The problem with violent protests is that it is hardly ever the government or their agents that suffer.
It's private citizens, private property, private businesses that suffer.
In the short term that is certianly true. However, if the protests are successful and bring about change to bad policies then it is the citizens, property and businesses that benefit from a more just and productive society over the longer term. The premise of the OP is that violent resistance or at least peaceful resistance backed by a credible threat of violence is 100x more effective in bringing about positive social change. I don't know if history backs up that claim, but if it does then the argument is sound.