Can’t. Disabled. I’m the type of people that the people you defend will liquidate first after your appeasement has run its course and they don’t have to pretend anymore.
No one said YOU were a fascist, only that you give fascists cover by stating that the people need to deal peacefully with them. The UK is literally arresting and jailing people for speaking out against genocide and supporting freedom for Palestine and your solution is strong language and peaceful protest.
The only thing that stops government violence is populist violence. I’m sorry that offends your sensibilities, but I am absolutely in favor and supportive of violence being used against oppressors.
Following that line of thinking, it would make no sense for American revolutionaries to kill British soldiers, or for Palestinians to kill IDF, or for European resistance fighters to kill Nazi soldiers. Killing low level stormtroopers “just following orders” is the same as killing an occupying soldier “just following orders.” In both instances, you have low level individuals just going along with a status quo that leads to more victimization of innocents. Police who don’t want to become targets should either fight against oppressive tactics internally, or quit and deprive the force of manpower.
Whose arguing? I’m just having a spirited debate on the role violence has in balancing the power dynamic between the ruling class and the governed. I don’t believe that governments should have a monopoly on violence for achieving their goals and that the people have just as much a right, if not more, in using violence as a tool to prevent objective evils.
Ok. Like I said, you go first.
Can’t. Disabled. I’m the type of people that the people you defend will liquidate first after your appeasement has run its course and they don’t have to pretend anymore.
Ah yes, you’re totally not a fraud. Me simply stating your keyboard warrior shit is weak means I am a fascist. Your argument is airtight.
No one said YOU were a fascist, only that you give fascists cover by stating that the people need to deal peacefully with them. The UK is literally arresting and jailing people for speaking out against genocide and supporting freedom for Palestine and your solution is strong language and peaceful protest.
The only thing that stops government violence is populist violence. I’m sorry that offends your sensibilities, but I am absolutely in favor and supportive of violence being used against oppressors.
As others have said, murdering a low level police officer isn’t necessarily justified or going to help a SINGLE thing.
Following that line of thinking, it would make no sense for American revolutionaries to kill British soldiers, or for Palestinians to kill IDF, or for European resistance fighters to kill Nazi soldiers. Killing low level stormtroopers “just following orders” is the same as killing an occupying soldier “just following orders.” In both instances, you have low level individuals just going along with a status quo that leads to more victimization of innocents. Police who don’t want to become targets should either fight against oppressive tactics internally, or quit and deprive the force of manpower.
We really don’t need to argue here.
Whose arguing? I’m just having a spirited debate on the role violence has in balancing the power dynamic between the ruling class and the governed. I don’t believe that governments should have a monopoly on violence for achieving their goals and that the people have just as much a right, if not more, in using violence as a tool to prevent objective evils.
I perceive a conversation where I’m being accused of doing something horrible as an “argument”