Just wondering, man. I mean, I’m willing to go to prison or die anyway- I can’t afford neither rent nor food in either case, so for me the equation isn’t super complex. Just wondering how much more we are going to spread our ass cheeks, my sphincter is getting pretty sore.

Edit: Just so we’re clear, don’t actually speak up or rise up or anything, violence has literally never solved a single problem in the history of mankind even once.

  • adhd_traco@piefed.socialEnglish
    71·
    10 days ago

    A great summary here:
    https://infosec.exchange/@tinker/115832508196201635

    And a lot of links here:
    https://piefed.social/post/1629996

    As for violence never having solved anything…
    I’m not advocating for or against violence, I’m doing my thing and I let other homies do theirs. Though I believe at the very least the least amount of harm possible should always be aimed for.

    But there has also been a lot of disinformation around the history of non-violence. I’m no expert, and this is from memory. Anyone who cares enough or wants to know for sure, should look at the mentioned resource or others. Web searches will generally be unhelpful ime, because they propagate the narrative that MLK and Malcom X were polar opposites over violence/non-violence.

    I think I heard it in Dan Carlin’s “So you want a revolution” episode (free on youtube) where he mentions a quote from MLK basically saying something along the lines of, “I guess violence is here now, so we gotta work with it.” While what I’m saying is pretty hazy, what is clear is that it has been framed consistently that MLK had a fallout with Malcolm X over violent methods. Similar things about the non-violence of Gandhi.

    Violence is used by controlled opposition to delegitimize progressive moments, but they obviously also don’t like it if people are fighting back, making it harder for them to keep oppressing.

    Edit: Also just realised this is casualconverstion. A bit too political imo. I frown now!