• azureskypirate@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    You start on the right card, survive long enough to end up on the left card, and get murdered by a right carder…it only ends when a “strongman” or dictator comes to power…is it the French Revolution?

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Personally, I believe overthrowing capitalists, fascists, and monarchs are a good thing. Colonial resistance movements like in Algeria, or settler-colonial resistance to genocide like in Palestine, come from the systems of colonialism and settler-colonialism themselves.

  • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    Umm cowbee, have you considered that by the oppressor’s own laws, norms, or terms the violence is legitimate? Whereas the stinky oppressed are doing illegal bad violence or terrorism.

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Legit I encounter this attitude heaps and have difficulty communicating the problem with it. Especially the often invisible but implicit violent threat that precedes any violent resistance and thus causes the violence.

        It’s really hard to explain why reasonable people resort to armed resistance and the associated atrocities without lighting up the parts of their brain that get them to go “Are you saying terrorism is good?” and shutting down.

        Hard to explain without endorsing sometimes.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Oh yea you’re 100% correct. For some reason, people would rather pick arbitrary starting points for history, like October 7th, precisely to erase the near century of context and genocide behind why Al-Aqsa Flood happened in the first place. It’s all rhetoric and not based in truth, but they use it to make themselves seem reasonable.

  • Hey, that’s not fair. Oftentimes liberals really do differentiate between the two pictures.

    They just decide that violence against the oppressed is ok especially if it preserves the status quo (and the flow of their treats). Violence enacted by the oppressed always needs to be tut-tuted though, for only pacifism is a truly virtuous and acceptable response because anything else might threaten the status quo (and the flow of their treats).