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
There is an expression that says "the state has a monopoly on violence" - the government has no issue using violence to get their way, in fact, the essentially have no other tactics. And that's exactly why everyone decided to go protest. Breaking that taboo is a way of taking power back from the state.

>>glenda+og1
It's a bit more than merely an expression[1]. The point (as I understand it) is also not to say that the state is only capable of or always legitimate in administering violence.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence