| ▲ | mrhottakes an hour ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
It's 100% accurate to say that the history of the United States is filled to the brim with political change via violence. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tenacious_tuna an hour ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Some friends and I read "A People's History of the United States" a while back and were surprised at how true this is. US classroom history textbooks hold civil disobedience up as the One True Way to bring change, but it's alarming how often the backdrop of famous acts of civil disobedience was in fact incredible violence. Our conclusion in our impromptu book club was that made sense: why would the state schools give students lots of examples of how violence against the state was an effective negotiating tool? It was extremely jarring to reconcile with the image of US history we'd been imbued with up to that point, which of course was also a reflection of our socioeconomic status at the time. As a counterpoint, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" is also taught in schools, so it's possible I'm just selectively remembering things. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||