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

tall73 said:

I couldn't vote for either of the two major contenders last time.

Click to expand...

Are there any independents who model the Kingdom for true Christians to vote for? Perhaps like God said, our efforts are better used elsewhere.

tall73 said:

But I still think voting on issues, and sometimes even voting on an imperfect but still sincere candidate is worth it.

Click to expand...

Do you hound that candidate to live up to your vote if elected or do you think you have done your job?

tall73 said:

But I think in general the "culture war" will not be won until Jesus comes, and that our main job is to reach people individually for the gospel.

Click to expand...

Imagine if the people were out doing good for one another. Governments would fall because what they are selling th

tall73 said:

When they focus on Christ they are willing to, if necessary, do away with their rights, to serve others.

Click to expand...

Yes it is called responsibility. Today's generation is unaware of the fact responsibility has always trumped rights.
e people is all about self..

tall73 said:

But in the abstract people seem reluctant to say that they would use violence for political reasons.

I wonder what accounts for that?

Click to expand...

Loving neighbour as self?

tall73 said:

Yes, I think on the whole I do.




Understood.

French's article referenced this one, which may be a good next read:

https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/30/the-cultural-white-walkers-have-descended/

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I've read that one.

tall73 said:

This is a response to that one for those following along at home.

Click to expand...

I see Bobby and Tommy and Suzie and a big happy birthday to Sally who needs to look behind the couch for her present. (sorry, just reminded me of those old Saturday morning radio shows)

tall73 said:

There have been recent threads discussing specific aspects of incidents of violence, or debating the relative dangers of various groups. This thread is more general.

Do you think that beating, kicking, striking with weapons, shooting, are legitimate means to promote a political message?

If you think they are, in what circumstances would they be legitimate or moral?

If not, why not?

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

Click to expand...

Nope. Never acceptable to use violence to promote a political message. The only "legitimate" or "moral" reason is when a corrupt an tyrannical government is seeking to use violence to against you. This is why the 2nd amendment exists. The reason why Martin Luther King was so effective in the Civil Rights movement was because he used non-violent protests in a propaganda war against racial injustices. Similarly, the best way to ensure that your political intents remain legitimate is to remain non-violent no matter now violent the opposition will become. Doing so will only turn the public opinion away from the opposition and in favor of yours.

Edit: I will add that Andy Ngo is a perfect example of how powerful it can be to remain non-violent in the face of violence. Because he did not retaliate with violence, ANTIFA's cause and public support have been severely damaged.

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...

Whether liberal or conservative, it is never acceptable to resort to violence to push a political agenda.

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ) said:

Whether liberal or conservative, it is never acceptable to resort to violence to push a political agenda.

Click to expand...

Is the left not for a tyrannical government? Are they not the dreaded, evil deep state? Are they not the corrupting force that is out to destroy good people? Do they not hate Christians and everything they stand for? Why do they not deserve violence?

PeachyKeane said:

Is the left not for a tyrannical government? Are they not the dreaded, evil deep state? Are they not the corrupting force that is out to destroy good people? Do they not hate Christians and everything they stand for? Why do they not deserve violence?

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what they are for a tyrannical fascist government or a tyrannical communist government. Using any sort of violence against them will only further the cause of those you are attacking. You sound surprised that I am saying that violence should not be used on the left. Do you want violent attacks on the left?

tall73 said:

Do you think that beating, kicking, striking with weapons, shooting, are legitimate means to promote a political message?

Click to expand...

Of course not.

Radagast said:

Of course not.

Click to expand...

I wonder whatever prompted a thread like this?

PeachyKeane said:

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

Click to expand...

No...it doesn't.

Everyone has views that someone disagrees with...you do and so do I. If you aren't willing to stand up for me if I'm being beaten for my views....why should I or anyone else stand up for you when you're being beaten?

It's the difference between living in a civil society where we all have the right to express disagreements and living in a society where you're only allowed to express support for whomever is willing to commit the most violence (aka the worst of us).

tall73 said:

There have been recent threads discussing specific aspects of incidents of violence, or debating the relative dangers of various groups. This thread is more general.

Do you think that beating, kicking, striking with weapons, shooting, are legitimate means to promote a political message?

If you think they are, in what circumstances would they be legitimate or moral?

If not, why not?

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

Click to expand...

What are you thoughts on the righteousness/morality of the violence the American colonies showed against their rightful king back in the 1700s?