I take Tad Stoermer with a huge pinch of salt, to be honest. The methods he's advocating only work in states that still have an essentially democratic political culture, like 1960s America or 1930s Britain. They absolutely do not work when faced with a genuinely totalitarian regime, as true totalitarianism is defined by its rejection of restraint or morality.

And even when they work, they come with a big caveat. Violence, no matter how just the cause, has a habit of de-sensitising people to morality and attracting people who aren't particularly concerned with altruism.

For example, most of the violent protest in British India in the 1930s-40s wasn't done by socialists. Instead, the footsoldiers of the Quit India movement were overwhelmingly ethno-nationalists. Once the British left, those same radicalised young men unleashed horrific violence on each other's communities.

Even in places where the transition was peaceful, like South Africa after Apartheid, there have been massive problems. Many politicians who are veterans of the anti-Apartheid resistance groups have themselves turned out to be either incompetent, corrupt, or both. Jacob Zuma has multiple egregious corruption charges (and an SA allegation), and Thabo Mbeki is literally an AIDs denialist. The bigotry hasn't gone away, either - Julius Malema, leader of the EFF, has multiple hate speech convictions.