zlacker

>>mwseib+(OP)
> So let’s not excuse violence, or rationalize it, or participate in it.

Taboos around violence for political are one of the crucial building blocks for a functioning democracy. If those taboos are broken, even for a good cause, you set a precedence that violence works. And the next cause won’t be as good. One only has to look at the lessons of the Roman Revolution that started with the murder of Grachus, and ended with an Emperor who everyone acclaimed as they were so tired of the bloodshed.

>>RcouF1+pg
I don't condone violence, but at the same time you have to acknowledge that modern American democracy was built on the foundation of political violence. It worked for us.

>>nradov+ck
You do not use violence in a democratic protest. To use it is effective acknowledgement that you either want to destroy the democracy or do not believe that it actually exists on the moment.

>>marcos+Lq
The American revolution was a violent protest.

>>evanli+Bs
Against a tyrannical, non-representative government, and it was a last-ditch effort.

We have a democracy. People have opportunities to vote. Police policy is decided largely at the local level, so individual votes are powerful. Imagine if even 10% of protesters voted in their local elections...

>>throwa+OJ
Why would you think that the voter turnout among protestors is less than 10%? That seems absurd and at least a little offensive.