Requirements for positive change to happen via violence:
1. A more powerful foreign entity (or multiple entities) getting involved.
2. The people that actually want change having more physical power (so weapons basically) than the state.
So yeah, neither really apply because America. The mechanisms that allowed the Civil Rights Movement to succeed were visibility more than anything, a lot of which can be attributed to the nonviolent resistance and likely would not have had it been all anarchism all the time. A lot of the violent resistance was straight up useless. Hell, people just kind of shrugged their shoulders after the Watts riots and blamed communism despite the 34 deaths and $40 million in property damage, which in the long term amounted to increased racial tensions even decades later and a nifty thing to reference in music.
We also live in a VERY different era compared to the 60s, which is to say nothing of the fact we're in the middle of the biggest story of most of a lifetime since WWII, which is going to take away any visibility from more social causes assuming things don't escalate to an unreasonable degree.
That Era doesn't understand this is just sad.