you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 3 months ago (1 child)

What I found funnier is that these fictional people armed themselves. They violently opposed their oppressors. But many people are still brainwashed that peaceful protest, or single day protests, will end the oppressions.

You're supposed to make your actions unavoidable to ignore. The oppressors has to consider you a threat to even begin dialogue.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (2 children)

    None of those people live in a democracy. We do. If you overthrow a democratically elected tyrant, the demos who outnumber you will democratically install a new tyrant. The only way to solve the problem and make it last is by convincing the people, not by fisticuffs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    It ceased to be a democracy when he declared himself emperor for life. https://youtu.be/f2H4AI21tEs

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    And it worked, historically, and fictitiously.

    You can't vote your way out imperialism, you need to feverish oppose all forms of oppression. Whether at the ballot, and at a deathcamp.

    #Landback when?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    It did not work fictionally. Nobody supports rebels in a democracy. They are rooted out of their communities and punished as terrorists. Only when it was no longer a democracy did the rebellion work. The same is true historically. If the people being oppressed can vote for their rulers, violently attacking them instead always fails.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Yet Myanmar , Thailand , Nepal , and Spain uprooted their oppressors violently without democracy.
    South Korea kept it's democracy by taking the tyrant violently .

    It just seems the disconnect is plain old complacency.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    Yet Myanmar ,

    Myanmar wasn't a democracy.

    Thailand ,

    This prime minister was removed by the court, not by violence.

    Nepal , and

    This is the only example you gave of a democratically elected official who was violently overthrown. I said that if you violently overthrow a democratically elected tyrant, the majority will simply democratically install a new tyrant. That's exactly what happened in Bangladesh, with the same party being elected after it was violently removed. Nepal seems to be a vanishingly a rare counterexample. We'll see how long that lasts.

    Spain uprooted their oppressors violently without democracy.

    Spain also wasn't a democracy.

    South Korea kept it's democracy by taking the tyrant violently .

    Also removed by the court, not by rebel violence.

    It just seems the disconnect is plain old complacency.

    No, if you violently remove a democratically elected official, that official will be democratically replaced with more of the same. Violence doesn't magically change voters' minds to agree with you.

  • source
  • parent