Correct. Nobody wants violence. But we have to be realistic about this situation if we’re going to affect real change.
this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2025
82 points (97.7% liked)
/r/50501 Mirror
665 readers
906 users here now
Mirrored /r/50501 Popular Posts
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
I would argue Trump wants violence. Violence can be spun by controlled media into justification for martial law that Fox viewers will see as necessary.
So don’t miss.
Fortunately attacking his friends works just as well and Trump doesn't have any empathy to care about what happens to others so burning Elon's cars is effective.
Don't forget about the lawns around the California and Texas headquarters. I saw this yesterday in front of the Fremont Tesla headquarters:
A big ass "Nazi Fuck" carved into the grass. The rain probably washed away some of the chemicals that would have made a more pronounced mark but it's at least happening.
The right wants violence against them to justify using grunts to solve the problem. Attack the grunts beforehand, specifically the police and law enforcement organizations by doxxing and exposing them. They scare easily, that's why they wear masks to Nazi flag events.
The best tactic right now is to use property damage to harass and weaken their feeling of safety without doing anything actually dangerous. Fuck up their lawns. Make them do actual work for once in their lazy conservative lives.
You’re right, we should do the tried and true liberal way of preventing fascism, which is by doing absolutely nothing of value. That’s always worked historically. When has violence ever stopped fascism?
I want violence and I think you can make a reasonable argument that a lot of people want violence given the response to Luigi. I'm tired of watching rich people and fascists shit all over Americans. We can't continue on this path any longer and they've made it clear they have no intent to change things willingly which leaves us with the one option.
Exactly. Those who think we can legislate or lawsuit out of this are sadly naive. The fascists will cling to power until they are violently ousted. The collateral damage will be significant.
A general strike could achieve the same end potentially non-violently
How would a general strike change anything? The oligarchs know they can wait normal people out. Even if half the population went on strike for a week, the only result would be the people who organized the strike getting "disappeared" so that the dip in profits doesn't happen again. We lost, full stop. Peaceful means will not end Trump's tyranny.
I actually expressed a very similar sentiment to my SO recently... Don't get me wrong, I'm as pacifist as they come, but at the same time if one finds out one has cancer we don't exactly just try to negotiate the tumor(s) away, do we? Ironically enough, it seems the one thing you can't be tolerant of is intolerance.
If you try to work with the cancer, eventually it's just going to take over, so... Sucks for the cancer, I guess, but that means it gets excised. If it didn't want that outcome then maybe it shouldn't have been ~~so orange and fascist-y~~ such an unrepentant, deathly toxic piece of shit entity.
Or, as I like to put it: "Play shitty games; Win shitty prizes."
Pacifism doesn't mean 'no violence ever.' It means that violence is the last resort.