← Back to context

Comment by eyelidlessness

3 years ago

By that logic, no one is advocating violence unless they intend to participate in the violent act directly. It’s a logically consistent position, but it’s also a highly implausible one.

Of course one can advocate for violence without participating in it directly. For example, you could call for a riot. Or for the death of someone directly.

No reasonable person would confuse “the traitor should get the death penalty” with “kill the traitor!”.

  • I guess I’m not a reasonable person then? Advocating for state sanctioned killing is no different to me, in terms of advocating violence per se, than advocating anyone else do the killing. There are surely other distinctions to be made, but “the state should implement violence” isn’t categorically different from any other actor in the same configuration.