Strongman
\r\nWhen NATO started bombing Serbia in the spring of 1999, some of the people who were most bitterly opposed to Milosevic’s rule caught themselves supporting our genocidal president as he defiantly stood up to the West. It was like some primordial wellspring of tribalism bubbling up. During a speech by Milosevic just after the bombs started falling, one of my fellow Otpor! leaders even caught himself cheering on the dictator, gushing (to his embarrassment only moments later), “Go get them, Slobo!” But it was a normal reaction, because when your cave is in danger, you root for the chief to succeed. Even if the guy is a jerk.
\r\nThis helps explain why all forms of violence—whether we are speaking about the killing-fields variety we see in Syria or the protest burning of McMansions by militant environmentalists in the United States—are so much less effective in bringing about lasting social change than peaceful measures are. Violence scares people, and when people are scared, they look for a strong leader to protect them.
\r\nIn nonviolent action, you're trying to win by converting people to your cause—be they ordinary people like traffic policemen or big shots like newspaper columnists—and getting them to fight your battles for you. You're building group identities and creating new communities that will hopefully have enough mass to cause people to gravitate toward your cause. And because you're not frightening anybody off with violence, your friends and neighbours won't feel the instinctive need to be protected by a strongman. This, in the end, is the only way you'll get people to abandon that big ugly brute who guards your cave.
\r\n Compiled From:
\r\n \"Blueprint For Revolution\" - Srdja Popovic, pp. 202, 203