worked to some degree even in the most repressive of regimes. That is, if one understands strategic application of non-violence and can adapt and change to the regimes attempt at sowing division and fear.

The authors make a good case that the stronger the dedication to non-violence during the uprising, the more democratic the state will tend to be after the uprising succeeds. The more violent the uprising, the more repressive the successor state tends to be. This is because a successful non-violent movement builds parallel non-state, non-violent institutions and expectations among the people and these will carry over after the revolution.