Is it time for Red Flag laws?

[texshooter]

In fact, they found that nonviolent campaigns were twice as successful as the violent campaigns.

If civil disobedience works better than armed rebellion, perhaps collective suicide would work even better still, according to one popular passivist.

Yeah, right. I'd rather take my chances, thank you very much. Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.

[Alan Klein]

No one claims that nonviolent civil resistance works 100% of the time. The empirical evidence shows that it is twice as effective as violent insurgency. Moreover, nonviolent campaigns are becoming increasingly successful and common. That's the cold, hard reality of it.

Here is Chenoweth giving a brief presentation on her research: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJSehRlU34w

Chenoweth and Stephan are anti-gun advocates.  Hence their support from liberal anti-gun organizations.   Your post: "A few years back, two scholars, Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan, analyzed 323 movements resisting tyranny from around the world that occurred between 1990 and 2006."  Question: what kind of movements?  There aren't that many countries in the world.  And all these happened over a 16 years period? 

According to one article I read, "Their team identified over 200 violent revolutions and over 100 nonviolent campaigns. Twenty-six percent of the violent revolutions were successful, while 53 percent of the nonviolent campaigns succeeded."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erica_Chenoweth
What does that mean?  What's the difference between a revolution and campaign.  Maybe the violent revolutions failed because the government had bigger guns and the non violent campaigns, whatever that is, succeeded more because the people in power were not threatened by the demands of the protestors.  Snowflakes, both of them. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... bad example...

Why?

[Damon Lynch]

Chenoweth and Stephan are anti-gun advocates.  Hence their support from liberal anti-gun organizations.   Your post: "A few years back, two scholars, Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan, analyzed 323 movements resisting tyranny from around the world that occurred between 1990 and 2006."  Question: what kind of movements?  There aren't that many countries in the world.  And all these happened over a 16 years period? 

According to one article I read, "Their team identified over 200 violent revolutions and over 100 nonviolent campaigns. Twenty-six percent of the violent revolutions were successful, while 53 percent of the nonviolent campaigns succeeded."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erica_Chenoweth
What does that mean?  What's the difference between a revolution and campaign.  Maybe the violent revolutions failed because the government had bigger guns and the non violent campaigns, whatever that is, succeeded more because the people in power were not threatened by the demands of the protestors.  Snowflakes, both of them.

You could answer all your questions quickly and easily by reading their research! It's not difficult to find it online.

And in the case of Chenoweth, before becoming a professor she had wanted to join the military. I have no idea about Stephan's background.

 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... And in the case of Chenoweth, before becoming a professor she had wanted to join the military.

Spurned lover syndrome.

[Alan Klein]

You could answer all your questions quickly and easily by reading their research! It's not difficult to find it online.

And in the case of Chenoweth, before becoming a professor she had wanted to join the military. I have no idea about Stephan's background.

 

Why don't you read it and report back.  Anyone can takes a bunch of statistics and draw erroneous conclusions. 

It could well be that conflicts that devolve into armed conflict are the kind where the government feels threatened with their existential survival.  So their position requires armed opposition to attain change which has a smaller success rate. 

Meanwhile, in those examples of non-violent changes, these had a chance of occurring anyway.  So the opposition had no reason to resort to arms using more political persuasion.  Without analyzing each and every example, in each in all their complexity, you're asking me to take their conclusion on faith that they interpreted the statistics correctly.  That's too big a leap of faith.

Even if they are right, what does a people do who are being abused?  Do they protest like "tank man" and disappear?  How long do you have to wait for things to change before it's OK to resort to violence for your freedom?  Should American patriots waited from 1776 until 1948 to be freed from English rule along with Gandhi's India?  Or should they have resorted to violence sooner as they did?  It's easy to suggest patience sitting in an Ivory Tower where the biggest problem you have today is what you're going to eat for lunch.  Meanwhile, people who are being abused daily by a tyrant like Assad with death and maiming and insults and starvation are faced with the opportunity to shoot their way to freedom and life.

[Farmer]

You can't have a pussyfied nation suddenly turning into a fierce army.

