Asklemmy

43946 readers

491 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

144

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

474 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Your argument here is just saying, "Political violence is justified if a minority are being oppressed."

I mean, I believe that, but that's not my point. The point is that minority populations will strike back, regardless of advocacy.

Maybe you are tweaking it to be, "Political violence is to be expected if a minority are being oppressed."

That's literally the argument, though. You misunderstood it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The 2nd argument there, the one you claim to be making, is advocating for political violence.

I don't think you're debating in good faith here.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

How is saying "people will eventually fight if oppressed hard enough" the same as saying "oppressed people should fight their oppressors?"

The first statement is analysis of cause and effect, the second is advocacy. You're intentionally misframing it to spread a narrative.