Last time we had a major protest in the city of Chicago, 24 people died. That’s a little more than “the slightest consequence or inconvenience”

Luigi’s protest was way more efficient. Only one person has died.

When we have protests large enough to get noticed, we get attacked by the police. Why should the protesters have to suffer? Make the oppressors suffer instead.

The first book is phenomenal. The others are good, but not necessarily “must read”

“Do you want to live in a move civil society where everyone is treated equal, or do you prefer to live in a post civil society where it’s each for their own and we just murder those that we have a conflict with?”

Oh, the first one, absolutely.

But we’re already living in the second one it’s simply obfuscated by an illusion of civility. When the violence is only directed downward, it’s somehow legal and civil, but when it’s directed upwards, they convince the public that it’s wrong.

Some of us disagree with that, and think that mass murderers should be punished even if the law won’t do its job.

So we’re back to the protesters having to suffer.

Nah, I think the oppressors should suffer instead.

The slippery slope is a common logical fallacy. It’s not real. Look it up.

I pointed out how protests are met with the violence of the state, and your response was “it’s not easy”

How else could one interpret that?

So two things.

First off, tell them, not me.

Second, we want to make them think about their opinion so that they can see that they’re wrong. If you’re combative like in your comment above, they’re just going to dismiss you as an asshole and not listen to the point you’re trying to make.

I agree with the other things you said about solidarity.

But your implied view of protests, where the protesters have to suffer violence at the hands of the oppressors, is just insane to me.

And cops have been recorded commiting war crimes against the American people, and guess what the recordings did? Fucking. Nothing.

They brutally attacked protesters during the Vietnam war protests, what are you talking about?

They did in fact stop millions of people in more recent protests, once again by using violence against the protesters.

Whenever we have big protests, we get tear gassed, shot with rubber bullets, beaten with nightsticks, and arrested. Why do you think this time would be different?

Serious mod abuse in this thread. Removing a lot of posts that don’t actually break any rules.

Like I get that you have to ensure that people follow the rules, but you’re waaaaaay overstepping that line.

Edit: seems to have calmed down a few hours after I posted this, now comments aren’t getting removed unless they actually break the rules, as far as I can tell.

Wait, wait, so the right wingers also want the evil CEOs to be destroyed, it’s not just the lefties???

The fuck are we fighting about, then?

No war but class war.

That’s not what that word means.

Anecdotal, but most people I know with conservative parents are leftists.

In a perfect world, that would be ideal. But for at least 50 years, capital has been buying the legislators and we’re backsliding even further from positive change. Without the threat, there’s no reason for them to let things change for the better for the rest of us.

She wouldn’t like it, but she’d understand.

I was just trying to show that taking the high road effectively does nothing, when the opposition is willing to stoop to any level to win.

And that, historically, whether we are non-violent or violent, both have been countered with violence.

You’re absolutely right about the spillover violence, but I would contend that we’re currently experiencing that anyway, as inequality runs rampant and people are forced to crime to survive.

We’ve been trying the peaceful way for my entire lifetime and made no real progress. Perhaps it’s time for a different approach. I’m not really comfortable with it morally, but I’m also not morally comfortable with things staying the way they are for another generation.

But still not answered the question.

I’ll reword it for you, since you want to be pedantic about it.

You’re in the process of seizing the means. They see this and don’t like it. They respond with overwhelming violence (as they have repeatedly in the past)

Now what?

Nice dodge

Okay so once you’ve non violently seized the means, and they come to violently take them back, then what?