If you think that was “nonviolent,” you need to go read up on the All-India Muslim League. (Hint: they got what they wanted; Gandhi didn’t.)
Giving Gandhi’s noncooperation movement sole credit for Indian independence is like giving MLK sole credit for the US civil rights movement and ignoring folks like Malcolm X: it’s an absolute whitewashing of history designed to serve the elite by gaslighting the next generation of folks with political grievances into ineffectiveness.
In reality, the the only thing that makes moderates like Gandhi and MLK look moderate and thus begrudgingly acceptable to the Powers that Be is the existence of a radical flank. It’s the latter that makes it clear that the choice is between moderate reforms and violent revolution, not between moderate reforms and the status-quo.
Most of the other examples you gave also had violence associated with them that I guess they just didn’t teach you about in school forreasons. I’ll concede that the Velvet Revolution and the Russian Revolution (by which I assume you mean 1991, not 1917) were exceptions, but that’s just because the leaders were well on their way to transitioning into capitalist oligarchs and their hearts really weren’t into Communism anymore.
If you think that was “nonviolent,” you need to go read up on the All-India Muslim League. (Hint: they got what they wanted; Gandhi didn’t.)
Giving Gandhi’s noncooperation movement sole credit for Indian independence is like giving MLK sole credit for the US civil rights movement and ignoring folks like Malcolm X: it’s an absolute whitewashing of history designed to serve the elite by gaslighting the next generation of folks with political grievances into ineffectiveness.
In reality, the the only thing that makes moderates like Gandhi and MLK look moderate and thus begrudgingly acceptable to the Powers that Be is the existence of a radical flank. It’s the latter that makes it clear that the choice is between moderate reforms and violent revolution, not between moderate reforms and the status-quo.
Most of the other examples you gave also had violence associated with them that I guess they just didn’t teach you about in school for reasons. I’ll concede that the Velvet Revolution and the Russian Revolution (by which I assume you mean 1991, not 1917) were exceptions, but that’s just because the leaders were well on their way to transitioning into capitalist oligarchs and their hearts really weren’t into Communism anymore.