204
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
  • They help individuals channel their frustration, isolation and desperation
  • They are a show of strength
  • They typically lead to more political involvement
  • They have already produced wins
  • They must remain nonviolent to be effective
  • They must be in small towns in the heartland, not just big coastal cities

Find one near you at nokings.org

This post uses a gift link, but some people do seem to be prompted to register. I can't change SF Chronicle policy about that. They also have a history of sending lawyers after people who post archive.today links to their articles, so whatever you do, don't plug the URL into that site.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] elrik@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

The biggest win is getting more people involved and comfortable with protesting and non compliance. Today was the largest single day protest in American history and up 40% from No Kings I.

You can't go from zero to prolonged protests over night. Each event needs to build on the last with increased experience and new participation.

[-] 3abas@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Yes you can, but Americans aren't willing.

[-] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 79 points 3 days ago

How come one side apparently MUST remain nonviolent but not the other

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 54 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Because of propaganda and state power. It’s not a symmetrical conflict.

[-] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 days ago

It certainly isn't

[-] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 47 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They don't have to, but data shows over and over that non violent ones more often end to being more successful at regime change.

Benefits for the non violent:

  • more people are willing to join protests
  • much harder to use force to squash protesters (they can still try, but that often motivates more people to join, that is what for example happened in Euromaidan)
  • it is much harder to frame that those protesters are there to hurt ordinary people
  • sends signal for good people in power to do the right thing and that we have their back
  • validates people that they aren't alone and that it is a lot of us

We actually have more power than them, they only succeed if we get scared and think there's nothing we can do. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

[-] solarvector@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 3 days ago

I've seen many statements to that effect. I have not seen political science studies that support it though.

[-] tree_frog_and_rain@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It's a little more nuanced.

Violent resistance tends to swap one regime for another.

Non-violent resistance tends to create more positive social change.

If the only goal is to get rid of Trump, either one can work. If the goal is to have a brighter future then a revolution with minimal violence is preferable.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2452292924000365

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolent-resistance-beats-violent-force-in-effecting-social-political-change/

[-] solarvector@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

Thank you for the links

[-] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago

Because there is none. The state always preaches nonviolence to keep us passive and not a threat to the status quo. They want peaceful from us but subject the working class to violence with every action.

[-] emeralddawn45@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 days ago

Not much history to support it either.

[-] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 days ago

Solidarity movement in Poland was a peaceful protest and last to end of the communism there.

Color revolution (including orange revolution in Ukraine)

Euromaidan (it was peaceful, although the government wasn't).

Statistically peaceful protests succeed 53% of the violent ones succeed 26%

Note though it isn't just showing up one day and be done, it's about having a sustained protest with at least 3.5% of population involved.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago

but data shows over and over that non violent ones more often end to being more successful at regime change.

What data is that, exactly?

[-] scaredoftrumpwinning@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

Just look how stupid the administration is sending troops to Portland because all of the "violence". If Portland was more violent then they could carry the narrative rather than people dressed up in costumes. People will remember the frogs and the absurdity of the situation.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 24 points 3 days ago

Basically, if we start shooting, that will result in a military response, and the US military is really good at massacres.

[-] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 14 points 3 days ago

"Give me liberty or give me 40 more years of wage slaving consumerism and hoping my demographic isn't next"

[-] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 days ago

Not sure if you are aware but the military are already responding

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)

Because violent revolts elevate violent leaders. Because violence is the last, worst option for influencing the behavior of your fellow humans. Nonviolence isn't more effective than violent political action if all you want to do is swap out who's in change, but it is more effective (I would argue necessary) if what you want is a nonviolent society governed by a nonviolent democratic government. Once both sides have devolved into violence, really the only thing that sets policy is which faction is able to inflict the most pain. It also proves the fascist rule of "everyone is ultimately violent, so your best bet is to stick with the violent team that shares your religion / skin color / flag / etc." and dominate through might, rather than trying to build a genuinely peaceful coalition that could, if empowered, build a genuinely peaceful government that makes its citizens' lives better.

Or, to put it another way, you can use The One Ring to defeat Sauron, and you may succeed in defeating him, but you will corrupt yourself in the process and become the very thing you sought to destroy.

