Comment by antisthenes
1 year ago
> That is a true, but We should discourage and condemn them picking up guns.
Nonsense. They will and should pick up guns if the entrenched systems no longer serve the purpose of the majority. Sure, it's not ideal.
But sometimes it's the only way to enact change. Some of the most important rights we have today were won with violence.
It's one of the so-called "Four boxes of liberty[1]". When the soap, ballot, and jury boxes are no longer effective, we should not be surprised when people increasingly reach for the ammo box.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_boxes_of_liberty
There is a big moral and social difference between an overwhelming majority of the people and a dissatisfied group.
The ammo box is not justified and should not be tolerated simply because someone doesn't get what they want. That route is a quick decent to societal collapse.
That is how you end up with your incels, anarchist, communists, and Christian fundamentalists shooting anyone who doesnt agree with them.
I was not defending its use, but its existence means it could be used, and that fact acts as a sort of invisible check on what corporate/government power can realistically get away with. If the ammo box didn't exist as an option, then even in a democracy the "overwhelming majority" could do pretty much whatever it wanted to.
Based on impressions I'm seeing online (and freely admitting that this is hardly statistically-rigorous or -defensible sampling) I'd suggest at the very least that dissatisfaction with working within the system is highly palpable. Revolutions are rarely majoritarian viewpoints.
The majority has all the power and the current system is what the majority wants. Being a frustrated minority does not excuse violence.
> Being a frustrated minority does not excuse violence.
-Random Internet comment in response to the colonial uprising and Declaration of Independence, circa 1776
> Being a frustrated minority does not excuse violence.
- random Internet comment in response to the execution of John Brown, 1859
Ethan Hawke has some great lines in The Good Lord Bird as John Brown.
That's untrue on its face. For instance, killing a guy is a way to use power.
It's not one we like, but nonetheless.
I was talking about the power to enact healthcare policy change. I have the power to kick a dog, but that is tangential to the objective of interest.
My point is that healthcare reform is obstructed by the fact that everyday American citizens want very different things and cant agree.
7 replies →
[dead]