Can We Stop This "non-Violence" is the Answer BS?

[SoulRattler of Venom]

The war isn't won by how many opposing troops you kill. It's about who endures the longest. Peace by force will never last because it isn't a choice. Ghandi's idea was that if you can endure the attack of the enemy long enough, you will be able to hold a mirror up to them to show them the hypocrisy between their theory and practice. Peace has to be accepted, not forced upon.

 

[SoulRattler of Venom]

^^^ No, not full scale war. We're talking about fighting back against injustice of whatever kind. When the court's wont listen. when the politicians wont listen, when your concerns are dismissed as "the race card" the "holocaust card" the "gender card" etc etc etc then what do you do?

History has shown that busting heads works if you do it long enough. It just cant be the ONLY thing you are doing and can not be your FIRST resort.

And I'm sure MLK would be proud but that still doesnt erase the fact that he wasnt the only one responsible for black progress in the 60s. Its no coincidence that kids know everything about MLK but his favorite food but learn nothing about Malcolm, Black Panthers, etc and those who said "you hit me, I'm hitting back." Why do you think that is?

That's all fine if your goal is to kill off an entire group of people... but then nothing will stop you from finding more people to kill off because they don't fit into your plans of "peace and equality"

 

[ThaChozenWun]

^^^ No, not full scale war. We're talking about fighting back against injustice of whatever kind. When the court's wont listen. when the politicians wont listen, when your concerns are dismissed as "the race card" the "holocaust card" the "gender card" etc etc etc then what do you do?

History has shown that busting heads works if you do it long enough. It just cant be the ONLY thing you are doing and can not be your FIRST resort.

And I'm sure MLK would be proud but that still doesnt erase the fact that he wasnt the only one responsible for black progress in the 60s. Its no coincidence that kids know everything about MLK but his favorite food but learn nothing about Malcolm, Black Panthers, etc and those who said "you hit me, I'm hitting back." Why do you think that is?

They dont talk about it obviously because they dont want violence, did it have a major role in where we are yes. I think arms should be a last resort though, I'm sorry for not thinkin we need to go to war against the government, I think were moving foward at a quick pace in America. The system does have alot of flaws, but they aint all pointed towards the black man. If theres a rich black man he can get off shit just like a rich white man could. All races get treated like shit by the government, we get it more but shit is changing. The poor will always face a harsher system than the rich, that will never stop. The only thing I see us needing to go fight for is the injustice between financial ranks. In 20-30 years I honestly dont think the system will be all whitey, we been takin shit over so fast they cant stop it. The poor will still be treated like shit, Ill fight for that, I will never call for physical action unless we are stuck or moving backwards, and we are from either right now.

 

[And Step]

Violence still has never worked, America is still going to war all the time and we still have to fight at times for our freedom. Get past the whole every white man is evil thing and you'd see this. And Im sure if MLK was alive today he'd be proud as shit at what we have accomplished in such a short time.

OK, show me where, I ever said such thing. You are just hyper-sensitive. Your trained perfectly.

Any criticism of white people you jump to their defense. Any criticism of black people you remain silent. Why is that?

 

[And Step]

They dont talk about it obviously because they dont want violence, did it have a major role in where we are yes. I think arms should be a last resort though, I'm sorry for not thinkin we need to go to war against the government, I think were moving foward at a quick pace in America. The system does have alot of flaws, but they aint all pointed towards the black man. If theres a rich black man he can get off shit just like a rich white man could. All races get treated like shit by the government, we get it more but shit is changing. The poor will always face a harsher system than the rich, that will never stop. The only thing I see us needing to go fight for is the injustice between financial ranks. In 20-30 years I honestly dont think the system will be all whitey, we been takin shit over so fast they cant stop it. The poor will still be treated like shit, Ill fight for that, I will never call for physical action unless we are stuck or moving backwards, and we are from either right now.

You said whitey. You hate all white people.

 

[ThaChozenWun]

You said whitey. You hate all white people.

Whitey = rich, racist, old white men.

Whitey doesnt mean the entire race when I say it.

If you a nigga makin millions a year and not helpin out the poor, they are whiteys also

 

[janklow]

Janklow, why are you afraid to admit that these white dudes hate the fact that there is a nigga in the White House? ... Nigga could have a noose around his neck and you would be like, " Well we should consider all angles of this before we just assume this is a lynching."

because that's actually not what i am talking about. here's the quote: "...when the rednecks lost the white-house to a half-breed they went out an bought guns and bullets, formed rifle clubs, joined militias and bought as much ammunition as they could fit in their wrangler jeans."

all that drama about guys rushing out and buying guns and ammunition has much to do with the expectation that Obama/congressional Democrats would push for restrictions on firearms. this is not ONLY about race (this kind of thing happens whenever gun control legislation seems eminent) and the part i QUOTED misses that. h-rap isn't about to acknowledge that not everything's about race, especially not this.

i am not afraid to admit there are a lot of racist white dudes that hate the fact that the president is black. why would i be? it is, sadly, a fact.

ps. if you're a long-time lurker, does it really seem like i would a) deny the existence of racist white folks or b) miss a chance to expound on firearms-related politics? because if you answered "no" to those, i don't know where you were lurking.