Do you think Australia, Canadian, New Zealand, British (just to pick a few) armies lack capability?  All have current military operations under way.  All do not have "right to bear arms" and in fact have tight gun control.

[Rob C]

Everything reaches its limit of elasticity and, like the unlucky knickers, snaps at the worst possible moment, just as you are wearing your miniest mini.

It's become plain to see that this "debate" depends not on the limits of normal human elasticity nor, indeed, upon the value-for-money grace of Calvin Klein, but upon the swinging in the wind steel balls paradigm, where a pair of globes bang together, mindlessly, until somebody just grabs them and renders them still.

Heysoos, you guys sure display a fine appetite for running round in circles! Unfortunately, there's no acceleration involved, so no chance of the final solution of a perfect vanishing act into a black hole which, I suppose, brings us back to your Calvin Kleins...

And its a shame. On other matters some of you display a fine sense of balance, some objectivity and the like, but in these threads, that old Greek god proves he had many sons with bad feet...

Where in hell do you find the patience (or impatience) to keep hacking at dead horses?

;-)

[Robert Roaldi]

Everything reaches its limit of elasticity and, like the unlucky knickers, snaps at the worst possible moment, just as you are wearing your miniest mini.

It's become plain to see that this "debate" depends not on the limits of normal human elasticity nor, indeed, upon the value-for-money grace of Calvin Klein, but upon the swinging in the wind steel balls paradigm, where a pair of globes bang together, mindlessly, until somebody just grabs them and renders them still.

Heysoos, you guys sure display a fine appetite for running round in circles! Unfortunately, there's no acceleration involved, so no chance of the final solution of a perfect vanishing act into a black hole which, I suppose, brings us back to your Calvin Kleins...

And its a shame. On other matters some of you display a fine sense of balance, some objectivity and the like, but in these threads, that old Greek god proves he had many sons with bad feet...

Where in hell do you find the patience (or impatience) to keep hacking at dead horses?

;-)

What you are basically asking is, why is there an interweb?

People no longer gather in town squares to hear the latest news and gossip from their neighbours. We now have the interweb instead. Except forum participants are only virtual neighbours so we don't feel we have to be tolerant or polite. Some people confuse disagreement with attack, the way 14 year olds do. I hope sociologists are studying these patterns of behaviour. Now and then I'll look for an old song on youtube and start reading the comments. It's astonishing how quickly a few comments about an old half-forgotten song can turn into a vicious insult-fest. This might be a new addendum to the Turing test.

Another thing is in forums such as this, our conversation companions are selected based on them accessing this site. In the real world, you wouldn't choose your conversation companions that way, i.e., just because they happen to be walking down the same street. It's a bizarre way to meet people, we just think it's normal.

[Damon Lynch]

Why don't you read it and report back.  Anyone can takes a bunch of statistics and draw erroneous conclusions.

I'm not sure if you understand how the academic system works Alan. Those two scholars spent years of their lives investigating these issues, after having received extensive training. Their work is then critiqued colleagues, anonymous reviewers, and critics who have genuine expertise. Only then is their work published. Chenoweth went into the research a true believer in the efficacy of violence to overthrown tyranny.  Her views changed 180 degrees.

You on the other hand do not have anything like the expertise they have. You have not received anything like the training they have. You have not done the research. You're merely sounding out ideas in an Internet discussion forum. A little humility on your part would go a long way. Your questions indicate you know practically nothing about how in real life people use nonviolence to overthrow dictatorships -- which is not a criticism. Most people do not.  Learn about it. I'm not about to hold your hand and guide you through the literature. I'm merely reporting their findings and pointing out some resources. Do the work yourself.

[RSL]

Wow! Now I guess you understand how ignorant you are, Alan. You haven't spent the required years mumbling to yourself and thumbing your lip while "researching." You simply don't have the credentials to be able to mumble and thumb along with those properly credentialed. You should be very, very sorry that Damon isn't going to hold your hand and guide you through the literature so you'll become enlightened.

When I hear about how effective Gandhi's passive resistance was I always wonder how effective it'd have been had the "occupiers" been German or Russian instead of British.

[Alan Klein]

I wonder what "tank man" thinks of the book.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

This blind belief in the truthfulness of academic research is outright scary. As I said many times, science is the new religion for some.

How many studies that took years to research, were peer-reviewed, and published in respectable publications, were found to be faulty and debunked either contemporaneously or a bit later?

Academia lives in the proverbial ivory tower, detached from the real world. They construct models, based on simplified parameters, supposedly mimicking real life. It is a dangerous illusion to mistake academic models for real life. They are certainly useful, one of the aspects to be taken into account, but they are not a substitute for real life, and certainly not treated as a new religious dogma.

I had professors and assistants in business school who never set foot outside of academia all their life. And yet they were attempting to explain to us, practicing managers and executives, how things work in business. Really!? Surely they can teach numbers and formulas, concepts and analytical tools, and we gladly absorbed that. But claiming to know how the corporate world works from the inside, based on their models? Claiming it is all there is to know? Now, I am not saying that those who practice something know everything there is to know about the subject. Neither side should attempt to claim the monopoly on the whole truth. We need both, but a little humility would not hurt bookworms either.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... When I hear about how effective Gandhi's passive resistance was I always wonder how effective it'd have been had the "occupiers" been German or Russian instead of British.

Quote of the year!!! Brilliant!

[Damon Lynch]

When I hear about how effective Gandhi's passive resistance was I always wonder how effective it'd have been had the "occupiers" been German or Russian instead of British.

Gandhi led several hundred million of his people to freedom from the tyranny of British colonial rule. And you? Have you been to the places in India and Pakistan where the British gunned down hundreds of Indians at a time? Have you taken the time to research British colonial violence in the subcontinent? The millions who died of starvation? Do you know anything at all about the world's first nonviolent army, the Khudai Khidmatagars? Do you know anything their uniforms, their band, their training camps, their militant and civil wings, their oath? Do you know who led it?

Regarding the Nazis, share with us your knowledge about the nonviolence Europeans did undertake against Nazism, and analyze its effectiveness.  Can you even name a single example? Do you know anything about this topic? Or are you just sounding off with no intent of understanding how people actually do overthrow tyranny most effectively?

[LesPalenik]

Wow! Now I guess you understand how ignorant you are, Alan. You haven't spent the required years mumbling to yourself and thumbing your lip while "researching." You simply don't have the credentials to be able to mumble and thumb along with those properly credentialed. You should be very, very sorry that Damon isn't going to hold your hand and guide you through the literature so you'll become enlightened.

When I hear about how effective Gandhi's passive resistance was I always wonder how effective it'd have been had the "occupiers" been German or Russian instead of British.

Very good points. It wouldn't have been effective at all. And any alliance partners would keep quiet.

Regarding the Nazis, share with us your knowledge about the nonviolence Europeans did undertake against Nazism, and analyze its effectiveness.  Can you even name a single example? Do you know anything about this topic? Or are you just sounding off with no intent of understanding how people actually do overthrow tyranny most effectively?

Just look at the history of the former Czechoslovakia.
Czechs and Slovaks, preferring always peace to war, were first betrayed by France and UK in 1938 when Hitler decided to take over, and again in 1968 when the Russians invaded (after the very peaceful Prague spring).  Although the west helped the refugees who managed to get out, there was no action or warning by USA or the western Europe to Russians "to get ready" as now by Trump and Macron.

[Damon Lynch]

Academia lives in the proverbial ivory tower, detached from the real world.

I'm sorry that you had such an awful experience in business school. It seems to have scarred you for life. It must have been simply terrible being subject to all that education. I bet you've advised your children to forget about university then, so as not to make the same mistake you did! 

[LesPalenik]

This blind belief in the truthfulness of academic research is outright scary. As I said many times, science is the new religion for some.

How many studies that took years to research, were peer-reviewed, and published in respectable publications, were found to be faulty and debunked either contemporaneously or a bit later?

Academia lives in the proverbial ivory tower, detached from the real world. They construct models, based on simplified parameters, supposedly mimicking real life. It is a dangerous illusion to mistake academic models for real life. They are certainly useful, one of the aspects to be taken into account, but they are not a substitute for real life, and certainly not treated as a new religious dogma.

I had professors and assistants in business school who never set foot outside of academia all their life. And yet they were attempting to explain to us, practicing managers and executives, how things work in business. Really!? Surely they can teach numbers and formulas, concepts and analytical tools, and we gladly absorbed that. But claiming to know how the corporate world works from the inside, based on their models? Claiming it is all there is to know? Now, I am not saying that those who practice something know everything there is to know about the subject. Neither side should attempt to claim the monopoly on the whole truth. We need both, but a little humility would not hurt bookworms either.

Good points again, and not only in the fields of violence or business.
For example, most doctors and nutritionists were at one time taught and still believe that cooking with olive oil and drinking milk is healthy (despite numerous new studies which debunked those myths). 

https://www.pritikin.com/your-health/healthy-living/eating-right/1103-whats-wrong-with-olive-oil.html

[Rob C]

Wow! Now I guess you understand how ignorant you are, Alan. You haven't spent the required years mumbling to yourself and thumbing your lip while "researching." You simply don't have the credentials to be able to mumble and thumb along with those properly credentialed. You should be very, very sorry that Damon isn't going to hold your hand and guide you through the literature so you'll become enlightened.

When I hear about how effective Gandhi's passive resistance was I always wonder how effective it'd have been had the "occupiers" been German or Russian instead of British.

Regarding the last paragraph, Russ: people tend to forget that a country running any empire at a time when the motherland, the UK in this instance, is almost broke and carrying a massive financial debt to her allies during WW2, is in no position either to care or be able to engage in distant fisticuffs half-a-world away.

Independence was given in August, 1947, a very short time after the end of WW2. The cost of trying to carry responsibility for maintenance of one of the most massive railroad systems of the day, for example, is something it couldn't even begin to attempt; it can hardly afford to keep its national one working properly today, never mind the Indian one. All the additional administrative, defence and political pressures of hanging on would have been impossible, never mind trying to fight the very people who had fought and sacrificed on your side during WW2!

Apart from logistics and costs, there comes a time when the people you have had some sort of authority over have developed their own statesmen and functionaries, and you become very surplus to requirements.

Imagine if Britain had tried to ignore the social tides, the zeitgeist of the period; she would have worn herself out trying to maintain an increasingly impossible status quo.

Cynically, I'm damned sure she's glad to be freed of so many widespread responsibilities; as for raping the country, some see it as unification, to a degree, establishment of a fair legal system, education etc. etc. India was no single, absolutely united and smoothly functioning state at the time of the British intervention. Apart from having close to 400 languages (so I have repeatedly been informed), it's social structure was as near to despotic as our own sweet Alan fears he may live to see in the States unless all his fellows are able to outgun the official military.

On a personal level, all to which I can attest is this: on the day we left our home to go across the country to Bombay (where I spent a delightful six weeks or so having the then time of my life) to catch the ship back to Britain, our staff were, as were we, in tears. They for the loss of jobs and future uncertainty and, I believe, out of affection; we for the loss of people we'd known and shared many years of life beside. Not so oddly, the early life of Sally Mann, and its emotional connections, comes to mind.

Rob

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I'm sorry that you had such an awful experience in business school. It seems to have scarred you for life. It must have been simply terrible being subject to all that education. I bet you've advised your children to forget about university then, so as not to make the same mistake you did! 

Attempt at sarcasm duly noted, though misdirected.

I love education, theories, books, etc. Where did I say otherwise? I actually said "Neither side should attempt to claim the monopoly on the whole truth. We need both..."

I did not have "awful" experience in business school. On the contrary. Great theories learned, horizons expanded. Late night/early morning drinks with a sitting director of the Federal Reserve Board.

All I am saying is that everything in this world, science and academia included, should be taken with a grain of salt, not treated as a religious dogma.

As for the relationship between theory and practice, I swear by this quote from Miles Davis, an advice to a young musician (quoted from memory): "First, learn all there is to learn about music. Then, FORGET it all and play until you become dizzy."

It is a yin and yang thing, Damon. Not just yin, nor yang.