sorry. broken glass and damaged property is a loss of something of great value. luigi has the right teaching.
this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
266 points (95.2% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
1661 readers
779 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc.
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
Destroying someone's property can ruin their life. Property is often required to make money. If your job has to close you aren't getting paid. If someone burns your car and you can't get to work you're not getting paid. If you're not getting paid you're not getting rent/groceries. Many people don't have much of a safety net to cover those losses.
If some egregious shit happens and people want to burn down a court house or police station I won't bitch about it. Vandalizing places that had nothing to do with it is asshole behavior.
Human lives can be replaced just ask Job about his kids....
That story only makes sense if his wife and kids are property, not people.
I agree with the picture, but not the title. Nonviolent action is an option and was successful many times. Contingent on the situation, it can be more effective.
Nonviolence has practically never been successful. It has always accompanied violence in order to give itself legitimacy. From MLK to ghandi, violence was used along side nonviolence to maximize strain on the oppressors.
Violence works, ask Saigon what it's new name is.
Not a single right of ours has ever been won via nonviolence.
Both can be true. And things such as denying healthcare can be wrong, unethical, reprehensible, etc without being violence. There are other forms of bad things.
They can be considered violent when people die due to those decisions when the only rationale to deny them was in order to provide $3 EPS rather than $2.98 that quarter.
It's a matter of conceptualizing violence.
A medieval siege was a battle of attrition. Encircle the castle and just starve them out.
Is this violence even if no one was stabbed and everyone starved?
Wage suppression and inflation are ultimately the same battle of attrition wherein the working class is pushed into poverty. Wage theft from employers is as much as 80% of all theft in the US.
I've never seen a fucking corporation in handcuffs and yet they're still people with tax breaks and infinite political contributions. Odd coincidence.