Comment by Nursie

> So at what point can we start saying that violence because of words (or shirts) is bad?

Straight away!

> Should we act as if you're a good guy, because it was just a punch?

No, and nobody is asking you to. In fact this is the whole point, can you not distinguish between those two guys?

Neither one is good. You're not being asked to decide one is 'good' and the other 'bad'. You're not being asked to accept that the more minor one is OK because it's not as bad as the other one.

They can both be bad. But they aren't the same. We don't say "Dude A was upset about someone talking smack about his sister too, so he's just as bad as Dude B". Or at least most people wouldn't. But we also don't say "It's fine to punch someone in the gut because at least he didn't cut the guy's throat". Dude A probably gets a night in the cells and a minor punishment, maybe a conviction for assault and released on parole for time served. He's got some anger issues and probably some issues in his relationshp with women. B gets serious jail time.

> now it's somehow become "shitty, but not as bad, because in some other land you'd get shot instead," (and similar excuses)

Nobody's making excuses. That's all on you and how you're deciding to ascribe motivations to other posters. Let me say it again - nobody is saying it's OK. I'm not defending anything. If you think I am I'd invite you to re-read the thread.

> How much closer must UK come to iranian levels, before you start seeing the parallels between the behaviour of the two governments?

One is a strict conservative, theocratic dictatorship that is commiting mass murder in order to hold on to power. The other is a troubled democracy that, as far as anyone can tell, isn't murdering its citizens to keep order but has made some pretty fucked up decisions about what constitutes terrorism and a terrorist organisation. Both of these are bad. But they aren't the same, there are some parallels in their actions, though not so much in either motivation or outcomes. And proclaiming that the actions of the UK or the EU are the same as Iran or Russia or China provides cover for atrocities IMHO, and is straight out of the propaganda playbook those countries like to put about the place. It also just destroys nuance of discussion when basically anything negative may as well be Hitler.

> 10 years ago, getting arrested for wearing a tshirt

Was something that happened occasionally under varying different laws. It was shit then too.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/oct/11/manchester-man-ja...

And if you'd worn a pro-IRA t-shirt in the 80s/90s, you'd have faced arrest for that as well. Still would in fact. The major change that people have a problem with in the Plasticine/Palestine action cases is the classification of a pro-Human Rights, direct-action group as a terrorist organisation, and the suppression of speech as a result of that classification. If you'd like to see a list of all the organisations currently classified this way, there's one here - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror...

I don't think many people in the UK have a real problem with this law as it applies to (say) ISIS, or the Wagner Group, though I know that in some other countries (US?) you are more likely to be able to show support for those without facing sanction because of stronger protections of free speech.