To paraphrase a wiser man than I: Violence is never a solution? Wrong. Violence is ALWAYS a solution. Violence may not be the best solution. Violence may not be a good solution. In fact, violence may be a TERRIBLE solution, but it's always A solution, and sometimes violence is the ONLY solution.
Violence, historically, has been the most effective answer all throughout all history when negotiation fails.
Violence rarely should be the first answer but it'll never be taken off the table as long as people exist that wish to abuse others, especially in an inequal world where different people wield different amounts of power to change things without explicit violence. Note that denying healthcare, price gouging, excessive rent, monopolies, and other abuse are all types of implicit violence.
It will get no easier as time goes on. The system will become more and more oppressive until we really are too weak to fight back. We need a leader and we need them now
I'm not one to condone violence, but I approve cops/military using deadly force to stop murderers if absolutely necessary. If CEOs are legally killing, what options does that leave for their victims?
Violence is like antibiotics. It doesn't solve problems; it makes them go away. You won't be any more equipped to handle the problem if it comes back, and if you rely too much on it it might fail you when you need it most--but if you take it off the table, and imagine you're a better person for ignoring it as an option, you're a fool and you might well die a horrible, preventable, medieval-peasant-ass death.
Watched an interview with a billionaire who said the average person has reached a point that they are unable to live without finqci stress & it's his fellow rich people's fault for being too greedy. More CEOs will die unless prices lower so the middle & poor can afford more, but knows they won't. He also said that we should all talk about how much we're earning so we know who is being screwed, because it's the rich who tell us not to say how much we earn, while they always say how much they have
I’ve wavered on this back and forth, but I’m at the point where violence IS the answer. The people we vote in won’t do anything and peaceful protests haven’t done anything. What else do we have?
We have a convicted felon as president, a bought and paid for Supreme Court, and Congress that has been studied and shown that it only really works for the wealthy.
System is fucked fam, violence is an expected outcome when societal safeguards fail.
The CEOs are just the working class elite, really. The upper middle. But their power and influence is what's really dangerous. They're still generally operating within the system that lawmakers created based on the input from the owners of said businesses. CEO is just your alpha Chad hype bro archetype m or f
"Force, my friends, is violence, the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived. Naked force has resolved more issues throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence never solves anything, is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always pay." -Professor Rasczak, Starship Troopers
The stupid thing about the ideology of pro-violence like this is it's like a sword that so many don't know how to wield. You want "justice" but your propoganda here is attempting to give the sword to a lot of sloppy idiots who are going to end up murdering the wrong people. Don't believe me? Look at how pizzagate worked. The above post is basically the blue-pill version of pizzagate. Innocent bystanders & misidentified targets are the future victims to this bullshit.
I fail to see the connection. This seems like conflating some very distantly related things, similar to seeing Israel's genocide of Palestinians and concluding that all militaries everywhere are genocidal. We know who the problems are, and it's not workers in pizza restaurants.
It's always weird to me how "violence is never the answer", but the US spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on our military with weapons that either threaten or enact violence.
Then you got the US giving weapons to Israel who is just causing as much mayhem and death as they can.
"Go get an adult", the US didn't go get an adult, the US convinced a bunch of its friends to go beat the shit out of Iraq. It's amazing how much overlap there is between juvenile problem solving and global politics sometimes.
They are forgetting that the negotiation that came from democracy and unionisation was the established alternative to being shot by the angry, disillusioned mob.
And thanks to their brethren and fellow member of rabid unchecked capitalism - the NRA - which has been supplying the masses for decades with plenty of firearms.
Yes most of those firearms are concentrated in the bootlicking inbred Maga world, but the oligarchy can only trick the redhats also into believing poor people of other color are the cause of their suffering for so long.
The stupid thing about the ideology of pro-violence like this is it's like a sword that so many don't know how to wield. You want "justice" but your propoganda here is attempting to give the sword to a lot of sloppy idiots who are going to end up murdering the wrong people. Don't believe me? Look at how pizzagate worked. The above post is basically the blue-pill version of pizzagate. Innocent bystanders & misidentified targets are the future victims to this bullshit.
Completely unrelated events, and even the context isn't relative. CEOs killing people with their greed is factual, far from the conspiracy theory that fed pizzagate. Innocent bystanders and misidentified targets? People want CEOs, it's simple. This isn't dropping a JDAM on a street in Iraq. Everything about your comment is stupid, including accusing the original commenter of pushing propaganda. Which you misspelled. Go back to Facebook or Xitter w your incoherent babbling.
yeah the only people who could think you're a basement dwelling pathetic failure trying to steal valor from people actually out there making a difference are CEOs. in fact I bet all those people who cross the street when they see you coming are CEOs, and also so are your parents probably which is the only reason they're so disappointed in you
Can't blame the CEOs entirely. Have to blame the voters in this country who have voted for Republicans who deregulate everything and refuse to give us universal health care.
There's a fuck ton of blame to go around. Calling everyone that contributed to blame out is excessively worthwhile. Don't really need to nitpick percentages though.
The ACA as written provided insurance to every American regardless of ability to pay using almost the exact model the universal system in the Netherlands uses, except unlike the Netherlands the ACA used our existing single payer Medicaid system to cover people up to 140% of the poverty line.
At my former employer, the cost to add one’s spouse to the plan was over $900 a month. This being unaffordable, the spouse was still not eligible for an ACA plan because they had “access” to the plan at their spouse’s work.
No it did not. It provided a marketplace that people could buy health insurance on. It did not guarantee healthcare access. That is what you're mistaking here. There were still bills from the healthcare providers, there were still hospital bills. Universal healthcare is free at the point of service, its like Canada, or the UK's healthcare. If money comes out of your wallet at the point of service for the doctor, it is not universal healthcare.
The only significant change Obamacare made was affordability of health insurance plans, and refusal to insurers to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, and the ACA marketplace. Money still changes hands, and there are still hospital/doctor/testing facility bills that have to be paid by the patient, it is not universal healthcare, at best it is similar to a voucher system. We don't need diet single payer, we need fucking single payer.
Violence is the optimal response to those who respond to nothing less. The problem is that violence is not an easily controlled thing, and tends to lead to a lot more violence. And if you don't think the other side is capable of incredibly savage acts of violence once provoked, you're insane.
They love when we're violent towards eachother. It creates revenue in healthcare, home and car insurance, gun sales, etc. Now the violence is filtering up the chain, and while that was ALWAYS going to be an inevitability, they always figured that was a problem someone else would deal with.
You seem to forget there is 2700 billionaires on earth and 8 billion non billionaires. You dont need violence. You just take it. Form a union. Demand better shares of the fruits of your labour. Demand more taxes for the rich. Until we band together in numbers and organise ... nothing will change. Talk to your coworkers.
Democracy is the peaceful option. We all agreed on using democracy as a tool for an orderly, peaceful, civilized society but the obscenely wealthy perverted it into the profane thing that it is today. The fools have forgotten that without democracy the citizens only recourse is violence.
