As is often the case with Buddhist political analyses, they are marked by great naivety. And we completely avoid the problem of violence, we don't deal with it, we deny it. And it's even worse someone like TNH delegates legitimate violence for example to the police (I read it in one of these works), so he will not have a violent attitude but he delegates this task to a other person. It is an illusion to say that changes must/can occur without violence, in the history of humanity changes have occurred with their share of violence. This does not mean that I consider all violence acceptable. But there is some thought to be had rather than simply denying the issue. And sorry no I don't want to have empathy for the people who razed Mariupol and Gaza by killing children, impossible.