-
Whatever the merits of the rest of her argument, for @MariaJStephan to use the research on "violent flanks" to argue against #antifa is scholarly malpractice. @DemocracyPost/1026886474057297921?s=19Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -3 🙁
-
In the cases studied by Chenoweth and Schock (which @MariaJStephan links to) standard antifa and black block tactics never characterize an "armed flank."Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -1 🙁
-
Instead, antifa tactics are essentially those widely used by the anti-apartheid movement during its pivotal years. They are the "nonviolent" case in C&Schock and in Chenoweth and Stephan's book.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood 0
-
In the Philippines people power revolution, there was also an armed flank consisting of rebel elements of the armed forces.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
Also in the people power campaign, the nonviolent movement specifically mobilized to sites of confrontation, rather than gathering elsewhere across town as Stephan counsels.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood 0
-
The Civil Resistance literature makes a solid (if not watertight) case against armed guerrilla resistance, but it is consistently misapplied to using data about unarmed/armed movements as proxies for advice about pacifist/confrontational approaches.On twitter.com
Mood +2 🙂
-
FWIW, a lot of this is the fault of nonviolence scholars mischaracterizing confrontational global South movements as pacifist, when they are not.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood 0
-
Zunes' reading of the South African anti-apartheid struggle is the worst of these cases, IMHO. Any historical account reveals abundant stone throwing, burning down of collaborating business, and strategic street confrontation coordinated nationally.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -5 🙁