It doesn’t matter who is behind it. The whataboutism on this is gross. It doesn’t matter what the other side does, we do not have to stoop to murder or threats. We can all be better.
But heres a comparison people will likely cry about.
At what point from hitlers starting point in politics, to his suicide in the bunker, should the german people have started committing violence to overthrow their government?
This isn’t that, not yet anyway. All bets are off if they start rounding americans up based on their race or political ideology but we should otherwise use our institutions, both the elections and the courts, and freedom of speech.
No I completely agree. I am just posing the hypothetical of when “political violence” moves into effectively “battle for survival under an oppressive regime”
A comment I shamelessly copied from another thread, but it answers your question well.
Everyone in Hitler’s orbit was just as hateful as he was. But in many cases, they were smarter and less insane. Killing Hitler could have easily made WW2 a lot worse for everyone. What if you assassinated Hitler only to cause the Nazis to win?
I think the point I am making is slightly different. I am not suggesting the german people should have killed hitler, job done. I specifically said to overthrow their government.
If the implication isn’t obvious - at what point should the german people have risen up and began a civil war to overthrow the entire nazi government.
Not just one single person, because like you pointed out, it wouldn’t have changed much in the grand scheme.
A war against the elected government in a climate of disinformation doesn’t seem doable. You don’t get a majority until it’s too late.
Efforts has been punched down the same way as in russia. Dictatorships end with war.
The only solution is to not elect fascists in the first place.
What would a civil war in America look like these days, 30+ years of ambushes and small battles until people get tired and end it without a solution? US cities will look like Bagdad and your short lives will be miserable.
Getting violent now as a violent minority will push the majority to the guys defending, not the guys attacking. Trump doesn’t live in a vacuum and he has been coming a long way, but by getting violent now, he will get bonus points.
Your only chance is to not elect him. How do you think you will motivate enough people to kill strangers and neighbours when you can’t even convince them to vote.
So how about starting to make people vote instead of inciting violence on the Internet?
Im not american, im just watching the dumpster fire burning while asking sincere questions about it, and wondering at what point drawing parallels stops being “hurr they arent nazis”
That’s my point. The commentor I replied to got downvoted for condemning violence, while the ones above that should get banned for inciting violence get upvoted like crazy.
And it’s no secret that troll farms have it easy here. Willful audience to eat it all up and get radicalised. I just tried to wake them up to what’s happening on here.
His classmates said he was a bully during high school. This doesn’t appear to be the victim nor the hero Lemmy tries so hard to make us believe.
Just keep in mind, the alt-right are rooting for a civil war for years now. So who do you think is behind inciting lefties to become violent, Lemmy?
It doesn’t matter who is behind it. The whataboutism on this is gross. It doesn’t matter what the other side does, we do not have to stoop to murder or threats. We can all be better.
on principal I completely agree.
But heres a comparison people will likely cry about.
At what point from hitlers starting point in politics, to his suicide in the bunker, should the german people have started committing violence to overthrow their government?
This isn’t that, not yet anyway. All bets are off if they start rounding americans up based on their race or political ideology but we should otherwise use our institutions, both the elections and the courts, and freedom of speech.
No I completely agree. I am just posing the hypothetical of when “political violence” moves into effectively “battle for survival under an oppressive regime”
A comment I shamelessly copied from another thread, but it answers your question well.
I think the point I am making is slightly different. I am not suggesting the german people should have killed hitler, job done. I specifically said to overthrow their government.
If the implication isn’t obvious - at what point should the german people have risen up and began a civil war to overthrow the entire nazi government.
Not just one single person, because like you pointed out, it wouldn’t have changed much in the grand scheme.
A war against the elected government in a climate of disinformation doesn’t seem doable. You don’t get a majority until it’s too late.
Efforts has been punched down the same way as in russia. Dictatorships end with war.
The only solution is to not elect fascists in the first place.
What would a civil war in America look like these days, 30+ years of ambushes and small battles until people get tired and end it without a solution? US cities will look like Bagdad and your short lives will be miserable.
Getting violent now as a violent minority will push the majority to the guys defending, not the guys attacking. Trump doesn’t live in a vacuum and he has been coming a long way, but by getting violent now, he will get bonus points.
Your only chance is to not elect him. How do you think you will motivate enough people to kill strangers and neighbours when you can’t even convince them to vote.
So how about starting to make people vote instead of inciting violence on the Internet?
Im not american, im just watching the dumpster fire burning while asking sincere questions about it, and wondering at what point drawing parallels stops being “hurr they arent nazis”
They are indeed Neonazis, there’s no doubt about it.
You shouldn’t be inciting violence just for your amusement, though.
When it starts in the US, it will land right in the front of your door.
I am not inciting violence, at all. I have repeatedly said I disagree with it.
But at some points in history, when we can look back, I think its valid to consider what could have been done differently.
When I ask these questions, I am not saying violence is the only answer. I am wondering what other pathways could have been taken
Could the german people have rid themselves of the nazis without violence? That would of course be preferred.
Could the US civil war, which really was about “we want slaves”, instead have been entirely nonviolent instead?
Could the american revolutionaries created a new country separate from the british empire, without violence?
That’s my point. The commentor I replied to got downvoted for condemning violence, while the ones above that should get banned for inciting violence get upvoted like crazy.
And it’s no secret that troll farms have it easy here. Willful audience to eat it all up and get radicalised. I just tried to wake them up to what’s happening on here.