The leader of a conservative think tank claims that most recent political violence in the U.S. has been caused by left-wing extremists, but the data paints a different picture.
Right-wing extremists were just as likely to commit violent acts as those motivated by Islamic extremism, the researchers found. Left-wing extremists were a distant third.
I can’t speak for every leftist, but I don’t think anything can really be accomplished through individual, random acts of violence. Then again, I don’t really think very much of anything can be accomplished through any means, really. I’ve come to see hope as futile and change as impossible. But, I do think acts of violence are especially futile. Plus, I don’t really want to hurt anyone, even people I don’t like very much.
I’m pretty sure if you, like, locked the doors at cpac and filled the rooms with carbon monoxide so they all died, you’d accomplish quite a lot. It wouldn’t fix everything, but a lot of evil doers would be gone.
I don’t know, I’m not so sure. The problems are systemic, not necessarily a result of a few people of poor moral character just doing evil things. So, even if you eliminate all the evil-doers, because they were products of the system, new evil-doers will emerge to take their place, so long as the system remains unchanged.
I don’t entirely disagree. However, if enough of the active evil doers were removed, it would be easier to change the system. Like, we could fund education better if we didn’t have Republicans constantly trying to gut it.
I think that makes sense, but I think when you try to remove those people who are obstacles to change using violence, you run the risk of making them seem sympathetic to the average person. I think that can end up bolstering those people and their opposition.
I can’t speak for every leftist, but I don’t think anything can really be accomplished through individual, random acts of violence. Then again, I don’t really think very much of anything can be accomplished through any means, really. I’ve come to see hope as futile and change as impossible. But, I do think acts of violence are especially futile. Plus, I don’t really want to hurt anyone, even people I don’t like very much.
I’m pretty sure if you, like, locked the doors at cpac and filled the rooms with carbon monoxide so they all died, you’d accomplish quite a lot. It wouldn’t fix everything, but a lot of evil doers would be gone.
I don’t know, I’m not so sure. The problems are systemic, not necessarily a result of a few people of poor moral character just doing evil things. So, even if you eliminate all the evil-doers, because they were products of the system, new evil-doers will emerge to take their place, so long as the system remains unchanged.
I don’t entirely disagree. However, if enough of the active evil doers were removed, it would be easier to change the system. Like, we could fund education better if we didn’t have Republicans constantly trying to gut it.
I think that makes sense, but I think when you try to remove those people who are obstacles to change using violence, you run the risk of making them seem sympathetic to the average person. I think that can end up bolstering those people and their opposition.
Several things can be accomplished: instilling fear, forcing disproportionate responses, provide thinly veiled excuses for… well, almost anything.
It’s just that there’s nothing positive that can be accomplished that way.
Lasting change only comes with compassion and understanding. Violence does not create either of those.