PacASpat - Pacifism as Pathology - Ward Churchill

[DJpopel]

Did you just seriously say Milosovic got overthrown by Nonviolence?? He had the entire western world leaning on him, there were hundreds of factors that led to his downfall, not to mention a lot of dead fucking bodies.

The arguments about India are also invalid. a) ghandi was by no means the main storyline at the time(as with king). And b) because the arguments assume India is free, which it is not. Like the US, India is nothing more than a corporate Proxy. I will PM you the rest its too MucH!

[DJpopel]

@rubbleofempires

PART 1/2

The Sword that Heals? muhahaha

Im sorry dude, you are definitely intelligent in my opinion( and I thought your bit about prostitution was very insightful. But dont you realize what kind of a spineless fucking armchair liberal you have to be to even dream UP such an utterly reatarded and just plain fucking INNACURATE title?

Its so absurd that its almost insidious. Like fucking Orwellian doublespeak

@disqair pretty much sums it up. But im gonna finish and then give 2c

[disqair]

to Brutally paraphrase orwell, pacifism is a tool the ruling class uses to maintain the status quo.

[nazibreaker]

Demonstrations against the Shah began in January 1978.Between August and December 1978 strikes and demonstrations paralyzed the country. The Shah left Iran for exile in mid-January 1979, and in the resulting power vacuum two weeks later Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran to a greeting by several million Iranians. The royal regime collapsed shortly after on February 11 when guerrillas and rebel troops overwhelmed troops loyal to the Shah in armed street fighting

[nazibreaker]

AND PLEASE to all the pacifists stop manipulating the terminology as it is pacifism vs violence ,it is pacifism vs all means nessesary not i dont know a revolutionary that support only violence means .PEOPLE shoud base action not on moral convictions in revolution or non-violence , but do as it is needed in the situation.Nor nonviolence nor violence alone will work. we must no limit our self to some tactics and tools .No one shoud impose a single doctrine for liberation

[nazibreaker]

SERBIAN DICTATOR Milosevic was overthrown by the Bulduzer revolution there was some peacefull protest but there was even dead people so it is a big fraud the it was peacefull

[nazibreaker]

Yes the world war 2 made England weaker seriusly.U cant mesure Kenya population with India lol , total uprising in India woud be fatal for british military lol.History remembers Gandhi not as the only and the greatest leader in India but by all the attention he was given by the British media.The british were not forced to leave India The british authored the new constitution and transfer the power to handpicked successors.

[nazibreaker]

The actual history of India liberation is more complicated.Chandrasekhar Azad very inportant leader who fought with armed struggle against Britain and revolutionaryes such as Bhagat Singh who won mass support for bombings and assasinations to overthrow both british and indian capitalism.The militant candidate Subhas Chandra Bose was twice elected as president in Indian national congres.The 1945-48 armed stuggle of the izraeli and arabs scared the Britihs empire also and weakend it

[RedNickII]

I think that reforms can be made on a local, grassroots level through non-violent methods. These can be very helpful in winning people over to the movement. But on a national level chances are violence will be inevitable and those who aren't prepared to fight will get stomped out. I dislike, however, how some people want to engage in fighting way too early, and form secretive militant groups (AKA "urban guerrillas") that accomplish very little.

[RedNickII]

Also, in Ward's pamphlet he gives a quote from one of Martin Luther King's advisers and organizers who said that he (not King, the adviser) would always point to race riots and say to the government something along the lines of "if you had been working with us all along, those other people wouldn't have rioted." And so he said the riots were helpful to King's movement.

[RedNickII]

I'd be careful with that example about the Marcos regime in the Philippines. There was a violent struggle going on there being waged by the Maoist NPA guerrillas. I'm sure the non-violent part played a role, and I'm sure some NPA affiliates played a non-violent role, but I wouldn't say Marcos was ousted by non-violence alone.

[UglyFacet]

Why exactly are trying to "neutralize" Churchill's arguments?

Just because the British continued to practice colonialism after Indian independence means the argument loses all validity?

Don't you think you're oversimplifying a pretty complex process?

Perhaps India was more difficult to maintain as a colony, and strong arguments can be made that the british only switched to neocolonial rules, which has become the modern process of hegemony.

[Irtidad]

Brilliant! Yeah I'm not a strict pacifist either, but I really don't like Ward Churchill's contrariness. His whole attitude comes across as really repulsive to me.

[rubbleofempires]

Yeah, he's funny. I find him to be like Derrick Jensen in that he says some really important radical things that need to be said, but then is frequently illogical with the arguments he puts forward. One thing which is mentioned in Lakey's article is that Pacifism & non-violent direct action r 2 completely different things. Ward relies heavily on pretending they're the same.