GW trampled more civil liberties and spent money like it was pennies, and not a peep from these people.

well, there was a peep from some people, but much of the love for this Tea Party stuff is hypocritical in that regard. still doesn't have much to do with my earlier post, though.

 

[And Step]

ps. if you're a long-time lurker, does it really seem like i would a) deny the existence of racist white folks or b) miss a chance to expound on firearms-related politics? because if you answered "no" to those, i don't know where you were lurking.

To be honest, I used to scroll past your posts because you always would have some scary looking person in your avi.

 

[whar67]

Violence is only good when it can be employed effectively. Check the Hungarian revolution for what happens when violence is not enough.

Non-violence is only good when employed effectively. Check the Tiananmen square incident of 1989.

Non-violence has significant advantages over violence.

1. Relatively little need for physical logistics. You don't need bullets.

2. Isolates decision-makers from their support. The greatest strength of non-violence is its ability to sway the general population. It is revolting to the core of most people to see a non-resisting person assaulted. If decision-makers rely on violence to force compliance on a non-resisting popluation they almost always loss support of the general population.

3. Resistance tends to soften with age. In long campaigns spanning several years non-violence tends to become stronger the longer it is pursued.

4. Can produce win-win situations for all parties.

Violence has advantages as well

1. Capable of producing results on an exceeding short timeline. Victory on the battlefield can effect immediate change.

2. Employing violence can shift negociating stances in the short term

3. Effective even against entrenched ideas. Non-violence can alter these ideas, like religous views for instance, but tend to have a much harder time. Many religious wars have been fought due to this issue.

Both of these paths are effective but only when their strengths align with the assets a group has. Since non-violence has such a lower set of assets needs it tends to be the superior choice.

 

[hrap-120]

are these really all equally successful examples?

its deeper than war

History teaches us that Dessalines and the Hatian revolution was successful in gainig Haiti's independence, sadly he was assassinated by an Uncle Tom mulatto. Haiti has suffered tremendously, and paid a heavy price for freedom but through violence towards the europeons they were able to free themselves from slavery.

History teaches us that the Mau Mau, and the Mau Mau rebellion was sucsessful because they were given land, better wages, and political representation after they used violence against the europeons.

Bandula in Berma is much more complex, that shit was a senseless massacre, they were outgunned and outmanned from the jump, but dying on the battlefeild defending your nation fighting alien imperialists is some heroic, romantic ish. LOL but seriously he was able to massacre many red-coats but ultimately his men lacked the bloodthirstiness they needed in order to out-slaughter the europeon.

Geronimo died a broken man who wished he never surrendered, and once again another example of an Uncle Tom Apache betraying him and helping the U.S capture him, he was succesful in slaughtering many pale-faces but his people ultimately lacked the savageness necessary to eliminate the europeon.

The romanticism of armed resistance aside, bloodshed is the only way for the landless to get land from the landlord.

i think there are some political nuances to this that you might be overlooking because they don't relate to race

[video]http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5189467n[/video]
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5189467n

I have heard enough vitriol, code-words, and propaganda from the Nascar crowd, and seen enough interviews and documentaries to come to the conclusion that many whites hate Obama because his father was a Black Afrikan, and a Black family is in the "white"-house

History teaches us that gun sales reaching all time highs at two times in American history.....

1.) Post-slavery after African Americans were given their so-called freedom
2.) Post-election after Barack Obama was elected president

.....its only coincidence that the sales were highest in confederate states and middle america....hmmmmmmm just coincidence.

[video=youtube;e5jvPZDzQrA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5jvPZDzQrA[/video]

 

[DarcSkies777]

You all keep thinking I'm talking about some mass revolution (which would be great) but we're only 14 percent of the population (probably less once the Census results are in and the many black babies murdered in abortion clinic take its toll).

I'm asking why are whites taught that violence is OK and they teach their children about "the bombs bursting in air" but blacks are taught about the pacifist MLK and nothing about anybody else.

Why is it that when whites so much as THINK Obama is going to fuck with them they instantly stock up on guns and form militias but stupid niggas get shot by pigs and not one pig is dead the next day? Why even wait for a trial you know they gonna get off. The most powerful man in the world gets whites to form militias. But some low life pig makes niggas march down the street singing negro spirituals.

Why is it that violence is good for them but not us? And why do you all accept it?

