Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
I will instead refer you to page 9 of the document you felt you free to deride without the benefit of a quick scan first to see how it might measure up to your dogma:
I did not deride the document. I merely expressed surprise at the conclusion as stated, because it did not seem insightful. Thus-
"Nonviolent resistance is a civilian-based method used to wage conflict through social, phychological, economic, and political means without the threat or use of violence.
No threat of violence - thus politics in the truest sense of the word.
It includes acts of omission, acts of commission, or a combination of both. Scholars have identified hundreds of nonviolent methods - including symbolic protests, economic boycotts, labor strikes, political and social non-cooperation and nonviolent intervention - that groups have used to mobilize publics to oppose or support different policies to delegitimize adversaries, and to remove or restrict adversaries' sources of power.
Again, all political instruments. None of this should be the concern of anyone in uniform - bar Policeman.
Nonviolent struggle takes place outside traditional political channels, making it distinct from other nonviolent political processes such as lobbying, electioneering, and legislating.
And? This statement attempts to draw a false distinction between formal political processes and real politics in the wider sense. Poll Tax Riots? Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament? Greenham Common? These are all well tracked and well understood aspects of politics since time began.

Sorry Bob, I full confess to not getting it. I grew up with Protests, Strikes and Boycotts. They pure politics in one of it's most unambiguous forms.