Is violence in the streets a legitimate/moral political tool?

tall73 said:

David French Responds to Sohrab Ahmari: What Ahmari Gets Wrong | National Review

Now that I finished the other I think it is only fair to give French the chance to respond personally, so I will read this next.

Click to expand...

That's fair. I think based on your posts you'll side with French.

While I do so, is your view that this is an ideological underpinning to take more drastic tactics in the cultural war on the right?

Click to expand...

My view is that this is an ideological underpinning to take more drastic tactics against the left in the the culture wars.

And do you see any authors doing such on the left?

Historically I suppose Marx was pretty plain about the use of force to bring about revolution, but I mean more recent ones.

Click to expand...

I don't really know. I don't really know much literature from the left. I wouldn't know where to start.

PeachyKeane said:

That depends entirely on who is being beaten and who is doing the beating now doesn't it?

Click to expand...

Indeed.

if I disagree with your political views, I have every right to physically assault you.

TheBear said:

Indeed.

if I disagree with your political views, I have every right to physically assault you.

Click to expand...

More or less.

PeachyKeane said:

More or less.

Click to expand...

Are you okay with that sentiment?

tall73 said:

If your primary contention was simply that Christians have no role in politics, alright. My reply was meant to have you consider the aspect of Christians having a positive impact on society in which they are permitted to play a role.

Click to expand...

They have no part in the world of man, only the world of God and are meant to set the example of an alternate kingdom. That is to be our positive impact. Alternate living by putting the governance of God ahead of the governance of men, not rejoin it and pretend we are ambassadors..

tall73 said:

My view is that they should not be used for political purposes. People should use reason to promote their views, not violence.

The more we resort to violence the less we tend to discuss the issues constructively. At some point violence between factions can become about retaliation for past hurts, rather than the issues that started the disagreements in the first place.

Any person resorting to this should be arrested and prosecuted for violating laws against assault, murder, etc.

Click to expand...

Normally that's a solid "NO", but history tells us that often change doesn't come until things get so bad that bad things happen.

Usually the results are not, themselves "good" by any stretch, but over time things can re-equilibrate.

I keep thinking, for instance, that the topic of income inequality is a prime example of this. If those who are amassing huge sums of money and buying legislation to ensure they continue to profit at the expense of those on the bottom have lost a huge chunk of learning from history. That NEVER works out for the rich and powerful in the long haul. If they could learn to moderate their thirsts and hungers maybe, just maybe it wouldn't turn into another French Revolution, but apparently that is not a subroutine most humans possess.

And the French Revolution didn't turn out so well for the common person either! A lot was destroyed from that and not to the benefit of the commonweal.

We need to learn how to course-correct without sinking the ship.

carlv_52 said:

We need to learn how to course-correct without sinking the ship.

Click to expand...

That is what Jesus said but he said we wouldn't do it by utilizing the same methods as the foe.

tall73 said:

Do you think that beating, kicking, striking with weapons, shooting, are legitimate means to promote a political message? If not, why not?

Click to expand...

No, not in circumstances when self-defense is not relevant.

Because scripture directs us to love and by doing so provide an alternative by both message and example. Romans 12, for example, makes it clear vengeance is God's job and ours is to love those in need (and that is what is at the root of all political discourse). Love is patient, kind, humble, forbearing, hopeful, etc. We turn the other cheek, walk the extra mile, and do so on the way to the voting booth.

I would, on the other hand support nonviolent civil disobedience and encourage everyone to read Francis Schaeffer's "A Christian Manifesto" to better understand the Biblical bases for that position. Last half of Ephesians 6, too.

tall73 said:

Do you think that such violence tends to escalate, or is just a localized phenomenon?

Click to expand...

World looks pretty violent to me. On a daily basis. I respectfully suggest the cart is before the horse in that question. We have political division because humans are violent, not the other way around. Keep in mind violence of thought, violence of word, and violence of hand are simply variations on a common problem.

Luke 6:45 NAS
"The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart. "​

Luke 6:45 ESV
"The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks."​

One needn't be a Christian to understand that truth.

Ultimately, I think if we 1) remembered Whose we are, 2) who we are as the royal priestly sons and daughters of The Most High God and 3) acted like it more consistently we'd live in a much different and better world.

tall73 said:

I suppose we will see.



Yes, and I have started a number of threads on our war efforts. However, let's limit this to the type of street violence within our country that this thread is about.



Agreed. And the work injury issue is a personal one as a family member of mine experienced this.

However, this thread is not about pacifism in general, but about the sort of street violence we have been seeing.

Click to expand...

Fair enough - I’ll let you set the parameters on your thread. I’ll just say that think it is hypocritical to be critical of people who get violent on the street, but vote for policies which result in other kinds of violence. And I’ve been guilty of that myself.

PeachyKeane said:

Obviously, it would be immoral and awful when a left-winger practices violence as politics. But it is fine to practice violence against liberals because they are immoral and awful.

I'm sorry that you're wrong.

Click to expand...

I call Poe's Law!

RDKirk said:

I call Poe's Law!

Click to expand...

From the Teletubbies?

timothyu said:

From the Teletubbies?

Click to expand...

Poe's Law is one of those "laws" of Internet social phenomena that was actually stipulated right here in Christianforums.

Poe's law - Wikipedia

Poe's law is based on a comment written by Nathan Poe in 2005 on christianforums.com, an Internet forum on Christianity. The post was made during a debate on creationism, where a previous poster had remarked to another user "Good thing you included the winky. Otherwise people might think you are serious". Poe then replied, "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article".[1] The original statement of Poe's law referred specifically to creationism, but it has since been generalized to apply to any kind of fundamentalism or extremism.

Click to expand...

TheBear said:

Are you okay with that sentiment?

Click to expand...

Not really. But someone should bring it up.

RDKirk said:

I call Poe's Law!

Click to expand...

Good catch!

tall73 said:

So would you think that any voting is wrong?

Click to expand...

No but picking the lesser of two evils is wrong especially if the people are not willing to step forward and present an alternative worth voting for based on the principles of God. We had a Baptist minister here do just that and it changed the face of politics here for the better.