Honestly, I think it’s OK to hold a bit of both beliefs and have that dissonance generate a sort of shame-tinged discomfort.
Violence should, by any rational and reasonable measure, be avoided. But that doesn’t mean that violence isn’t necessary at very specific points. To be more specific, the threat of violence can be a powerful equaliser when faced with aggressive, unrelenting abuse wrapped in denial.
We still shouldn’t glorify it, though. Snitches get stitches in this not related to current events context, because a show of force is necessary to establish the veracity of said threat. But we shouldn’t forget that murder is murder, even when the murdered was a murderer.
When you say something like, violence should be avoided, I have no idea what you mean. Avoided by who? Avoided when? Certainly law enforcement has done a lot of horrible things, but if you think they ought to exist, then you are explicitly endorsing the use of violence.
Avoided by any living thing when it would be directed or would affect any other living thing. I don’t care if you punch your fridge, for instance. I do care if you punch something with a pulse. That punch better have a damned good reason, like being aimed at a Nazi. Or a cop. Or a Nazi cop. Oh, who am I kidding, that’s pleonastic.
Violence should be avoided, which is why our healthcare system needs to be replaced by a single payer universal system like the rest of the developed world. The current system is violence. social murder is violence.
Exactly! Violence is literally just a thing that exists (I’d argue a sun swallowing a whole planet is pretty violent, for instance), the essence is in the how, when, and why!
Honestly, I think it’s OK to hold a bit of both beliefs and have that dissonance generate a sort of shame-tinged discomfort.
Violence should, by any rational and reasonable measure, be avoided. But that doesn’t mean that violence isn’t necessary at very specific points. To be more specific, the threat of violence can be a powerful equaliser when faced with aggressive, unrelenting abuse wrapped in denial.
We still shouldn’t glorify it, though. Snitches get stitches in this not related to current events context, because a show of force is necessary to establish the veracity of said threat. But we shouldn’t forget that murder is murder, even when the murdered was a murderer.
When you say something like, violence should be avoided, I have no idea what you mean. Avoided by who? Avoided when? Certainly law enforcement has done a lot of horrible things, but if you think they ought to exist, then you are explicitly endorsing the use of violence.
Avoided by any living thing when it would be directed or would affect any other living thing. I don’t care if you punch your fridge, for instance. I do care if you punch something with a pulse. That punch better have a damned good reason, like being aimed at a Nazi. Or a cop. Or a Nazi cop. Oh, who am I kidding, that’s pleonastic.
Get out of here with your “nuance” and “reasonable, balanced” takes. We clown in this mf
Ok :-<
Please don’t actually get out of here though we appreciate you
I’m Commander Shepard, and this is my favourite community on Lemmy ;)
(Thank you!🤗)
Violence should be avoided, which is why our healthcare system needs to be replaced by a single payer universal system like the rest of the developed world. The current system is violence. social murder is violence.
100% agreed.
But we should also recognise when violence
a. Is bad
b. Is completely legal
And that this is, in fact, a bad thing. And we should question why such violence is legal.
… Even if you come out at the other end deciding that yes, this is how it should be. The only “wrong” thing is not thinking about it.
Exactly! Violence is literally just a thing that exists (I’d argue a sun swallowing a whole planet is pretty violent, for instance), the essence is in the how, when, and why!