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
> democratic protest

It seems like the protestors have lost faith in the democratic process. Can you still call it a democratic protest?

>>moolco+3k1
Then is it a revolution? What is the plan? The want to secede Minneapolis?

It is either a democratic protest, domestic terrorism, or a civil war. I hope with all my being that it is a democratic protest.

>>afiori+uE1
It's the same justification many people used for voting for Trump, which was that?

>>krapp+PF1
I am sorry, I am a bit lost, but if Trump election had to be one of those three it would have been a democratic protest against the establishment.

Or were you referring to something else?

>>afiori+lH1
Many Trump supporters (primarily the alt-right and white supremacist fringe) didn't simply protest against the establishment, and certainly didn't intend to do so democratically (as that would imply a belief in the legitimacy of the system and the views of their opponents.) They voted with the intent of seeing the system destroyed and an ethnostate emerging from the rubble. Reasonable people can disagree about the size and relative influence of this contingent on the election, but it exists.

Drawing too many parallels between that and the protestors would be unfair, particularly where motive is concerned, but it is hard not to notice the energy is the same in a lot of ways. One side doing violence against the system and another doing violence against infrastructure, each because they feel the system has been irreparably damaged by the influence of the other.

>>krapp+kC2
Ok, so what? I have no sympathy for violent far right extremism and I intend to denounce neo-nazist ideologies as much as I can. Especially since it has devolved into (mostly non collective) violence already.

On the other hand your comment is saying that one of the worst thing those groups collectively did was voting. I don't think you are making the argument you think you are making.

On the other hand, if you are saying that the other side might start rioting too; isn't that an argument for deescalation?