There is a difference between nonviolence as a moral philosophy and as a practical strategy. The former, frankly, makes no sense, the latter can, and often does make sense; and as I have said repeatedly, nonviolent social movements have a far greater ratio of success.
Before I came to Islam,I was a great admirer of Gandhi, and studied his ideas extensively; as well as the philosophy and strategy of Marin Luther King.
Gandhi maintained that nonviolence is not a tactic of the weak. He said that the capacity to be violent is a necessary component of nonviolence. If a people do not have the capability to use force, their use of nonviolence is not a deliberate choice, but a choice of necessity; that deprives it of its moral value. This is similar to the principle Rasulullah ﷺ explained about how the strong man is the one who can restrain his anger when he has the ability to lash out.
If you are intelligent enough to know that nonviolence as an absolute moral principle is illogical and unnatural, but you find that you are in a weak position; nonviolence is not your ideal choice; indeed, it is suicidal.
Rather, when you are weaker than your opponent, it becomes imperative for you to identify his weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and to target those exclusively and repeatedly to offset the imbalance of relative power.
As I have written many times before, any man, regardless of his size and strength has the ability to physically defeat any other man, regardless of his size and strength, if he can identify his enemy’s pressure points. That is precisely what the strategy of economic system disruption does: it targets the most vulnerable points in the power structure, employing minimum effort for maximum impact.
#تكتيكات_التعطيل
#استراتيجية_ثورة
#ثورة_مفتوحة_المصدر
#أهداف_الثورة_مفتوحة_المصدر
#Open_Source_Revolution