Violence isn't the answer. *opens history book*
Uhh, uh, oh.
*Frantically starts flipping though pages*
"Where's the peaceful revolution where nobody did anything but things got better?!"
"Must be here somewhere!"
Uhh, uh, oh.
*Frantically starts flipping though pages*
"Where's the peaceful revolution where nobody did anything but things got better?!"
"Must be here somewhere!"
Comments
The peacewashing of American history is wild
Idealism is wonderful.
Ideally, violence isn't necessary.
History says otherwise.
Should be a simple thing to understand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_March
🔹Indian Independence Movement
🔹US Civil Rights Movement
🔹Woman Suffrage
🔹German Reunification
🔹Abolition of Slavery
🔹Trade Union Movements
Not finding the answer doesn’t mean it’s not there—it just means you haven’t looked in the right places yet.
The Glorious Revolution is also called the Bloodless Revolution for a reason. Plus Gandhi's leadership in India's independence popularized Non-Violent Resistance, showing peaceful change is both powerful and achievable.
I notice your response focuses on dismissing the examples rather than engaging with the broader argument.
The Glorious Revolution, while involving elites, is still known as the Bloodless Revolution due to its peaceful transition.
That's why I cited it as an example of nonviolent change.
Regarding India's independence, I never claimed it was entirely peaceful or simple.
However, Gandhi's nonviolent resistance—through civil disobedience and mass protests—was PIVOTAL.
His approach inspired movements worldwide, proving the power of peaceful strategies in achieving lasting reform.
🔹La Gloriosa Revolución
🔹El Movimiento de Independencia de la India
🔹El Movimiento por los Derechos Civiles en los Estados Unidos
🔹El Sufragio Femenino
🔹La Reunificación Alemana
🔹La Abolición de la Esclavitud
🔹Los Movimientos Sindicales
No encontrar la respuesta no significa que no esté ahí, solo significa que aún no la has buscado en los lugares correctos.
Ojalá que esta traducción esté bien