Read on Twitter
The non-violence ideology of liberalism implies that the violence used to establish the US Empire is okay but violence used to dismantle it is not
Kwame Ture: "Now, I think the biggest problem with the white liberal in America, and perhaps the liberal around the world, is that his primary task is to stop confrontation, stop conflicts, not to redress grievances, but to stop confrontation." https://unableunwilling.wordpress.com/2016/06/03/the-pitfalls-of-liberalism-by-stokely-carmichael-kwame-ture/
"If killed thirty [Vietnamese] who were pointed out to me by white Americans as my enemy, I would be given a medal. [...] If I were to kill thirty white policemen in Washington, D.C. who have been brutalizing my people and who are my enemy, I would get the electric chair."
"the oppressor makes his violence a part of the functioning society. But the violence of the oppressed becomes disruptive." https://unableunwilling.wordpress.com/2016/06/03/the-pitfalls-of-liberalism-by-stokely-carmichael-kwame-ture/
An audio reading of this text....the voice is kinda eh but it helps if you dont have time or focus to read
This analysis isn't eternal. Kwame speaks about the white liberal of his time but 2020 has produced the diverse liberal. They are the new vanguard of stopping confrontation. In fact, the white liberal pushes the diverse liberal to the front-lines of stopping confrontation.
A final points on violence: no to dogmatism. Violence isn't the universal method that must be applied in all cases -- there are a few things to consider:
1. People like to misunderstand that famous line "political power grows from the barrel of a gun" power isn't created by the gun but the gun strengthens it, especially against those who wield guns. Our goal is to permanently abolish the gun even if it means using the gun to do so
2. Violence must not advance beyond the consciousness of the masses otherwise you alienate the masses, especially in the face of non-violent liberalism being a dominant ideology. Material conditions MUST be assed before reaching a stage of violence: popular support+strong defense
3. Also there shouldn't be a romanticization of violence. It isn't the "ultimate stage" of political power, it is the unfortunate stage of political power. Violence isn't an aesthetic. Individuals enacting violence on "behalf" of the people, without the people, betray the people
