We need to stop Trump from being elected or he will destroy democracy.
We need to shoot all the Trump supporters.
Nooooooooo, not like that!
You can, if you stop abstaining or voting third party out of protest. You can’t blame the electoral system for being ineffective if you don’t use it right.
Y’know the old saying about the best and second best times to plant a tree? Sweeping political change takes time. You need progressive candidates to prove themselves on local and state levels.
It’ll take 6 years to replace every governor and congressperson, and based on the landscape I see, at least 5-10 years to promote enough progressives to a position suitable to candidacy. 15-20 years of voting for capable progressives in every race from school board to governor will provide us with a rich crop of experienced candidates.
That does mean voting lesser evil until you can get proven progressives on the ticket. That’s just reality. If you don’t vote for a candidate that wins, you didn’t get even the most meager semblance of representation. Not getting what you want because the voters that disagree with you outnumber the ones that agree is the fundamental principle of democracy. Show up. Vote, for someone who might win.
Republicans planted their tree 50 years ago. Progressives’ best move in the next few elections is show up in droves to big tent blue wave, and then splinter when the Republican party is defunct.
Just seems like an excuse for tone policing of you're going to be putting so many qualifiers on it
What? You think I get my rocks off on "tone policing"? Why would I seek an "excuse" for it? It's not even a question of tone, it's a question of real content, real actions, because it is a question of rehabilitative versus retributive justice.
I agree with you completely then, at least when everyone involved is calm. Restorative justice is always better than killing people or making them suffer for no reason except some sort of glorified sadism. I do think, though, that there are lots of things that are considered "revenge" normally that really aren't in a retributive vs rehabilitative justice sense. I don't think some peasant killing a king or lord in a revolt is revenge, even though it might have some very similar emotions, because it's done due to a lack of other practical options available to attempt to rehabilitate them. Same for pretty much most other political ruling classes when it comes to those situations.
The place we're likely to disagree is when it comes to premeditated and spontaneous revenge. I actually think someone being angry and taking revenge in response to an injustice is an understandable response, granted of course that it is an actual injustice done to them and not some sort of reactionary mental gymnastics. But this is particularly defined by the lack of space for rational thinking. The moment someone's able to "take revenge served cold" and actually does so it becomes super questionable to me, because it means they weighed their options and decided to go stab someone for next to no direct benefit to themselves.
I mean, if someone is really mad and pulls some shit, that doesn't make it not incorrect, it just means there were mitigating factors to the misdeed. The logical consequence of saying people just aren't responsible for themselves when they are angry is that they would feel emboldened to give in to their worst impulses when they are angry despite the fact that being mad does not actually negate your ability to control yourself, just makes it harder.
(And of course of killing is the only viable option, go for it)
Makes sense