• ed_cock@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Violence is supposed to be the last resort to deal with them, I don’t see how this is in any way helpful, good or justified.

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        The last resort according to basic self preservation.

        The other side have guns too. What do you think they’re gonna do when you start killing their people?

        • RedPandaRaider@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          One side is gonna lose in the end. That is all that matters. The world is ruled with violence. Non-violence only is beneficial to those currently in power.

          Basic self-preservation as you put it requires violence. How are you going to preserve yourself when you let people run around who want to opress or kill you?

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            One side is gonna lose in the end.

            And there are plenty of times where this is done non violently.

            Basic self-preservation as you put it requires violence.

            Yes. As a last resort. That doesn’t mean never using violence. It means using it for self preservation, not just because you disagree with them.

            • RedPandaRaider@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              As a last resort is too late. If you can use violence successfully, it justifies itself. Waiting for when it’s time for the last resort is too late. You’re not going to stop the nazis in the spring of 1933, you would have needed to kill them in the 20s, a decade before they came to power. The same applies to any political movement.

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                You’re not going to stop the nazis in the spring of 1933, you would have needed to kill them in the 20s, a decade before they came to power.

                Except such thinking was how we got the Nazis in the first place. Hitler co-opted unions and parties who were extremised by such responses, and these were the basis of the Nazi party.