Posted by:
Michaelm
(
)
Date: January 14, 2012 04:12AM
I will not participate in any online website involving talk of advocating violence.
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,389947,390134#msg-390134Martin Luther King? He was not the only leader of the civil rights movement and he was not the only factor, violence was a major factor in progressing the civil rights movement, but people REMEMBER the Martin Luther Kings, not the Malcolm Xs
Same with Gandhi, when you look at the India independence movement AS A WHOLE, we find that there was also a violent side, but people want to believe that it was really not violent so they can worship Gandhi, and ignore the reality.
So, the effective leaders may use the term in a certain way, history shows that it just isn't so. Many of those same effective leaders owe their success to the violence that the they claimed to be against. It is sort of a "good cop. bad cop" sort of thing. The "good cop bad cop" thing does not work without a bad cop and in the end, the "good cop" is the cop people LIKE. The non-violence preachers loose effectiveness when there is no violence to rail against, and the non-violence preachers are the ones that people LIKE to remember.