 

[busayo]

the mau mau rebellion isn't a good argument against non-violence.

violence when you are the minority in numbers isn't a good idea, it could have worked in algeria and haiti but not in the us

 

[DarcSkies777]

*SIIIIGH*

None of the responses tell me you people get what I mean. U all know I'm not talking about taking over right? Just making shit extremely uncomfortable for people to abuse and fuck with you when all other methods fail (i.e. Court system, politics)

 

[tri3w]

Yeah and poor whites should just be content that the last 43 president's where white. So I guess ALL white people benefited from the mere color of the president's skin right? STFU!

Black businesses weren't burned down and if they were it was accidental.

Also it's not "your own shit" if you dont own or benefit from those businesses. There is a Bank near my house. But I dont make a percentage so I'm not about to cry a river if it burns down and say "why'd they burn MY bank." Its not mine/ours if I/we dont get a benefit from it.

THis is why General Grant is on my list of Greatest presidents because he used violence to keep the KKK at bay. HE pretty much just rounded them muthafukkas up with Federal Troops and violence against blacks was next to none. THen Congress made him stop and........

VIolence seems to be the only language whites dont understand. And although KTULU was just being a smart ass he's right. Too many niggas are lazy and are just happy with "a black president..." like thats going to keep pigs from shooting you when you're unarmed or make corporations hire you even though you qualify or make schools teach kids something they can actually use when out of HS.

Dumb niggas.

Sometimes, Violence is a Required Response, sometimes It isnt..........Nelson Mandela needed to use violence, his Country was for all pracitcal purposes being invaded and the Natives were being held hostage.............Acts of Violence was the Only Response (It was worst there than it was over here). Other times, peace Does work Too, Ghandi Proved this, MLK proved peace was Effective too. Say what u want, but We wouldnt be in the Situation we Were now is not for the Apporach MLK used. Rite now i think the probelm lies in with us Not taking care of us, not Holdin down our Communites and shit.

Anyway, to Say neither is needed is Crazy, there have been plenty peaceful Demonstrations that where it was Effective. and on the flipside of that, main Revolutions Were won because of Blood Shed...........

 

[And Step]

Gandhi had nearly 750,000,000 indians that were ready to merk.

So the hint of violence was always there. He knew how to play politics.

 

[And Step]

Whitey = rich, racist, old white men.

Whitey doesnt mean the entire race when I say it.

If you a nigga makin millions a year and not helpin out the poor, they are whiteys also

So a black man that does something negative is called a whitey?

That is racist.

 

[Jay107]

listen carefully...universal, common, timeless knowledge

[video=youtube;o7f5NTLgtEA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7f5NTLgtEA&feature=related[/video]

[video=youtube;upHF-WpmacQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upHF-WpmacQ[/video]

[video=youtube;XVG3gaANAys]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVG3gaANAys&feature=related[/video]

 

[ThaChozenWun]

So a black man that does something negative is called a whitey?

That is racist.

I am racist toward rich folks who look down on everyone else, and those who hate others because of skin color

 

[hrap-120]

*SIIIIGH*

None of the responses tell me you people get what I mean. U all know I'm not talking about taking over right? Just making shit extremely uncomfortable for people to abuse and fuck with you when all other methods fail (i.e. Court system, politics)

We both know most kneegrows are too traumatized by Uncle Sam & Willie Lynch to make shit even remotely uncomfortable for massah.

The kneegrow can be easily placated with shiny objects, air-jordans, white-women, and a tummy full of fried-food, he's not going to stick his neck out and risk becoming a martyr like Fred Hampton, or doing 25 years like Mutulu.

It would be within the best interest of all ruling majorities to espouse non-violent methods to its minorities....thats just common sense like locking your front door, but the hypocrisy cant be ignored when America was founded on bloodshed and has always celebrated her criminal/murderers like Jesse James, John Dillinger, and Al Capone.

Believe it or not we live under a system of white supremacy thats upheld and maintained by violent methods; from police shootings and beatings of unarmed Black men, to U.S. marines shooting Iraqi's..thats why its essential for those in power to deify passive-puppets like the post-incarceration Mandela, Dr. King, and poor Ghandi, and we cant forget white Jesus who let the proud Romans use him for an ornament.....any leader advocating armed resistance will be vilified, terminated, or incarcerated if not all three.

It is what it is Darc'.

 

[DarcSkies777]

It's funny how some say violence is the only way to deal with white people, AKA the oppressor, yet they can conquer us with trickery and deceit.
Can we not out think these people? Or any other race?

Out think? Since when do whites ever think? They've always used force.

Lets not perpetuate the myth of the savvy white man. Your species is basic at best. Great fighters though. But thats all you have over any race. Force.

Now you could argue that overpowering a peaceful people, stealing their resources and selling them later to get rich and buy the services of other country's scientists to build yourselves bombs is intelligent then you have a point. But at the end of the day force is just force. Doesnt take a genius to over power someone.