Someone recommended I read this book, and Im still forming my thoughts on it. But it is definitely dunk-able, and if anyone has read it I'd like to hear their thoughts
Edit: the big picture complaint I have is that they separated movements into the false dichotomy of "violent" or "nonviolent"
Non-violence tend to work a lot better if it also carries an implicit threat of ultra-violence, which is why the revisionism of indian independence is so infuriating. Because while Gandhi was bringing in massive crowds of people and doing civil disobedience, actual revolutionaries were also out committing acts of violence upon the british.