LittleWhiteTab

What do you think of the criticism that debt forgiveness is simply not revolutionary enough, and that any headway in debt relations must be made through a debt strike?

How does this square with the narrative of Gelderloos, Churchill, et. al. that the Civil Rights movement and earlier Indian independence movements were a mix of militant and non-violent elements, acting as balancing effects for maximizing pressure on the State?

The suggestion is that radicals like Malcolm X and Bhagat Singh acted as leveraging elements that made the State more likely to negotiate and give legitimacy to non-violent actors who represented a more moderate message.

What are you thoughts on non-violent direct action and the use of property destruction as a legitimate tactic in preventing greater harm against human beings? I.e., last night Turkish protesters tore apart and drained a truck hauling water to the police riot lines.

Where do acts like this exist within the broader framework of non-violent activism?