Personally I generally agree with this statement. But there's a very big Asterix on it.

The protests didn't work due to it being violent alone, they were heavily supported by peaceful protests. Violent protest will only work if you have the support of the majority. Violent protest does not work with making meaningful policy change. Policies made out of fear are very sloppy and generally not permanent. However is very good at reaching the news and spreading awareness. It is a short term solution to a long term problem and it very easily can end up harming the chances of meaningful change happening more than gaining so it's a massive double-edged sword.

Peaceful protesting is more effective at making permanent change however is very difficult to raise awareness on, this is especially more so with news media and social media becomming more and more corporatized and starting to actually suppress any type of news that isn't considered extreme or it doesn't follow the parent company's ideology.

If and this is a big if a protest is able to make it into the new cycle and have prolonged coverage, peaceful protesting that ends up impeding day-to-day operations such as a general strike or traffic shutdowns, will have much better odds at succeeding then said same operations via violent means. It's just the world is increasingly starting to criminalize said actions of peaceful protest, which is a very dangerous action. When you take away the humans ability to have a voice, when they become lost at what they /can/ do, it becomes dangerous because at that point all you have is violence.