They're afraid!
I think the health insurance companies are actually taken by surprise by the amount of people who sincerely wish them death. Maybe we will see some almost-meaningful change soon?
this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
1254 points (99.3% liked)
196
16743 readers
1841 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm starting to think the whole "Violence is never the answer" is just yet another propaganda piece of the rich
Basically every large successful social change has been built on violence or the threat of it. King might have been a nice speaker and a friendly face, but violence brought people to the table.
He knew it too. When Gandhi got imprisoned, his movement turned violent. If you don't listen to the peaceful protester, you'll get the angry rioter.
"And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard."
-MLK
Gandhi's counterpoint was Subhas Chandra Bose all along.
I strongly recommend a book called The Sword and The Shield, about the dual roles Malcom X and King played in the civil rights era. King very well understood the need for a credible threat of violence, and actually he grew closer to Malcolm X's beliefs as time went on, and that is why he was killed.
At our worst moments, when all else fails, violence is the only answer and everyone, deep down, knows that.
Edit to add: washing King's legacy via history so he appears as purely nonviolent is, I believe, a very deliberate strategy to make us easier to pacify. You'll notice that no high school curricula (barring I'm sure some notable exceptions) have ever taught Malcolm X. Only King, and only his nonviolence! Civil rights safely defanged.
This is reminding me strongly about how the Black Panther Party was vilified and outlawed. California didn't ban open carry for any other reason than to stop black people from being able too.
A critically important piece of our history, yes! The notion of gun control practically at all in this country actually came about because black people organized. Not only did the Black Panthers openly carry while carefully witnessing / observing law enforcement in their community, they also ran many aid programs and focused on the need for education and self-reliance.
And that had to be stopped, and it was.
A lot of racist/white supremacist intent underlined much of early gun control. Before concealed gun carry permits existed in a widespread manner in the late 80s, it was known that if you were the right skin color and weren’t carrying a shitty gun without said permit, cops looked the other way.
White guy with a H&K or Sig Sauer? “Have a nice day day sir”
Minority with a Jennings or Lorcin? Dangerous criminal lying in wait for their next victim
Thank you for the rec! I don't read nonfiction really but I am thinking this is a great place for me to start. That sounds fascinating
Sure thing! It was certainly eye opening, I'd stop short of calling it a page-turner myself, but I think it's important to give myself a better education about our history than our classrooms were able to.
Also, as a sometimes-neurotic reader, in case this is useful - nonfiction especially you can just choose which bits to read if that makes a difference for ya. It's got a flow and a narrative of course, so you'll lose a bit that way, but I've had struggles with other nonfiction books and needed to just try to get to the meat and forgive myself for that, lol. Turns out it's totally allowed, no one even says anything!
Thank you that does make a difference and the last bit made me lol so thanks for that too
It is 100%. Max Stirner talked about that in the 1800s.
I never understood how our country - proudly founded through the uprising of the downtrodden to overthrow their oppressor with violence - could ever honestly think that violence is never the answer. Our national anthem has a stanza specifically dedicated to the rockets and bombs "we the people" used against the British.
Yes. Yes it is, it has been for years and years. They figured out that if they get us to believe violence is inherently bad and should never be resorted to, then they can safely ignore us. It starts early too, with that complete crock of shit about ignoring bullies making them go away.
Violence should never be the first solution, but the threat of it needs to be there if the first attempt fails, and resorting to violence should happen as soon as it becomes apparent that nonviolent methods are not being regarded in good faith.
The lemmy.ml in my name for a reason. My realization moment was while I was in the military ironically enough.
Aren't the admins of that instance a bunch of statists who support the government having a monopoly on the use of legitimate violence? As a communist, drag can't support any ideology where the means of production are owned by an elite class of government officials rather than by the people.
I have not experienced that. But I agree with your position otherwise
https://feddit.nl/post/16246531
I would argue that's an issue of perspective, were I to post things that are hypercritical of western propaganda on world, I would be and have been banned there too. Managing propaganda is not the same thing as the claims made above.
Nowhere in that link was there claims that only the state has a monopoly on violence.
Edit: And I have absolutely been critical of Russia on their communities. As for the China critiques, I imagine they're tired of the same western propaganda ad nauseum
“Violence is never the answer (when it suits the rich)”.