To be clear, I wasn’t just asking a purely rhetorical question. I think there is a real answer and it matters.

My own answer to the question is that a non-violent protestor being martyred is mainly useful because it shows people the futility of clinging only to peaceful protest, because if one side is dogmatically peaceful and the other is not, the other will win. So it’s useful to have them (not that we should be throwing people’s lives away, of course), but acting like we need to just be in the business of endlessly producing martyrs until the people are finally awoken and this means things change without violence is complete nonsense. Martyrs facilitate uprising, and Good is already a martyr, so telling people not to take up arms over Good because they would not become adequate martyrs is simply silly.