• StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Thusly, any violent revolution stands a STRONG chance of being shunned by those who do not want a government with sanctioned violence.

    I disagree with this part. Violent revolution—violent opposition to our oppression—is absolutely necessary. However, turning it on ourselves—that is, in any direction other than that which opposes authority—is a recipe for disaster as you say.

    It’s not violence itself that is the problem. There are literally always forms of violence sanctioned by every single political philosophy (including absolute pacifism/non-violence, which sanctions violence performed by the state even if its subscribers often don’t realize this). The question is how and when that violence is performed and by whom, and the anarchist/non-authoritarian answer is that it must only be in the struggle for liberation, not the fight to gain and maintain power over others.

    • Orvorn@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      I absolutely agree. Peaceful protest has never brought meaningful or lasting change. Violent uprisings are the only way to reduce unjust hierarchy, because those in power have never given it up willingly.

        • StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Unending storms of propaganda do a lot to influence how ignorant people react in a situation. And it serves to keep them ignorant as well.

          (Not the person you were responding to, but that’s my take on how people often react regarding Palestine.)

    • aberrate_junior_beatnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      pacifism/non-violence, which sanctions violence performed by the state

      Maybe this is a silly nitpick, but: you can say it unintentionally empowers or enables state violence, but it doesn’t sanction state violence. (FWIW I’m not a pacifist)

      • StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’d say that’s a meaningless distinction, and that actions speak louder than words. But as you will.