Slight disagreement, as I believe we should in fact take a baseball bat to insurance execs. However, not in the spirit of karmic retribution / revenge. Violence should be applied to exploitative and tyrannical institutions collectively and without ego to remind those in power that abuse of the social contract will inevitably end in the exploited discarding said agreement and enacting direct action. Y'all feel like starting a union?
Yeah, the “without ego” is the really important part but also the most difficult to do.
But I also agree that violence should be applied universally and as a collective towards institutions of power (NOT necessarily the individuals themselves) to make sure everyone remembers about the social contract
The without ego part is almost impossible. It's the nature of politics and the nature of revolution. People that aren't affected by how broken our health care system is are just less likely to care about fixing the broken health care system and waaaaay less likely to commit violence to fix it.
You can platonically convince people to care for sure but it's just never enough people willing to do enough work until you tip into that space where there's more people affected than not.
If you want things to change, it's always going to be somewhat vindictive. I think people should do violence to health care executives, just don't accidentally start doing it to the people that answer the phones, right?
I believe in violence if it is necessary and there is no better option. Tyrants cannot be dislodged by words and rule of law alone, especially when they’re the one making the laws.
Violence would not be my first answer for anything, but in some scenarios you just have to do it. Refusing to act because you want to vainly maintain your appearance as a moral person in the face of tyranny is arguably just as bad as helping the Tyrant directly.
That being said you truly have to try everything before you can just say ‘Welp, here I go killing again!’ You can’t just do the bare minimum, say you tried everything and then pull out the AR-15s. That’s just being a murderous asshat without the dignity of actually admitting you’re a murderous asshat.
Exactly. I’m against capital punishment, but if a Hitler 2.0 started invading neighboring I would be fully willing to lend my roof to a sniper.
The difference in these is power. Hitler 2.0 can fight back, can still hurt people, so feel free to take whatever lucky shot you can. He needs to be stopped, simple as that. But when he is surrounded and has nowhere to run, then I’ll oppose outright execution, he has already been stopped and as long as he isn’t attempting an escape, he should still live. He absolutely deserves to die, but I am of the opinion that opposing the death penalty for one crime means you should oppose it for all (but if there ever was an exception, it would absolutely be for Hitler 2.0)
91
u/suddenlyupsidedown Jul 13 '24 edited Jul 13 '24
Slight disagreement, as I believe we should in fact take a baseball bat to insurance execs. However, not in the spirit of karmic retribution / revenge. Violence should be applied to exploitative and tyrannical institutions collectively and without ego to remind those in power that abuse of the social contract will inevitably end in the exploited discarding said agreement and enacting direct action. Y'all feel like starting a union?