[-] Weirdfish@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

Both should, one does. Don't sink to their level.

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

“When they go low we go high” got us Donald Trump

[-] TheJesusaurus@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 days ago

If your country doesn't sink to their level soon you won't have the right to protest them any longer

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 25 points 3 days ago

Some months ago I was giving a coworker shit for not doing much of anything. No protests. No volunteering. No donations. Just works his mid six figure job, plays video games, and dates his works-at-google girlfriend. He admitted maybe he could do more. I said I could nag him the next time a big protest happened. He said sure.

Well, I messaged him with a quote from that conversation. He was like "oh it's Saturday?" And then no further responses until I followed up a day later. He's not going to do anything.

The other guys from that group also don't do anything.

Something about rich white straight (-passing) men comfortably just keeping their heads down and not even doing a half assed minimum bothers me.

But I guess there's nothing to be done. I'll be doing my best.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 16 points 3 days ago

Get a woman in the group to invite spouses and girlfriends. The men will mostly follow.

A handful will decide they like cybertrucks more than sex

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 4 points 2 days ago

Interesting idea. I know at least one of them is dating a Google employee who, from what I can tell, is rather "apolitical". I don't know about the others, though.

[-] Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago

Protests like these are weaker than direct violent action. The government finds these easy to ignore since they give an exact time of how long it will last and know it won't really have any direct impact on them or their families lives since it's happening far away from them. The better thing is to DOX every member of government and ruin every part of their life, including every second they spend out of the house and ruining their time at home by causing havoc in front of it. Annoy them, threaten them, hurt them till they either resign or stop being pieces of shit.

[-] BadmanDan@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

I’m just happy people are gettin out of the house and communicating with eachother. Society needs that.

[-] Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

I'd be happier if people were discussing how to get rid of the problem in ways other than just believing Dems are "our savior" or "the lesser of two evils". That their hearts and minds could also be swayed by protests when the Biden administration showcased they care about them about as much as conservatives do since they used the police and guard to deal with Israel protestors.

[-] _AutumnMoon_ 5 points 2 days ago

then set an example, give us some ideas on how to get rid of the problem

[-] BadmanDan@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Believe it or not, a lot of those protesters actually prefer pragmatic institutions, and will accept reform over radical change.

[-] Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

This country has a love boner for guns. Put them to use and shoot every fascist in the face no matter who they are or what political alignment they have. Look at Malcolm X and the Black Panthers as perfect examples of what we should be doing at bare minimum and only go up from there.

[-] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

They are there to give the illusion of doing something. So the peasants won't complain that much.

[-] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago

They are empty vessels/pressure release valves provided by the oligarchy to prevent organic protest from rising that would actually threaten their existence.

[-] shaggyb@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago
[-] Wiz@midwest.social 5 points 3 days ago

I'll be there tomorrow with the frog guys!

[-] CubitOom@infosec.pub 16 points 3 days ago
[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They typically lead to more political involvement

Only because people have started to become affected personally by government policies. Many of those who voted for Trump regret are also in No Kings protest.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 19 points 3 days ago

I'll happily welcome anybody who flips because they recognize how awful Republican policy is. That's important if we are going to have a durable majority

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] RonniePickering@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago

Fuck yeah they do, see you there comrades

[-] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 days ago

Wasn't that long ago in the evolutionary timeline that humans diverged from sheep. For safety reasons we still want to be part of the biggest flock. Seeing huge numbers of people at protests stirs something in our DNA.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 8 points 3 days ago

"we're experts, we studied administrations where the government was comprised of people that gave at least 1/3 of a fuck what the population thought so naturally my opinion can be applied to an administration that gives absolutely no fucks whatsoever about the population."

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 9 points 3 days ago

They care enough that they're trying to talk it down. Having a big chunk of the population turn out to tell off a dictator is a key step in how they lose power

[-] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago

Dr. King's policy was that nonviolence would achieve the gains for black people in the United States. His major assumption was that if you are nonviolent, if you suffer, your opponent will see your suffering and will be moved to change his heart. That's very good. He only made one fallacious assumption: In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience. The United States has none.

Kwame Ture

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
204 points (100.0% liked)

politics

26109 readers
2735 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS