This is the most encouraging news I've read all year: Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts – and those engaging a threshold of 3.5% of the population have never failed to bring about change.

@yogthos Those numbers have already been debunked.

I don't have time right now, but I can try to find back the debunking if you want :).

@yogthos I don't have the sources on hand, but I'm pretty certain that all those "non-violent" movements always went paired with subgroups that weren't completely opposed to violence as such...

@yogthos This study prominently gets used by XR in talks, which is certainly not the main problem why the radical left has it's problems with the movement but it's a good symptom. One of the counter arguments is that peaceful movements usually have more violent groups (e.g. Civil rights movement and the Black Panthers) that "encourage" the powers to be to to negotiate with the non-violent part of the movement. (

@yogthos Quoting from the "Radical flank" wiki page:

Chenoweth and Schock's data set was limited to "ideal types of campaigns...that rely solely on nonviolent or violent tactics." She does not study "mixed campaigns" of both violence and nonviolence, although it is documented that most real-life campaigns are varied in this way.

@yogthos Found a more thorough critique, which is kind of too long to quote it here in it's entirety.
See the section "Nonviolence works?" in

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!