Liberals right now...
Liberals right now...
Cross-posted from "Liberals right now..." by @return2ozma@lemmy.world in !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
Capitalism is violence. Having billionaires while people starve is violence. Denying healthcare while spending billions on military is violence. Supplying weapons or finances to states commiting genocide is violence.
Right now, if you are passive, you are complicit in immense amounts of violence.
Somehow this is lost on liberals. (Or alternatively they believe the once every 4 years elite propaganda contest [elections] or strongly worded petitions are the only effective ways of dissent).
Seriously! I don't understand why this is such a hard concept to grasp
Just because it's a passive or hidden violence, or done from a complete disregard of people, doesn't make it less violent towards the affected
It's like the whole thing of how "murder is bad but war is acceptable". Like, why is one perceived so different just because it's state sanctioned? It's considered abhorrent to talk about violently removing a war criminal from their position of harm. It's complete nonsense
But what if i get table scraps from the violence and so don't want to get rid of it because i like my treats?
Okay but uts not violence if i don't consider them people, or have to think for a second to assign accountability to a specific person.
Could be. Stopping working for the system, with massive strikes. There is nothing they fear more. But they will exercise violence first, have no doubt. They are the lords and masters of violence. With violence they have the upper hand. A difficult situation to manage.
History has shown us again and again that when capital feels threatened, it gets violent anyways. Look at how many strikes have been beaten down, shot or even bombed (look it up, the first plane-dropped bombs in the US were dropped on striking miners)
I dislike violence, and I don't think it's good strategy to start it (that's why I'm a syndicalist), but realistically, we should be ready for the reaction.
look it up, the first plane-dropped bombs in the US were dropped on striking miners
Lest we forget about the Black Wall Street massacre.
You need stockpiles of food, water and heat.
But yes, this is the way.
It won't be violent if the ruling class don't make it violent.
That is to say, it will be violent.
Downvoted for insinuating protests should be violent to work, which is playing into the administration's cards to declare martial law.
So let me get this straight, you're worried about giving the fascists who have shown zero compunction about lying and making shit up at literally every turn a justification for being fascists? They've been spinning non-issues into crises and fabricating bullshit whole-cloth the entire time, why do you imagine they care whether their reasons are legitimate or not? Do you think they would just stop being fascists if everybody was super chill? Someone else refuted that idea far more eloquently than I can::
Well yes but i don't want to go outside. Outside is scary.
So im making this a principles thing.
Peaceful protesting can work especially if you have 3.5% of the population consistently protesting.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world
But violence also works. People have died to make 40 hour work weeks, minimum wage, child labor laws, health laws of all kinds. The LA riots of the 90s were a net gain for the city.
Violence isn't always the answer, but it's an effective one when other avenues don't work.
ETA: billionaires will never let you vote away their power.
I am not advocating violence but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragette_bombing_and_arson_campaign
The LA roots i6f the 90s were a net gain for the city.
I agree with your general point but can you expand on this?
Do you believe that 100% of people, out of millions, will not be violent while they can see what is happening with this government?
Do you believe the government will not resort to agent provacuteurs to get the outcome they desire?
I think you're correct that the government wants to declare martial law, but I also believe that some violent act will occur somewhere, and it will be used against the people.
Sorry, but I don't think you're gonna end this system with peaceful protests.
Downvoted for not having a damn clue.
The administration can just lie and say the protests are violent, that's how they got troops on the ground in California.
Small, little known loophole called "no one will stop me".
Well, one side of them is pretty violent.
Aren't they trying to declare martial law right now anyway?
Well, yeah, but, see, we can't give them an excuse to do something radical, like bring the marines in.
Like, whoever those guys in camo who pointed rifles at me on the way to the grocery store yesterday were scary enough.
Easiest trick: Show two options, let people pick a side and then pitch them against each other.
The problem is complex enough that both options are hammers that won't help to repair a watch.
Most are just too afraid to say they're afraid, perhaps, which is a more understandable position.
lol
Please tell us which achievable violent action you would take that would work to change the system. Please be specific and tell me how this action would facilitate change.
Short of straight-out illegal actions there is a lot of civic disobedience that organized groups of people could do. In this day and age maybe it will be construed as illegal, but goes beyond the conventional notion of protest.
“murder is bad but war is acceptable”.
War isn't acceptable, that doesn't mean the other guy with plenty of guns isn't going to war with/at you.
Avada Kedavra ain’t violence.