this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
829 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4067 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A recently released Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) document titled “Domestic Terrorism Symbols Guide”* links common protest symbols to “terrorism” — another marker in a common theme of conflating militant protest for social justice with deadly terrorist violence within the United States. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Brennan Center have raised warnings about such documents, citing inadequate protections for people’s constitutional rights.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 27 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Apartheid in South Africa was solved politically. The Troubles in Northern Ireland were solved politically. The Berlin wall collapsed and the Cold War ended without violence.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Nelson Mandela was accused of being a terrorist because he was one. The ANC mostly killed civilians, "civilians" that just so happened to be key figures in apartheid politics (well, that was their goal, anyways, and it worked well enough)

Also, just how myopic do you have to be to point to the collapse as the Soviet Union as being "solved politically" while ignoring several decades of proxy wars and an attempted coup?

Shit, it didn't even resolve that well other than independence for the satellite states, it just left Putin in charge in the end to get a million people killed himself.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah and Northern Ireland involved lots of actual terrorism as well. I didn't claim these were good people. I didn't claim the results were a perfect world.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The point is the violence, or the threat of violence, is what forced people to negotiate in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I don't disagree. The post I was actually responding to implied that protesting was useless and that fascism can only effectively be resisted with guns. THAT is the point I'm responding to.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Apartheid in South Africa was solved politically.

Bullshit. The Apartheid-regime would never have been ended if it wasn't for it's military defeat in Angola and the (extremely violent) uprising in South Africa itself.

The Troubles in Northern Ireland were solved politically.

Bullcrap. If it wasn't for the IRA, Ireland would still be England's doormat.

The Berlin wall collapsed and the Cold War ended without violence.

The (so-called) "Cold War" never ended... the US just switched to new pretexts to wage war on the 3rd world.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

It required both violence and politics to end Apartheid and the Troubles. Politics and nonviolent actions have always used some degree of violence to be successful. Even with famous nonviolent successes like the American Civil Rights movement and Indian independence movements, the potential of the movements to become violent played a large role.

Gandhi and MLK Jr were dedicated to nonviolence in the formation of their movements. Their nonviolent nature allowed them to become large and organized. Afterall, it's hard to crush a nonviolent movement once it gains momentum. If the members stop believing that nonviolence can bear fruit, some will probably turn to violence. The goal of nonviolent movements is to change laws, constructions that require enforcement through violence.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

War is diplomacy when all other means have failed. The same is true for revolution and resistance id say.

Violence isn't the only resort. It's the last one. And often unnecessary. Though not always.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

"War is the continuation of policy with other means."

-Carl von Clausewitz