Yep, exactly. The people in power have forgotten why we have checks and balances and accountability. It's because there's always at least ONE way to hold them accountable, if there aren't any others.
I'm going to re-explain the comment for you: we had non violent solutions. Unfortunately for them, those weren't heeded. Violence isn't the optimal solution, but, if you ignore the better solutions then people aren't left with others. Ignore the peaceful protest and welcome the violent one.
The optimal answer? Not at all, I'd say almost never. Sometimes it's the only remaining answer, though, and we are nearing that limit. If it is a life or death situation, you need to absolutely open a box, you need a Torx screwdriver to open it cleanly but you have only an hammer, you use the hammer to break the box.
It is precisely the optimal answer - because it's the only one available. No, whatever long winded idiotic take you (yes, you, you know who you are) wants to drown out the enthusiasm with, no. It won't change the reality. Violence against the rich is the literal only option left and if we don't take it the human story will end when the last rich filth dies in some luxurious hole long after the rest of our species is gone.
Even if you meant a more succinct thing, this comment provides insight into why we must never forget that there are always options. Violence is never off the table.
Talking of tables, there was someone that made a scourge and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables... and if I remember correctly he was a well-known pacifist. So, yes: it's always an option.
Violence should never be the first answer. It is a saying for children to keep them from mauling each other over petty disputes. Adults should understand that violence has its place. Non violence in the face of tyranny is admirable and should be explored to it's fullest, but with the understanding that it can and will fail as the situation escalates.
The only time anything has ever gotten done to the benefit of the masses in this world is when they start killing the rich until enough of their friends go "Well, maybe we should help folks instead of hunting them for sport?"
"Violence is never the answer" is written by those who'd rather you didn't protest the injustice done to you. Once words fail, what other recourse is there?
"violence is never the answer" says the world's largest military power, whose police are trained by the country that use the Dahiya Doctrine & the Hannibal Directive.
I used to think that. I really did not want to use violence at all and tried to avoid it. Then I went to Cameroon for 9 months and I won 7 fights because that was the only way I could get back safely. Now... I am much more comfortable with a fight when needed
In the history of the human species, violence has almost always been the answer. This is because as much as people don't like it, it is VERY effective. Fear is a powerful motivator, which can be the only motivator for people without morality that can motivate them like a civilized person.
I was taught violence against your fellows is never the answer. Violence against those who are violent against you is self-preservation. The rich have already decided to be violent against the non-rich.
Frankly, violence is the first and original answer. Is it sustainable? No. Have we been forced into a system where more enlightened methods of resolution have been engineered into obsolescence? Nobody knows, my fbi guy might be listening.
it a sham, it only benefit thoses in power , they dont want you to use violence, since they want the monopoly over it since that strenghten them, just a bunch of cowardly bullies that fear retribution, but since the start of time change come from violence, you want things to get better ? you better start breaking some teeths
The ruling class does everything it can to demonize violence, because they can simply use institutional powers (such as the police) to enact violence for them.
the republicans/corporations/fascist media always r the first to state "Violence is never the answer" unless it is them that want to kill citizens in Philippines, SE Asia, Asia, Middle East, Central/South America who stand in their way of making corporate profits and ability to install fascist dictators. or creating a GOP/Trump coup on jan 6
Violence is the last answer but should be used sparingly when all other fail. The most galling part is that the Americans ignore the fact that are very existence is due to violence. Our country literally exists due to the Revolutionary War. The real answer is hate cruelty and apathy are never the answer.
It also relies on the premise that violence is NOT ALREADY BEING ENACTED.
Violence is not the answer to peace, but if someone has voluntarily chosen to put their gun to your head, the time for polite discourse has passed.
Every day, these people knowingly make choices that will cause people harm and death for the benefit of shareholders, and they do it not because they're forced to or obliged to, but because they want to.
I always remember the quote from “strangers with candy” dumb shoes on Comedy Central twenty years ago: “Violence never solved anything. Except conflict.”
I object when the violence doesn't serve the purpose you intend, destroying your neighbors home or business does nothing to big corps and corrupt officials.
I will say the phrase "Violence is never *the* answer" is more accurate. It's always *an* answer. It's seldom the right one or the best one. But when all other answers are ignored or retaliated against, violence becomes what's left. Eat the rich.
It was a stance parroted by the people who knew violence would be the only eye to dislodge their corruption. Make violence sound more evil than them so we'd not see it as the moral high ground against evil.
We did have ways to solve this without violence though. Through politics and the justice system. Then the rich corrupted and bought both of those, to block anything that could dampen their profits, and cut down more rights and regulation to make even more obscene amounts of money, at the cost of even more human suffering.
Violence returning is just the natural consequence of that. "Last resort" doesn't mean "never", it means "when everything else fails".
"Dr. King’s policy was, if you are nonviolent, if you suffer, your opponent will see your suffering and will be moved to change his heart. That’s very good. He only made one fallacious assumption. In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience. The United States has none."
- Stokely Carmichael (June 29, 1941 – November 15, 1998), also known as Kwame Ture
Violence is actually the only thing that has ever, historically, successfully challenged social power problems like this. Billionaires to the general masses, it's probably not much different in economic scale to the French Revolution, or medieval life before that
Anyone who's ever managed to get their school bully to stop pestering them usually achieved this by using violence of some sort. You can't reason with people who lack basic empathy, plain and simple.
I subscribe to “violence is never the first option” rather than “never the answer”. Give reason a chance; but once it’s shown the other side won’t listen to reason, or they started with violence first? Never throw the first punch, but make sure you throw the last one.
I'm beginning to learn that "Violence is never the answer" comes from those who have never experienced a systemic injustice that threatens their livelihood.
The people who claim violence isn't the answer are the ones with enough privilege to think that the people choose violence as Plan A, and not Plan Z, after everything else fails. In almost all situations when citizens as a group turn to violence it's because they've appealed to the ruling class in all the 'proper' ways and got nothing but condescension.
That was made up by SHITE parents who didn't want to raise their kids and just wanted some peace and quiet. Same generation that would suspend victims and bullies because they were too lazy to ask questions. Y'all wanna use Jesus, Gandhi, MLK jr as examples, REMIND US HOW THOSE ENDED MOTHER FUCKER
That Statement was build up by rich and powerfull people in the hope that the Union would stop come to them and beat them to death after they let the last strike be shoot down by cops
On the basis of history violence has always been the answer no matter what civil rights violence slavery violence the literal founding of America violence civil war violence workers rights violence in every instance violence is the only thing that puts the rich where they really belong deep deep in the grave
The stupid thing about the ideology of pro-violence like this is it's like a sword that so many don't know how to wield. You want "justice" but your propoganda here is attempting to give the sword to a lot of sloppy idiots who are going to end up murdering the wrong people. Don't believe me? Look at how pizzagate worked. The above post is basically the blue-pill version of pizzagate. Innocent bystanders & misidentified targets are the future victims to this bullshit.
It depends on who's saying the answer. They have no problem using violence to ensure their wealth. Yet it suddenly becomes wrong when anyone else uses it to secure their lives.
