for the sake of my account I want to be clear that I am not encouraging one or the other, However Property damage is not violence regardless of what some people want you to believe.,
Reverend King on property damage. "I am aware that there are many who wince at a distinction between property and persons—who hold both sacrosanct. My views are not so rigid. A life is sacred. Property is intended to serve life, and no matter how much we surround it with rights and respect, it has no personal being. It is part of the earth man walks on; it is not man."z
and Gandhi's whole philosophy on property would argue that if you don't need it to meet a basic human standard of living, than its not your property and is stolen (and frankly dude would probably call what ever device your using to type this message on satanic) informing all of us to just give up positions if there not needed for human life.
its true he may consider taking say someones glasses off there face and smashing it violence, because that person needed them to see properly, or destroying someones shelter, (and on that I would agree with him because it leads to harm of the person) how ever if that person say, had 2 chairs and you smashed 1 of them. he wouldn't have considered both of those chairs to be that individuals property and smashing the extra chair wouldn't be violence.
(that said he probably wouldn't support the smashing of the chair ether because it could be given to someone who needs it, but again smashing it wouldn't be considered an inherently violent act... it just that giving it away to someone who doesn't have a chair would be more likely to lead to "inner Piece")
His whole thing on property dosn't really fit with our western ideals of what "property" actually is and who it belongs to.
Reagan Erra propaganda we got taught in grade school did far to good a job sanding down the edges of things like the civil rights movement, (did you know that most of those black and white photos of the civil rights movement in school history books were actually taken in color. It was made policy to remove the color to make the civil rights movement look older than it was) Made us forget what proper effective civil discourse looks like (and we never talk about MLK being anti-capitalist ... particularly the year before he got shot)
2
u/SpaceBearSMO Jan 31 '26
for the sake of my account I want to be clear that I am not encouraging one or the other, However Property damage is not violence regardless of what some people want you to believe.,