12·
2 months agoTrue, which is why now is the most important time to condemn political violence, get people politically active, and vote to keep the fascist wannabes out of power.
- 0 Posts
- 161 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
Cake day: June 24th, 2024
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
11·2 months agoRemoved by mod
Removed by mod
I’m not here to defend him. He’s one of the worst of the presidents in our history. His list of horrendous acts goes far beyond his pandemic response and the insurrection, and it goes was past his presidency too. He’s truly awful. But with that being said, things like assassinations and terrorism should not become normalized as a legitimate way of achieving political means.
Removed by mod
no, but nothing is so black and white. do you perhaps think that bullies should always be acquiesced to? that defending yourself from attackers is inherently and unilaterally immoral?
You tell a teacher or parent on a bully and they’ll punish them accordingly, or if you’re an adult you report them to your HR department or whereever. You don’t go and fucking shoot dead a bully. That’s not a sane solution to anything.
they’re the ones constantly (publicly) cheering for me and my kind to be dragged out of our homes and shot for virtue of being born either non-white or non-straight (depending on flavor of republican, maybe both).
I understand they’re discriminatory bigots, but Jesus are you overexaggerating. Like who is advocating for this? I want specific names and sources if you don’t mind, bonus points if they’re from prominent politicians.
the reason violence is no longer acceptable as a mechanism for political change is that we built a system to address grievances without it: our representative democracy. we rose above the need by using the law to ensure everyone can be heard
Exactly, that’s the point, we have a functioning system, so why are you trying to justify terrorism?
they’ve already thoroughly corrupted the highest courts in our country to do so. they intend to continue to close all reasonable avenues of political resolution specifically for the purpose of being able to call any resistance to their rule “terrorism”, as you just have. this itself is an act of political violence.
Assassinations aren’t resistance, what in the fuck are you talking about? Do you seriously not see the problem with self righteous assholes going on terrorism crusades killing political candidates they don’t like? That’s how we move from a stable democracy and into a failed state.
if I corner you in an alley with a gun so you have nowhere to run and tell you to give me your wallet, but I haven’t shot at you or even aimed it at you yet, does this make me non-violent? is it acceptable? would you fight back, or capitulate? how about if I then tell you to leave but not your partner?
What? These situations aren’t even remotely comparable. You’re trying so hard to justify terrorism that you’re not even being logically coherent. No, somebody shooting someone who’s directly threatening them in person as an act of self defense is vastly different from some rando shooting political candidates they don’t like.
the police won’t help you, they don’t help your kind, and you probably brought it upon yourself in their eyes.
Idk what alternative reality you live in, but here in the real world, terrorism is condemned and legitimate peaceful avenues are pursued. Trump should be prevented from becoming president again, but this is done by defeating him in the election, not by fucking killing him and turning him into a martyr. Trump should be brought to justice via the criminal justice system, which has already found him guilty of a crime, not by some self righteous rando shooting.
You take him down either by defeating him through the election or by taking to trial via the justice system, preferably both. Assassinations are not a fucking legitimate means of achieving political goals in democracy. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills for even having to explain something this simple.
the word right has different meaning in different contexts, I assumed you were talking about human rights as in the legally protected privileges that are granted to people… idk wtf you’re talking about
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I mean one could argue that Tibet is an invaded country, but that’s besides the point. The only way we would realistically intervene is if China decides to either invade an American ally like Taiwan, Japan, or South Korea or if they directly attack and declare war on the US proper. Even then, it would be quite a stretch for us to have soldiers reach western China, but if we did and if our soldiers found camps where people are imprisoned, then we would have a similar reaction to what we saw towards the end of WWII. However, until then, we don’t have sufficient grounds to invade a major world power.
That is a fair point, I’ll keep that in mind.
Fair, but the situation is similar to what’s happening to Uyghurs in China right now. We know something is going on there, but it’s not exactly sufficient grounds to invade China and intervene.
I believe he lost fairly to Biden in 2020, but the DNC 100% screwed him in 2016 to favor Hillary.
A more accurate comp would be some American trying to assassinate George Washington because he didn’t like him.
The ends don’t justify the means politics, that’s how you end up with terrorism, tyrannical governments, and atrocities. I’m all for bringing Trump to justice, but it has be done through civil and democratic means via the established criminal justice system. If Trump goes through trial and is found guilty, which has already happened for one of his crimes, then our criminal justice system will punish him accordingly. If the punishments aren’t deemed harsh enough then we reform our punitive laws. We can’t have self righteous assholes going on terrorism crusades assassinating political candidates they don’t like. That’s a sign of a failed state.
But these are vastly different situations. For the record, all three of these individuals used political violence to achieve political aims, that’s one of the reasons why history doesn’t remember them fondly. The constantly killed people they didn’t like under the justification that it’s for the greater good or self defense. Saddam Hussien did that when he genocided the Kurds in Iraq and the invasion Kuwait, Hitler did that with the Holocaust and the invasion of Europe, and Bin Laden did that with 9/11 and the other terrorist attacks he launched.
Keep in mind, we actually have a justice system in this country that actually works. If we want Trump to face justice it has to go through the justice where he faces trial and is found guilty based on evidence… which has already happened btw for one of his crimes. That’s how justice is handled in a civil democracy. We can’t have randos going on self righteous terrorism crusades killing political candidates they don’t like. If someone tried assassinate Biden, would you being say the same? Probably not, and rightfully so, but the terrorist who tried to kill would be making similar justifications to what you’re trying to make right now. The very idea is wrong.
There’s a distinction between war and terrorism. Terrorism is done by non state actors, wars are done by states. For example, there’s a very big difference between the democratic government of the Philippines voting to fight ISIS in their southern islands, and some random ISIS terrorist trying to kill the Filipino president to intimidate non muslim candidates from running for president.