I just can’t understand why these people don’t think violence solves shit. In fucking high-school they teach you about militant civil rights demonstrations, militant abolitionist movements, militant labor strikes and demonstrations. For how snobby libs are about being educated, they really seem to lack basic historical knowledge
Highschool talked about the non-violent protests of MLK & Ghandi and absolutely did not talk about militant civil rights demonstration. Also what’s a labor strike?
Huh, we learned about Malcom X, John Brown, militant abolitionists, and even militant women’s suffrage movements. We also learned about the strikes in the 1900s and the lengths the government went to in order to stop them. And this was in my rural conservative town.
Actually, my history teacher had a big poster of Malcom X in the classroom now that I think about it. We also read Zinn’s “A People’s History” as required reading. Maybe I just went to the most based school?
It’s still ignoring the fact that MLK was a socialist who would be totally behind the BLM protests with zero hand wringing, but it does push people in the right direction
The plot twist at the end was unexpected… bravo!
Nothing but respect for our troops in the trenches o7
I like how chuds admit that only 7 percent of protests became violent but still have the audacity to act like that’s damning, on behalf of the fucking cops, no less.
