Cars kill more people in both raw numbers and by proportion
Do you have any idea how much blood fascism will shed?
Yes, arming the public will get people killed, do you think death camps are a preferable alternative?
The government still needs people to enforce their laws, you can't use fighter jets, bioweapons, and nuclear weapons against your own citizenry without losing legitimacy and leading to a civil war where foreign governments would arm all sides. Take a look at Syria, they successfully overthrew the Assad regime with the support of other nations.
We currently have armed unidentified state thugs snatching random minorities off the streets, that's the sort of government abuse that could be stopped if liberals were armed. The state can only go so far in using force against their own citizens before it fractures and we look like the Syrian civil war.
Explaining that they aren't silent and just make guns less likely to damage hearing is the most appropriate answer to someone asking why they're needed.
Its also reasonable to assume someone asking why they're needed assumes they're used similarly to how they're presented in pop culture
Armed resistance, or any kind of violent resistance whatsoever, should be the absolute last resort.
I don't think anyone here is arguing against this, we're just saying it's time to be prepared for if that time comes because we won't be given advanced notice.
We have a government controlled by people dedicated to consolidating their power and ensuring they won't be opposed. Unidentifiable armed thugs are grabbing people off the street and shipping them to torture camps.
I sincerely hope this can be resolved peacefully, but the reality of the situation is we have to be prepared for if it can't be.
Obviously don't fire the first shot; but if they do, it needs to be met with a shot back.
imo an important part of discussing what someone is doing to help is discussing how much we can trust them and how they're capable of helping. That mecessitates discussing what they're bad at.
You're 100% right there's a time and a place. I think a discussion in a left-leaning place like Lemmy with essentially no impact on what action people take is an appropriate place.
The solution to the left cannibalizing itself isn't to ignore issue with people, it's to acknowledge those issues and seek out what we can work together on. Random online leftists aren't meaningfully getting in the way by criticizing him, I'd argue it's important so we keep in mind where he's an ally and where he's an enemy.
Working together doesn't mean we have to pretend our allies have no issues.
Newsom doesn't meaningfully resist fascism and his brand of politics are a major part of why we're here. Yeah, I'll stand by him while he's fighting, but that doesn't mean we can't criticize him.
We can't afford to see him as a true ally. He will abandon everything we're fighting for if it benefits him. A tiny percent of leftists criticizing him online amongst themselves will have no impact on how successfully the fascists are able to seize control.
I'm out there alongside liberals who hate most of what I believe, we can be open about that while still working together. We have a common enemy that needs to be stopped.
It means working with people you don't like but it doesn't mean we have to pretend they're perfect, or even good.
Not when cooking that meal could let them become head chef.
Newsom has his eye on the presidency, and he could win it if he becomes defined by this and not all the terrible shit he's done.
He's thrown vulnerable people under the bus and has no principles other than what he thinks will help his career. Yeah, he's doing the right thing here, but let's not pretend he's good because he's doing the bare minimum
We can work with him while recognizing he's not a true ally