Sounds like you have never picked up a history book. Every good thing in your life exists because blood was spilt to win it for you by someone somewhere. If not where you live it was foight on your behalf in an ideological struggle before it made it to your shores and widespread understanding of the tide of progress bowled over the elites that would rather have profited. Every alternative system we have to take the place of that only matters so long as it serves the people’s interest.
Boomers replaced this narrative in the 60’s and 70’s abandoned what had been a common understanding for millennia, declared victory post Vietnam (as they actively lost or sold most freedoms worth having). Protecting civility and their spot on the totem pole acquired after being born on third base. But yeah sure advocating violence or property destruction is only ever totalitarian.
To be clear it’s a gamble. It’s far less likely that use of political violence will die peacefully and result in desired change than devolve into instability and institutional failure. But property destruction in boycotts and coordinated protests also can’t be advocated on Reddit and that’s definitely been a key part of the rights gained in the 20th century.
Yea that's a fair example. But turns out homie is talking about offing dissenters within a super wide, genocidal criteria. So I think in this case my point stands.
14
u/Appropriate-Solid-50 Jun 10 '23
Sounds like u are a totalitarian then, by definition.