• Tango@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    I would remind you that this comment chain began with someone suggesting that we’d “only need to lose 50 maybe 100 people”. I’m under no illusions as to what was meant by that, and I’m saying that generally speaking, that sort of “solution” doesn’t improve things. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”, etc.

    Force is sometimes necessary, yes, but generally speaking, the people who suggest it as a first resort before ever having gotten personally involved in attempts at other solutions, are the people who should be kept very far away from the real decision making.

    • wheezy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      47 minutes ago

      No one suggested it first. We’ve been working for decades through peaceful measures. Hell, we’re still doing it now and they are responding with marking our organizations as “domestic terrorist” with both parties spending every ounce of AIPAC funds to stop us.

      Those that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. We are right on that edge right now. We don’t make the choice to use violence. They do.

    • greenbit@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Yeah I’m all for them to peacefully choose exile. But by the looks of it they’re rushing towards the force scenario. Which is then technically a self defense situation.

      And yeah, it’s the hydras head unless there’s bigger changes as well. It’s a small chance either part would work on its own