Not same but he did advocate.
In his communist manifesto, Karl Marx said - The Communists… openly declare that their ends can be attained "only by the forcible overthrow" of all existing social conditions.
Later, at communist league he said - There is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society… can be shortened… "revolutionary terror."
For him, violence is necessary if required. He didn't glorify it but he advocated it clearly.
That is not the advocacy for violence like most associate it with. As I said, many think of Stalin, Lenin, and the actual violent revolutions when they think of Marxism. They assume Marxist WANT violence and that the theory is about spreading violence. They say "They're Marxist!" in the vein that they want violence for the sake of it, and has the goal of ruining the lives of everyone. Aimless rioters and gangs per se. Karl Marx and Marxism does not/did not
preach violence like Revolutionary Marxism and Leninism.
Marxism is the belief that class war is the central driving force of historical change, and that capitalism by its very nature exploits and creates class inequality, and therefore must be supplanted. It also believes that revolution is inevitable because the exploitation will not stop until revolution starts.
However, Karl Marx did advocate for peaceful solutions if possible, and believed that Democratic avenues to social and economic changes should be taken if available to achieve peaceful process. He just thought that in most situations, democratic process in unavailable for the nation, leaving revolution the
only option left. A revolutionist believes any process that isn't revolution is futile.
Marxism = "yeah he gonna blow it up at this rate. Might as well get ready if shit doesnt change."
Revolutionist and Leninism= "Let's blow that shit up right now! "