• PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    13 hours ago

    “So we’re going to take up violent action then, right?”

    “Oh, God, no, we’re just going to sit here and sneer at those who are trying to change the system without violence, or without enough violence.”

    • underisk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 hours ago

      The problem with violent action is that, to have a chance to succeed, you need a critical mass of support. Not like 50% or anything, but enough that you can’t be easily quelled. The only way you build that support is by suggesting violent resistance to people who scoff at you and accuse you of being unserious until the last straw finally breaks their back and you don’t sound so ridiculous anymore.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Violence is a top-tier solution for lower ranked cognition, where the notion of “hit thing” is a quality solution toward the final stages of attempted problem-solving. Fortunately, people in this situation tend to share the side effect of apathy, so managing to pull together enough “hit thing” people into an organised cohort rarely occurs, or fizzles shortly after take off.

      • Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Wrong.

        Violence is the supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived.

        When all else fails violence is the final answer.

        What do you do when someone is violently trying to knock down your door?

        You call the police and they come and they ask the person to leave nicely.

        He refuses and gets more aggressive, either they restraint him and drag him away or use some other method that involves violence.

        I challenge you to show a real world example of ending oppression that was achieved by asking nicely when one side refuses to come to the negotiating table.

        • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 minutes ago

          See that last stipulation is problematic. You are saying give an example but you are filtering out every possible example which would be when one side refuses to come to the negotiating table. Now granted im not saying you are wrong but in evaluating and thinking of an answer the problem of the logic with the when statement immediately pops up. Non violent protest leads to negotiation. bzzz. can’t use it. As I said in another post violence will happen. One side can be nonviolent but I can’t think of a case where they were nonviolent and violence was not done to them.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.”

        OTOH, here we are.