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.
So you’re no longer defending fascists against violent retribution by the people? Do you consider agents of a fascist regime (i.e. police) to be exempt from justified violent action by anti-fascists? Should police action in furtherance of fascist policies only be faced with peaceful protest, or is it morally justifiable to not be tolerant of intolerance, up to and including violence?
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”
So you’re no longer defending fascists against violent retribution by the people? Do you consider agents of a fascist regime (i.e. police) to be exempt from justified violent action by anti-fascists? Should police action in furtherance of fascist policies only be faced with peaceful protest, or is it morally justifiable to not be tolerant of intolerance, up to and including violence?