[an orange character is driving a bulldozer, facing a house]
I am going to bulldoze your house

[a yellow character is shocked]

[yellow asks politely, hands clasped]
Could you please not do that?

[orange, pushing the bulldozer's controls, answers]
NO!

[yellow walks away from their house, looking dismayed]
Well, I guess I tried to do everything I could
Too bad

[orange smiles smugly as they bulldoze yellow's house]

https://thebad.website/comic/respectable_resistance

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 1 day ago (26 children)

God, this shit is stupid.

Let me explain it one more time:

Violence is part of resistance, but acceptance of violence is part of fascism. One can be violent in a mission to change the world. It is undeniably a fast but chaotic and imprecise way to make change. However, it MUST make you an outcast. If you try to create a society where violence is accepted as a method of change, you won't have a society when you are done. You will have a battledome. You don't get to be the violent extremist and the hero of the people in anything but a fascist regime. Deal with it.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

    This is ignoring nuance of individual cases. It’s mental gymnastics to justify a blanket rejection of violence. This β€œstupid” cartoon isn’t that far from real world examples, and in this cartoon you would be justified in violence to save your home. If your family (or entire culture) was inside you would even be morally obligated to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 16 hours ago (1 child)

    The cartoon is stupid. It's a strawman of 'violence is bad,' that suggests anyone who says so is a true pacifist, or recognition of violence as a problem is somehow equating a slap on the wrist with a sadistic rape/murder. No one actually believes that. It's just negative partisanship to let people feel special for being brave enough to say 'murder is bad.' It's morally pretentious BS that insults the intelligence of its readers, regardless of their views on violence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago

    Damn, someone should tell all those people who successfully fought wars of independence that violence is bad actually. Or all the labor activists who gave us/you eight-hour work days. Yeah the Syrians should've just asked nicely I bet Assad would've listened.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    If we have to accept voting as a useful tool, then violence must also be accepted as a useful tool. Either all tools are used or we're free to cherry pick without people getting upset at what we choose to not use.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 23 hours ago (1 child)

    I don't think that is anywhere contested, see The four boxes of liberty.

    The thing is that order matters and you don't stop using one tool when the next one is justified. For the same reason that you don't stop reporting on illegal behaviors or filing lawsuits, you don't just stop voting and wait on people to start shooting. It makes no sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 17 hours ago

    I never advocate to not vote. I'm a heavy advocate for voting, but voting for the best candidate at every level no matter their party affiliation, including third parties. I'm just tired of "leftists" saying that our only options are voting and protests. Whenever someone brings up getting violent, they're laughed at or told it's not viable. That we shouldn't murder Nazis, including politicians on all sides and cops/ICE, cause that's bad. That if you're going to attempt it, don't link yourself to any leftist movement cause it'll make us look bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 22 hours ago

    Tangent: I sometimes think of voting as a proxy for violence. Humans are extremely dangerous animals. When a society excludes so many people from voting that it fails to reflect the likely outcome of a war, then war is invited.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Thank you for your explanation, I understand things so much better now! I've always celebrated the suffragettes as heroes, but no longer! I always celebrated Nat Turner, John Browne, and the abolitionists, but I see now that they're evil too! I always celebrated the Hatian slave revolt, the resistance movements against the nazis, the ANC, the Warsaw uprising, the Ukrainian defense, the fight for Indonesian independence by Sukarno, and so on! They all used violence, what a fool I was for celebrating them! Thank you for making me see the light!

    I completely fell for the "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." take from famed fascist Desmond Tutu. But thanks to your comment, I now see that violence bad. And if guy do violence, then guy bad! I can't believe I never thought of that. What a well thought out take! Good job!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 16 hours ago (1 child)

    Why do some people think sarcasm suggests a superior opinion?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago

    I don't think anyone thinks that. What people do think is that when you attack the form of a comment rather than its content, then you don't really have a response. I strongly suggest you try to find an actual rebuttal to what I said rather than whatever the fuck this is. You might learn something in the process, which is something you seem to be in desperate need of.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    We already have a society where violence is accepted as a method of change. Look at the Iran War, or any of the other wars of aggression. Are they not trying to use violence to make changes in Iran?

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

    Are those things accepted morally or accepted perforce? You don't accept them morally, it would seem. Are you not part of this world? Are you alone in those views? Are those views absent from the American conceptual space? Of course not. Power differentials allow unpopular actions, and the trend toward imperial presidency in America has created a massive power differential.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Are those views absent from the American conceptual space?

    Pretty damn close. And if you look at other wars and conflicts, the idea that we should even consider other options besides violence is often considered dangerously naive, if not outright treasonous. There's a reason why we have a military budget higher than the next 9 countries combined, and why spending was at an all time high even under Biden. Yes, the ruling class is generally more warmongering and has to drag people along to a degree, but they are able to do so without too much trouble, and their propaganda is effective.

    I guess my point is that it's not so much a question of whether violence is an accepted tactic, which I think it always has been and probably always will be, but rather which conditions and targets are acceptable. If violence is seen as acceptable only under certain conditions, then once those conditions are eliminated people can turn to peace while having internally consistent beliefs. And should those conditions arise again, they can switch between war and peace as necessary.

    Like, if innocent people are in danger and violence is the only means of protecting them, you don't need to convince everyone, "violence is cool and good," and then afterwards convince them that's wrong. You just need to convince them, "using violence to protect the innocent is cool and good," and they can keep believing that their whole lives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 12 points 1 day ago* (4 children)

    Are organizing, collective action, protests and strikes violent?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    Nope. Those are all non-violent actions against fascism. But we're starting to worry that non-violent peaceful actions have been ineffective, and beginning to wish for civil violence because bloodshed would be guaranteed to get rid of the 1% of people who are making life miserable for 99% of the population.

  • source
  • parent