I personally like the saying “the only good fight is the one not fought.” That doesn’t mean violence is never the answer. It just means violence represents a larger failure.
Yes. Violence is not *always* the answer, but it’s also not *never* the answer. Sometimes violence is the correct move. The people who study this shit have basically proven that violence works better the more support you have and once you have the active support of about 20-30% of the population, violence becomes an increasingly effective strategy. Less active support than 20-30% and it’s counter productive.
(I use ‘proven’ pretty loosely. In sociology owing active studies on this stuff kinda doesn’t work, you have to instead look to historical records. It’s important to note that a lot of changes happen without any violence at all! Less than a third of major changes in law happen with violence historically.)
I’m wondering if the people who came up with “violence is not the answer” are the one who are responsible for causing all the pains but afraid of us retaliating and thus propagandizing “violence is not the answer” so they can get away with it…hmm
It's always the answer. The few examples of major change from peaceful protest still held the THREAT of violence. A million people outside your door are effectively telling you "We're here and we're rational. Give us what we want before we stop being rational. You can't shoot us all." Compare that to occupy where they sat around with a handful of people. There was no threat there, which is why rich assholes felt at ease to smear them as dirty hippies. At their peak the NYPD outnumbered them 3:1.
You are right. Violence has almost always been THE option. That doesn't change the fact that glorifying a mentally ill shooter with quasi religious poster is messed up.
I wish it were that simple. Until we attack the root problem of capitalism nothing will change. That CEO has already been replaced. They'll do a little dance and maybe on the surface change a couple things but they won't get caught a second time.
You're correct. But it's not about that. Being the face makes them a target. Kill enough of them, that's how revolution happens. Make it not ok to be corrupt again by violence. If the judicial system is failed, it's up to the brave to make the sacrifice like Luigi and end the nightmare one billionaire at a time if needed. There's roughly 2780 of them out there. This only needs to happen roughly 2780 more times. Let me tell you, there's far more of the working class than that.
i mean the Founding Fathers certainly didn't think so. SO....if we go by the standards of the past why should we ? ( just pointing out the hypocrisy of ppl who want to go back to " how things used to be " )
Star Trek used to go so much harder than it does now. You would never get a good faith debate over the morality of terrorism on the corporate-approved Trek of today.
The insurance company CEOs literally cannot do anything about our healthcare system. If all of them disappeared tomorrow nothing whatsoever would change. Our *politicians* need to enact single payer healthcare, and half of them are ideologically opposed to it because most of their voters are opposed to doing anything that will help minorities.
It's the fucking reality of the situation. We're completely screwed because half the voters want to kill brown people to solve our problems, and now the other half want to kill "the rich" to solve our problems but no one fucking wants legislation that would ACTUALLY solve our problems. Populist propaganda has doomed us. But sure, it's totally unbecoming of me to fucking realize that.
You're not gonna be allowed legislation. Not if 99% of all amerimorons wanted it, voted for it, protested for it. You're not. Things are far too gone for america to try and pretend to be a functional society with values in 2025. You either kill the rich or they kill you.
Nope. Again, that won't do anything. What the fuck do you think will happen? The GOP will magically decide they're ok with providing healthcare to people that are different? Because no, they won't. In fact their voters will even more strongly support dictatorship to control the evil leftists that are causing violence. Btw peaceful change is actually a fucking thing, and you do it by convincing a majority of the population to make those changes. Remember
CEO’s set policy. Had this particular CEO set the policy to be “fulfill our role and pay for the healthcare as we are supposed to rather than make billions for ourselves” we wouldn’t have a problem would we?
If he just set a policy of always paying but the company would go broke, his competitors who didn't would grow. We still wouldn't have healthcare because the only thing that does work is socialized medicine which the politicians need to implement.
Never said that did I? What I DID say was that perhaps if they didn’t have a policy of outright denying 1/3 of all claims regardless of validity they wouldn’t have pissed off someone to the point of killing them. Or are YOU saying that the only options for insurance companies is to either go broke or pay out literally everything?
I mean fucking seriously, do you think it would be better if they accepted 10% more fucking claims? 20%? While millions are still completely uninsured? Like, fuck all the way off if you think murdering people to get a FEW fucking more claims approved is worthwhile while millions of uninsured are sick and can't get treatment.
Go ahead and find me one example in all of human history where violence solved the problem AND didn't just replace it with lust for vengeance. I'll wait.
Did you lose the plot somewhere? That wasn't at all the discussion taking place. It isn't about justification, it's about the reality of imposing your will by force leading to retaliation 100% of the time.
There's a bit of nuance to it. The amount of violence you have to do to get real change is so much that most people will ball at it because they will recognize that it can and will spill over on them, especially as the working class who don't have any protections whatsoever. This is the cruz of the problem. I've made the argument that violence on its own isn't that effective, because it's not. That's why so many people are in prison. The threat of harm does not in and of itself make people
follow the rules. It doesn't change people's minds about which rules should be followed either. We see this is recidivism rates, in talks about legalisation of certain drugs etc. we even see it in anti-drug media. The follow-through is important. And there's not that many people willing to follow-through.
Additionally if we're gonna burn it down, we gotta have a plan that's more than self righteous blustering and a hand full of random policies in a trench coat. This is down to more than just 5-6 hotly contested topics on social media. If it wasn't, more people would get involved in politics which, by the way, is another area most people don't want to have anything to do with.
Since y'all don't like what I have to say, I'm just going to point out that for the thousands of you advocating for violence on this platform everyday, not one of you is out there living that dream. Why not?
.. america has the highest rate of incarcerations in the world. They are also the most corpowhoring culture, extremely unlikely to do fk all to so much as inconvenience their oligarchy (including when their prisons are for-profit institutions of entirely and exactly literal slavery). The sort of "harm" and "prison" you speak of isn't even relevant to the discussion.
You're missing the point. I'm talking directly about recidivism rates and how people who are criminals (looking at the oligarchy you speak of) are likely to not only not be bothered much by the threat of violence or indeed by the threat of consequences so long as they can continue their way of life. Which is why threats from regular people) are so ineffective, and why every single time this happens regular people have to go so far (violently) to make any changes. The violence is a medium for
quick change but it doesn't last. We do this every 50-70 years somewhere on earth because people who want things that go against the common good or society do so by playing the long game. That's how we lost abortion rights in America. It's how we've lost workers rights, and social programs. Because it's not just about the violence. It's more about how we come together after the violence with a plan to do something good and what we can agree on going forward. People always love to bring up the
Violence part and how "effective it is" but neglect that there is absolutely way more to it than killing off the people who want to take advantage of the masses. You'll never kill them all and this is why shit like racism and slavery still exist at all. They go into hiding, rebuild their numbers and use the systems already in place to reclaim the things they want or change the systems to give them what they want and then we get to go killing them again 50-70 or so years later. Then add to this
CatskinnerKeen
To paraphrase a wiser man than I:
Violence is never a solution?
Wrong.
Violence is ALWAYS a solution.
Violence may not be the best solution. Violence may not be a good solution. In fact, violence may be a TERRIBLE solution, but it's always A solution, and sometimes violence is the ONLY solution.
FaecalJacksonPollock
Based.
Illithidbane
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable -JFK
spontaneous9
John F. Kennedy — 'Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable'
askmenotbolin0
I didn't think o I could Love her any more than I do.
BlindGardener
Scrooge only change his mind after being threatened with death as well.
Saelael
In the game of Capitalism, sometimes you have to flip the table.
EaNasirsExcellentHighGradeCopper
CE0485
Psionickitten
Violence, historically, has been the most effective answer all throughout all history when negotiation fails.
Violence rarely should be the first answer but it'll never be taken off the table as long as people exist that wish to abuse others, especially in an inequal world where different people wield different amounts of power to change things without explicit violence. Note that denying healthcare, price gouging, excessive rent, monopolies, and other abuse are all types of implicit violence.
Becker37
It will get no easier as time goes on. The system will become more and more oppressive until we really are too weak to fight back. We need a leader and we need them now
RexRexroththe1st
Yonbeast
violence is not an 'answer'....it is a means to an end. Usually, it is a very effective means.
Skr121
I'm not one to condone violence, but I approve cops/military using deadly force to stop murderers if absolutely necessary. If CEOs are legally killing, what options does that leave for their victims?
LespritDeLescalier22
Either financial ruin for all those that care for them, or wander off into the woods to die alone before they get to the family nest egg.
Layinginbed
Go after the lawmakers
PaleChapter
Violence is like antibiotics. It doesn't solve problems; it makes them go away. You won't be any more equipped to handle the problem if it comes back, and if you rely too much on it it might fail you when you need it most--but if you take it off the table, and imagine you're a better person for ignoring it as an option, you're a fool and you might well die a horrible, preventable, medieval-peasant-ass death.
PepperoniAndFingernailPizza
Watched an interview with a billionaire who said the average person has reached a point that they are unable to live without finqci stress & it's his fellow rich people's fault for being too greedy. More CEOs will die unless prices lower so the middle & poor can afford more, but knows they won't. He also said that we should all talk about how much we're earning so we know who is being screwed, because it's the rich who tell us not to say how much we earn, while they always say how much they have
Nanntuckett
I’ve wavered on this back and forth, but I’m at the point where violence IS the answer. The people we vote in won’t do anything and peaceful protests haven’t done anything. What else do we have?
plantpr0n
We have a convicted felon as president, a bought and paid for Supreme Court, and Congress that has been studied and shown that it only really works for the wealthy.
System is fucked fam, violence is an expected outcome when societal safeguards fail.
johneventually1
The CEOs are just the working class elite, really. The upper middle. But their power and influence is what's really dangerous. They're still generally operating within the system that lawmakers created based on the input from the owners of said businesses. CEO is just your alpha Chad hype bro archetype m or f
HandsomePenguin
A child raping convicted felon
DeepVeinZombosis
"Force, my friends, is violence, the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived. Naked force has resolved more issues throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence never solves anything, is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always pay." -Professor Rasczak, Starship Troopers
Psychobeanz
soepie7
If they don't want violence to be the answer, they shouldn't exhaust every alternative.
KidCharlemagne524
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." --JFK
getyourfruitoffmeyoudamndirtygrapes
The stupid thing about the ideology of pro-violence like this is it's like a sword that so many don't know how to wield. You want "justice" but your propoganda here is attempting to give the sword to a lot of sloppy idiots who are going to end up murdering the wrong people. Don't believe me? Look at how pizzagate worked. The above post is basically the blue-pill version of pizzagate. Innocent bystanders & misidentified targets are the future victims to this bullshit.
deadtedw
As far as Pizzagate is concerned, the right person got shot.
Corrodias
I fail to see the connection. This seems like conflating some very distantly related things, similar to seeing Israel's genocide of Palestinians and concluding that all militaries everywhere are genocidal. We know who the problems are, and it's not workers in pizza restaurants.
flexstar
Fanner50
We can always start with those with an MBA
404NoNameAvailable
That's a weird way to spell depressing. . .
One808
Also a strange way to spell "Be rid of".
flexstar
Cearnaigh
Not sure why you are getting downvoted. Unless dead children are a fun thing to weigh against dead monsters.
Djones06236
It's always weird to me how "violence is never the answer", but the US spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on our military with weapons that either threaten or enact violence.
Then you got the US giving weapons to Israel who is just causing as much mayhem and death as they can.
But, sure tell us that violence is bad.
thundercactus
"Go get an adult", the US didn't go get an adult, the US convinced a bunch of its friends to go beat the shit out of Iraq.
It's amazing how much overlap there is between juvenile problem solving and global politics sometimes.
90sLego
There may be a day where we are advanced enough as a species to solve our problems without violence. Probably gonna take a few millenia, though.
TheStateVsThomasLight
They are forgetting that the negotiation that came from democracy and unionisation was the established alternative to being shot by the angry, disillusioned mob.
MissSiesta
THIS.
denimdenis
And thanks to their brethren and fellow member of rabid unchecked capitalism - the NRA - which has been supplying the masses for decades with plenty of firearms.
Yes most of those firearms are concentrated in the bootlicking inbred Maga world, but the oligarchy can only trick the redhats also into believing poor people of other color are the cause of their suffering for so long.
casbott
And some of the MAGAS have been waking up.

denimdenis
Wild - that’s been the case right in front of their eyes for decades, and only now some of them are questioning their dogma, with one CEO unalived.
Greymalum
We have to fight back. They are and have been killing us.
deadtedw
Laws are meant to curb bad behavior. The threat of punishment (prison, fines, etc) doesn't stop crime, but it keeps most people relatively honest.
But what device is there to curb bad behavior by the rich & powerful? Not Prison. Not fines. So what else is there?
When they do not care about the people they kill by their actions, it seems turnabout is fair play.
getyourfruitoffmeyoudamndirtygrapes
The stupid thing about the ideology of pro-violence like this is it's like a sword that so many don't know how to wield. You want "justice" but your propoganda here is attempting to give the sword to a lot of sloppy idiots who are going to end up murdering the wrong people. Don't believe me? Look at how pizzagate worked. The above post is basically the blue-pill version of pizzagate. Innocent bystanders & misidentified targets are the future victims to this bullshit.
sullyandcheddar
Your comment is absolute bullshit.
Greymalum
hereforthememes420
Completely unrelated events, and even the context isn't relative. CEOs killing people with their greed is factual, far from the conspiracy theory that fed pizzagate. Innocent bystanders and misidentified targets? People want CEOs, it's simple. This isn't dropping a JDAM on a street in Iraq. Everything about your comment is stupid, including accusing the original commenter of pushing propaganda. Which you misspelled. Go back to Facebook or Xitter w your incoherent babbling.
SaveitforQueenDoppelpoppolus
people on imgur will really be like "the only way to fix our problems is to assassinate some CEOs" and then not go assassinate any CEOs
chansuke
To be fair its the opportunity to do so will never come up for the average person.
BlindGardener
It’s true. We love to call for violence here on the margins on the left, but it’s only right-wingers who actually make it happen.
johneventually1
Yeah well how many murders have you done this year so far!
BlindGardener
Fewer than the average CEO!
johneventually1
We're alternating. It's billionaire season until we get one, then it's CEO season again. You can bag a billionaire CEO for extra points.
Yeah but seriously guys, don't be pussies just go murdering. Throw away your life to end another's c'mon what are you waiting for? /S
No but really there are a lot of depressed and suicidal people that say they have nothing to live for. Don't kill yourself. It's a Luigi time!
SaveitforQueenDoppelpoppolus
shut the fuck up with "we" like you're out there killing billionaires and CEOs
johneventually1
You shut the fuck up. You're probably a CEO
SaveitforQueenDoppelpoppolus
yeah the only people who could think you're a basement dwelling pathetic failure trying to steal valor from people actually out there making a difference are CEOs. in fact I bet all those people who cross the street when they see you coming are CEOs, and also so are your parents probably which is the only reason they're so disappointed in you
SaveitforQueenDoppelpoppolus
"they're not afraid of me! do they even know how many memes i've posted and how many upvotes each of them got?"
dreadfroggy
Can't blame the CEOs entirely. Have to blame the voters in this country who have voted for Republicans who deregulate everything and refuse to give us universal health care.
Psionickitten
There's a fuck ton of blame to go around. Calling everyone that contributed to blame out is excessively worthwhile. Don't really need to nitpick percentages though.
idiotsonfire
Yes we can. The CEOs are the ones behind every single New Deal program being repealed. They benefited the most from that.
mardukkur
Not just refuse, when the Democrats gave us universal healthcare they successfully wrecked it.
idiotsonfire
Obamacare was not universal healthcare, it was a private health insurance mandate that only expanded access to it with restrictions.
idiotsonfire
Single payer healthcare is universal healthcare. Singlepayer does not require insurance, because everything is insured and paid for upfront.
mardukkur
The ACA as written provided insurance to every American regardless of ability to pay using almost the exact model the universal system in the Netherlands uses, except unlike the Netherlands the ACA used our existing single payer Medicaid system to cover people up to 140% of the poverty line.
nddstgm9gz12
Have you ever googled ACA family glitch?
At my former employer, the cost to add one’s spouse to the plan was over $900 a month. This being unaffordable, the spouse was still not eligible for an ACA plan because they had “access” to the plan at their spouse’s work.
idiotsonfire
No it did not. It provided a marketplace that people could buy health insurance on. It did not guarantee healthcare access. That is what you're mistaking here. There were still bills from the healthcare providers, there were still hospital bills. Universal healthcare is free at the point of service, its like Canada, or the UK's healthcare. If money comes out of your wallet at the point of service for the doctor, it is not universal healthcare.
nddstgm9gz12
There are still copays/fees in countries with universal healthcare.
idiotsonfire
The only significant change Obamacare made was affordability of health insurance plans, and refusal to insurers to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, and the ACA marketplace. Money still changes hands, and there are still hospital/doctor/testing facility bills that have to be paid by the patient, it is not universal healthcare, at best it is similar to a voucher system. We don't need diet single payer, we need fucking single payer.
ThatPug
Violence isn't the optimal answer, the problem is we have no meaningful and substantial paths to have grievances actually considered by the powerful.
LeMegachonk
Violence is the optimal response to those who respond to nothing less. The problem is that violence is not an easily controlled thing, and tends to lead to a lot more violence. And if you don't think the other side is capable of incredibly savage acts of violence once provoked, you're insane.
StellaMatutina
Tell me you've never read a history book without saying you've never read a history book "violence is never the answer"
thundercactus
They love when we're violent towards eachother. It creates revenue in healthcare, home and car insurance, gun sales, etc. Now the violence is filtering up the chain, and while that was ALWAYS going to be an inevitability, they always figured that was a problem someone else would deal with.
JohnSmithterms
You seem to forget there is 2700 billionaires on earth and 8 billion non billionaires. You dont need violence. You just take it. Form a union. Demand better shares of the fruits of your labour. Demand more taxes for the rich. Until we band together in numbers and organise ... nothing will change. Talk to your coworkers.
METROlD
Democracy is the peaceful option. We all agreed on using democracy as a tool for an orderly, peaceful, civilized society but the obscenely wealthy perverted it into the profane thing that it is today. The fools have forgotten that without democracy the citizens only recourse is violence.
Karma1970
Richter12x2
Yep, exactly. The people in power have forgotten why we have checks and balances and accountability. It's because there's always at least ONE way to hold them accountable, if there aren't any others.
ImHereToExplainTheJoke
Violence is a negotiation tactic when all others have failed
9byte
Read the peoples history of the United States.
ProppaGanda
We are living under a system built on violence. It's only a question if we're ready to answer
Hotjoe1991
You mean voting? Pffft. Real good thats done us.
AranaDiscoteca
I'm going to re-explain the comment for you: we had non violent solutions. Unfortunately for them, those weren't heeded. Violence isn't the optimal solution, but, if you ignore the better solutions then people aren't left with others. Ignore the peaceful protest and welcome the violent one.
delecti
Yeah, violence is never a *good* answer, but if it's the only answer left then it's the best answer you've got.
crcinau
Violence is the option of last resort.
Frederf
Something impossible, something inevitable.
PaperinoVB
The optimal answer? Not at all, I'd say almost never. Sometimes it's the only remaining answer, though, and we are nearing that limit. If it is a life or death situation, you need to absolutely open a box, you need a Torx screwdriver to open it cleanly but you have only an hammer, you use the hammer to break the box.
Goldensands
It is precisely the optimal answer - because it's the only one available. No, whatever long winded idiotic take you (yes, you, you know who you are) wants to drown out the enthusiasm with, no. It won't change the reality. Violence against the rich is the literal only option left and if we don't take it the human story will end when the last rich filth dies in some luxurious hole long after the rest of our species is gone.
pixelsnader
The only remaining answer is, by definition, the optimal answer. The rest would be wishful thinking or missed opportunities, or dangerous mistakes.
PaperinoVB
This was what I meant, thank you for making it explicit :-)
PectorialMuscles
Even if you meant a more succinct thing, this comment provides insight into why we must never forget that there are always options. Violence is never off the table.
PaperinoVB
Talking of tables, there was someone that made a scourge and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables... and if I remember correctly he was a well-known pacifist. So, yes: it's always an option.
GerbilHereReportingLiveFromRichardGeresAss
It is an optimal answer for them, why shouldn't it be for us?
AranaDiscoteca
Because we're not sociopaths?
GerbilHereReportingLiveFromRichardGeresAss
They do it because they don't care about innocent lives. We're not the same.
HavelTh3Rock
Because according to them, it's already been an acceptable answer to let us die in droves if it effects their bottom line.
INeverReadTheTOS
I agree. "Violence is never the answer" is a terribly simple, naive, and reductive stance that is frankly just plain incorrect.
Asadsadsadclown
Violence should never be the first answer. It is a saying for children to keep them from mauling each other over petty disputes. Adults should understand that violence has its place. Non violence in the face of tyranny is admirable and should be explored to it's fullest, but with the understanding that it can and will fail as the situation escalates.
Mansooratyale
"But the CEOs only pushes the (human grinding machine) buttons, they don't grind humans themselves!" / S
[deleted]
[deleted]
Frobizzle
It's really just propaganda
hfctom
The only time anything has ever gotten done to the benefit of the masses in this world is when they start killing the rich until enough of their friends go "Well, maybe we should help folks instead of hunting them for sport?"
Whyyeah
violence is the question and in this instance yes the answer
spinbutton3
I can take the violence. But I want to know what the goals are before it just turns into chaos
ThisIsMyUsernameThereAreManyLikeIt
"Violence is never the answer" is written by those who'd rather you didn't protest the injustice done to you. Once words fail, what other recourse is there?
ArgentXero
"violence is never the answer" says the world's largest military power, whose police are trained by the country that use the Dahiya Doctrine & the Hannibal Directive.
machine9
Violence is, technically, always an answer
It's usually not the right one, but sometimes it definitely is
malbec
It’s just a catch phrase used by people who want to use violence against you
GrandPubabofMoldistan
I used to think that. I really did not want to use violence at all and tried to avoid it. Then I went to Cameroon for 9 months and I won 7 fights because that was the only way I could get back safely. Now... I am much more comfortable with a fight when needed
Gestalt7
timidtimeturner
In the history of the human species, violence has almost always been the answer. This is because as much as people don't like it, it is VERY effective. Fear is a powerful motivator, which can be the only motivator for people without morality that can motivate them like a civilized person.
SkamanSam
I was taught violence against your fellows is never the answer. Violence against those who are violent against you is self-preservation. The rich have already decided to be violent against the non-rich.
DanOrtega
violence is not the answer. It's the meaning to an end.
DanielAsparagus
Frankly, violence is the first and original answer. Is it sustainable? No. Have we been forced into a system where more enlightened methods of resolution have been engineered into obsolescence? Nobody knows, my fbi guy might be listening.
IhopeUgetwhatUvoted4
It's the answer when it's about oil, but not when it's about human rights to live a decent life.
INeverReadTheTOS
And it rings especially hollow when said by those in power who regularly deploy a deliberately violent police force against the common folk.
VraedenHughes
Not to mention the social murder they are responsible for as well.
UserNamesArentEasy
We should just change it to "Violence should not be your first answer"
Bobbobbobobbananafanafobob
Violence is never the answer to a personal problem. It is almost always the answer to class problems where you have to punch up.
Nebel01
it a sham, it only benefit thoses in power , they dont want you to use violence, since they want the monopoly over it since that strenghten them, just a bunch of cowardly bullies that fear retribution, but since the start of time change come from violence, you want things to get better ? you better start breaking some teeths
INeverReadTheTOS
The ruling class does everything it can to demonize violence, because they can simply use institutional powers (such as the police) to enact violence for them.
Timesarrows
the republicans/corporations/fascist media always r the first to state "Violence is never the answer" unless it is them that want to kill citizens in Philippines, SE Asia, Asia, Middle East, Central/South America who stand in their way of making corporate profits and ability to install fascist dictators. or creating a GOP/Trump coup on jan 6
MimiMaura1996
"violence is not the answer" Philadelphia's Police department after bombing and leveling an entire black neighborhood in 1985.
QuintinParry
Violence is the last answer but should be used sparingly when all other fail. The most galling part is that the Americans ignore the fact that are very existence is due to violence. Our country literally exists due to the Revolutionary War. The real answer is hate cruelty and apathy are never the answer.
IhopeyougetstageIIIcoloncancer
It also relies on the premise that violence is NOT ALREADY BEING ENACTED.
Violence is not the answer to peace, but if someone has voluntarily chosen to put their gun to your head, the time for polite discourse has passed.
Every day, these people knowingly make choices that will cause people harm and death for the benefit of shareholders, and they do it not because they're forced to or obliged to, but because they want to.
adickurig
I always remember the quote from “strangers with candy” dumb shoes on Comedy Central twenty years ago: “Violence never solved anything. Except conflict.”
Jimthebutler
I object when the violence doesn't serve the purpose you intend, destroying your neighbors home or business does nothing to big corps and corrupt officials.
NeverDownvoteMelBrooks
It's not the answer. It is, however, often a vehicle to get you there.
DanOrtega
upvote for you because it's true. A means to an end.
rossimus
Violence has been the answer to something like 99.999% of all problems faced by life on Earth.
ramshead91
Bullies respond more to getting punched then anything else.
Icouri
I will say the phrase "Violence is never *the* answer" is more accurate. It's always *an* answer. It's seldom the right one or the best one. But when all other answers are ignored or retaliated against, violence becomes what's left. Eat the rich.
blzrdphoto
Violence is not the answer. Unless left with no other choice.
E7130
Agree considering wars exist…
NinjaCongo
RoombaTheAssaultVacuum
It was a stance parroted by the people who knew violence would be the only eye to dislodge their corruption. Make violence sound more evil than them so we'd not see it as the moral high ground against evil.
mikeatike
Violence is the question. The answer is yes!
ucandcantunc
Said by those whom usually the violence is target at.
mixiekins
A shame that they're forever immune to "equal or lesser force" given the fact that someone can only die once.
MagnumRadhard
It's as far-fetched as "The customer is always right."
SneezeFarts
"In matters of taste". The full quote is much better than the bastardized version that has been created.
TheWombatStrikesAgain
We did have ways to solve this without violence though. Through politics and the justice system. Then the rich corrupted and bought both of those, to block anything that could dampen their profits, and cut down more rights and regulation to make even more obscene amounts of money, at the cost of even more human suffering.
Violence returning is just the natural consequence of that. "Last resort" doesn't mean "never", it means "when everything else fails".
imgonnaralph
"Dr. King’s policy was, if you are nonviolent, if you suffer, your opponent will see your suffering and will be moved to change his heart. That’s very good. He only made one fallacious assumption. In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience. The United States has none."
- Stokely Carmichael (June 29, 1941 – November 15, 1998), also known as Kwame Ture
Hexidimentional
yeah his strategy doesnt work against sociopaths
bolinotoyou
Violence is actually the only thing that has ever, historically, successfully challenged social power problems like this. Billionaires to the general masses, it's probably not much different in economic scale to the French Revolution, or medieval life before that
FacelessAce
Maybe the French Revolution isn't the best example.
aloharamada
Anyone who's ever managed to get their school bully to stop pestering them usually achieved this by using violence of some sort. You can't reason with people who lack basic empathy, plain and simple.
jaydude22
I like to say violence is never the first answer.
Conejito
It may not be the answer for the question but it's one of the multiple choices. Definitely an answer for a different question...
SuperSaiyanYamcha
I subscribe to “violence is never the first option” rather than “never the answer”.
Give reason a chance; but once it’s shown the other side won’t listen to reason, or they started with violence first?
Never throw the first punch, but make sure you throw the last one.
Shmitty85
Violence is never the answer, violence is the question. The answer is yes.
Penth13f
By all means! Name 1 working alternative!
InfocalypseRising
Violence has, throughout history, very often been the answer. Like all the time, really.
Johnsky
If someone attacks you, you defend yourself. The rich are literally killing us for profit. Violence is THE answer.
theworldcouldbeflat
Waiting around for a kid to die at school is the option b people are going with...
Scahrossar
Almost all important social change has been enacted (partly) through violence.
draek1
It's an aphorism brought to you by the same minds that say money doesn't buy you happiness. Tools of control
krielovas
Violence is not the answer. Violence is a question, and if the other methods fail, then the answer is yes
SuperGeniusPS
somerandomusernamebecauseididntlikemyoldone
Historically it has frequently been the answer, on all sides
TheobromineAddict
Commander Data agrees with you.
BeardicPerformance
So does Major Kiera
BatmanDeadpoolSlenderMan
I'm beginning to learn that "Violence is never the answer" comes from those who have never experienced a systemic injustice that threatens their livelihood.
edgeofadhesion
The people who claim violence isn't the answer are the ones with enough privilege to think that the people choose violence as Plan A, and not Plan Z, after everything else fails. In almost all situations when citizens as a group turn to violence it's because they've appealed to the ruling class in all the 'proper' ways and got nothing but condescension.
theworldcouldbeflat
Yeah thoughts and prayers work while waiting for your kid to get shot at school...
StellaMatutina
That was made up by SHITE parents who didn't want to raise their kids and just wanted some peace and quiet. Same generation that would suspend victims and bullies because they were too lazy to ask questions. Y'all wanna use Jesus, Gandhi, MLK jr as examples, REMIND US HOW THOSE ENDED MOTHER FUCKER
HarperLee
Violence is never the answer on the playground. The rest of us have decisions to make
ThrowAwayAcct0000
Considering world history, violence is often the answer.
TheobromineAddict
Data notices that terrorism works.
Grinch01
That Statement was build up by rich and powerfull people in the hope that the Union would stop come to them and beat them to death after they let the last strike be shoot down by cops
Motherbot25
That's because you're not using enough
drfre
Violence is the last resort, because after the violence worked out one needs tot get rid of the violent.
CarpeMofo
"Violence is never the answer until it's the *only* answer."
thedarklord187
On the basis of history violence has always been the answer no matter what civil rights violence slavery violence the literal founding of America violence civil war violence workers rights violence in every instance violence is the only thing that puts the rich where they really belong deep deep in the grave
Sasurau
Always remember, the first Pride parade was a fucking riot.
RealRaceRiotsAreAboutGettingBlueshelledInMarioKart
"Violence is never the answer" -Usually said by people with VERY punchable faces
SexyKetchupFactory
Also, people who have no problems that need answering.
arikelrecords2000
Often said by people who co troll state violence such as police or military personnel
zacknotzatch
Oatmealman1
That saying was definitely started by corrupt power mad CEOs/politicians
SergeyPrkl
It sure is answer. Problem is, people tend to use it wrong.
Hexidimentional
We tried peace.
Ultratoxic
It's exactly the sort of thing someone doing violence to you might say to keep you from fighting back.
Someshithead241
However it's just as simple, naive and reductive as "Violence is the only answer."
getyourfruitoffmeyoudamndirtygrapes
The stupid thing about the ideology of pro-violence like this is it's like a sword that so many don't know how to wield. You want "justice" but your propoganda here is attempting to give the sword to a lot of sloppy idiots who are going to end up murdering the wrong people. Don't believe me? Look at how pizzagate worked. The above post is basically the blue-pill version of pizzagate. Innocent bystanders & misidentified targets are the future victims to this bullshit.
thedudeman519
Good thing that asshole got his dumb ass killed .
ProjectDeltaTheRealDeal
Guns are a lot easier than swords. Just point and Bang bang bang. Super easy to point it at a billionaire.
BonkyMcSignFace
The “war on terror” currently costs the US taxpayers $25,905.56 per second. Source https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/category/military/
FoxyEllie
Self defense has always been an acceptable form of violence
EaNasirsExcellentHighGradeCopper
Violence is usually not the answer, until the powers at be make it the only resort left.
Ryebread91
It depends on who's saying the answer. They have no problem using violence to ensure their wealth. Yet it suddenly becomes wrong when anyone else uses it to secure their lives.
graipefruitforbrekfast
Violence isn’t the answer, it’s the question and the answer is yes
FisheswithDynamite
Violence is never the answer. It is the question.
mabusmordana7
Nonviolent protests are a tool of the oppressor
AmbientPlatypus
Soo... Violence is *sometimes* the answer.
DarkwingDuc
When all else fails (and it has), yes.
tekcor
I personally like the saying “the only good fight is the one not fought.” That doesn’t mean violence is never the answer. It just means violence represents a larger failure.
ThriceGreat
It really depends on what the question is.
BlindGardener
Yes. Violence is not *always* the answer, but it’s also not *never* the answer. Sometimes violence is the correct move. The people who study this shit have basically proven that violence works better the more support you have and once you have the active support of about 20-30% of the population, violence becomes an increasingly effective strategy. Less active support than 20-30% and it’s counter productive.
BlindGardener
(I use ‘proven’ pretty loosely. In sociology owing active studies on this stuff kinda doesn’t work, you have to instead look to historical records. It’s important to note that a lot of changes happen without any violence at all! Less than a third of major changes in law happen with violence historically.)
BlindGardener
(… Mind, 100% of the major changes in law that they teach in highschool history class involved violence)
CallThisAUsername
Violence in self-defense is sometimes the only move that is not self-destructive.
theworldcouldbeflat
Yeah but the US is way past that point, Democrats are essentially lying on the floor in a fetal position trying to read Anne Frank to survive.
jayman0123
most* times
Itslukus
Violence is the question... follow the flow chart: if thriving the answer is no if barely surviving by no fault of your own than the anwser is yes
flosser
I’m wondering if the people who came up with “violence is not the answer” are the one who are responsible for causing all the pains but afraid of us retaliating and thus propagandizing “violence is not the answer” so they can get away with it…hmm
MrStealUrChange
Sure is
thatlamer
It's always the answer. The few examples of major change from peaceful protest still held the THREAT of violence. A million people outside your door are effectively telling you "We're here and we're rational. Give us what we want before we stop being rational. You can't shoot us all." Compare that to occupy where they sat around with a handful of people. There was no threat there, which is why rich assholes felt at ease to smear them as dirty hippies. At their peak the NYPD outnumbered them 3:1.
INeverReadTheTOS
Indeed!
Gestalt7
FiftyShadesOfCauliflower
When everything else has been tried, violence is the only answer that remains. Always.
theworldcouldbeflat
School shootings only happen in US kids dying seems worth the violence.
OverthinkingThis
This. Violence should never be the first answer, but it is the last.
OhIfIMust
Especially when one side uses violence, like, ALL THE TIME.
spookyactionatadistance
You are right. Violence has almost always been THE option. That doesn't change the fact that glorifying a mentally ill shooter with quasi religious poster is messed up.
ProjectDeltaTheRealDeal
Nah. People need a hero. Luigi is player 1 now.
spookyactionatadistance
I wish it were that simple. Until we attack the root problem of capitalism nothing will change. That CEO has already been replaced. They'll do a little dance and maybe on the surface change a couple things but they won't get caught a second time.
ProjectDeltaTheRealDeal
You're correct. But it's not about that. Being the face makes them a target. Kill enough of them, that's how revolution happens. Make it not ok to be corrupt again by violence. If the judicial system is failed, it's up to the brave to make the sacrifice like Luigi and end the nightmare one billionaire at a time if needed. There's roughly 2780 of them out there. This only needs to happen roughly 2780 more times. Let me tell you, there's far more of the working class than that.
Catodactyl
Revolutions are never pretty and always bloody...
DignamWhenAskedaQuestion
i mean the Founding Fathers certainly didn't think so. SO....if we go by the standards of the past why should we ? ( just pointing out the hypocrisy of ppl who want to go back to " how things used to be " )
HashMaster9k
Versh1986
I went looking for this. Have an upvote.
BeardicPerformance
Star Trek used to go so much harder than it does now. You would never get a good faith debate over the morality of terrorism on the corporate-approved Trek of today.
HashMaster9k
IconicM
The insurance company CEOs literally cannot do anything about our healthcare system. If all of them disappeared tomorrow nothing whatsoever would change. Our *politicians* need to enact single payer healthcare, and half of them are ideologically opposed to it because most of their voters are opposed to doing anything that will help minorities.
Goldensands
Fk me you are one vile corpowhoring apologist. Unbecoming of a human being to act this way.
IconicM
It's the fucking reality of the situation. We're completely screwed because half the voters want to kill brown people to solve our problems, and now the other half want to kill "the rich" to solve our problems but no one fucking wants legislation that would ACTUALLY solve our problems. Populist propaganda has doomed us. But sure, it's totally unbecoming of me to fucking realize that.
Goldensands
You're not gonna be allowed legislation. Not if 99% of all amerimorons wanted it, voted for it, protested for it. You're not. Things are far too gone for america to try and pretend to be a functional society with values in 2025. You either kill the rich or they kill you.
IconicM
Nope. Again, that won't do anything. What the fuck do you think will happen? The GOP will magically decide they're ok with providing healthcare to people that are different? Because no, they won't. In fact their voters will even more strongly support dictatorship to control the evil leftists that are causing violence. Btw peaceful change is actually a fucking thing, and you do it by convincing a majority of the population to make those changes. Remember
SuperSaiyanYamcha
CEO’s set policy. Had this particular CEO set the policy to be “fulfill our role and pay for the healthcare as we are supposed to rather than make billions for ourselves” we wouldn’t have a problem would we?
IconicM
If he just set a policy of always paying but the company would go broke, his competitors who didn't would grow. We still wouldn't have healthcare because the only thing that does work is socialized medicine which the politicians need to implement.
SuperSaiyanYamcha
Never said that did I? What I DID say was that perhaps if they didn’t have a policy of outright denying 1/3 of all claims regardless of validity they wouldn’t have pissed off someone to the point of killing them.
Or are YOU saying that the only options for insurance companies is to either go broke or pay out literally everything?
IconicM
I'm saying that that killing people doesn't do anything and that POLITICIANS need to fucking enact single payer healthcare. Did I stutter?
IconicM
I mean fucking seriously, do you think it would be better if they accepted 10% more fucking claims? 20%? While millions are still completely uninsured? Like, fuck all the way off if you think murdering people to get a FEW fucking more claims approved is worthwhile while millions of uninsured are sick and can't get treatment.
TheWhiteBarry
Go ahead and find me one example in all of human history where violence solved the problem AND didn't just replace it with lust for vengeance. I'll wait.
SuperSaiyanYamcha
Any time someone tried to murder another person and was killed by the defender.
DucksAreGood
... anytime someone defends themselves ?
TheWhiteBarry
> gets attacked
> defend myself
> attacker forgives me
lol
INeverReadTheTOS
... World War 2.
TheWhiteBarry
Yup there's definitely no connection to modern day Russia or anything...
sgnight13
Provide for us, if you will, an alternative solution to *checks notes* Nazi Germany that would lead to fewer negative outcomes.
sgnight13
Slavery
TheWhiteBarry
Yeah the south is clearly over that one 🙄
sgnight13
Yeah because the aftermath of slavery is totally worse than actual slavery 🙄
TheWhiteBarry
Did you lose the plot somewhere? That wasn't at all the discussion taking place. It isn't about justification, it's about the reality of imposing your will by force leading to retaliation 100% of the time.
atrielienz
There's a bit of nuance to it. The amount of violence you have to do to get real change is so much that most people will ball at it because they will recognize that it can and will spill over on them, especially as the working class who don't have any protections whatsoever. This is the cruz of the problem. I've made the argument that violence on its own isn't that effective, because it's not. That's why so many people are in prison. The threat of harm does not in and of itself make people
atrielienz
follow the rules. It doesn't change people's minds about which rules should be followed either. We see this is recidivism rates, in talks about legalisation of certain drugs etc. we even see it in anti-drug media. The follow-through is important. And there's not that many people willing to follow-through.
atrielienz
Additionally if we're gonna burn it down, we gotta have a plan that's more than self righteous blustering and a hand full of random policies in a trench coat. This is down to more than just 5-6 hotly contested topics on social media. If it wasn't, more people would get involved in politics which, by the way, is another area most people don't want to have anything to do with.
atrielienz
Since y'all don't like what I have to say, I'm just going to point out that for the thousands of you advocating for violence on this platform everyday, not one of you is out there living that dream. Why not?
Goldensands
.. america has the highest rate of incarcerations in the world. They are also the most corpowhoring culture, extremely unlikely to do fk all to so much as inconvenience their oligarchy (including when their prisons are for-profit institutions of entirely and exactly literal slavery). The sort of "harm" and "prison" you speak of isn't even relevant to the discussion.
atrielienz
You're missing the point. I'm talking directly about recidivism rates and how people who are criminals (looking at the oligarchy you speak of) are likely to not only not be bothered much by the threat of violence or indeed by the threat of consequences so long as they can continue their way of life. Which is why threats from regular people) are so ineffective, and why every single time this happens regular people have to go so far (violently) to make any changes. The violence is a medium for
Goldensands
Good grief dude. You can write your corpowhore apologist paragraphs to your fking self.
atrielienz
You think it's "corpowhore apologist" because you didn't read. Not my problem. Have a good one.
atrielienz
quick change but it doesn't last. We do this every 50-70 years somewhere on earth because people who want things that go against the common good or society do so by playing the long game. That's how we lost abortion rights in America. It's how we've lost workers rights, and social programs. Because it's not just about the violence. It's more about how we come together after the violence with a plan to do something good and what we can agree on going forward. People always love to bring up the
atrielienz
Violence part and how "effective it is" but neglect that there is absolutely way more to it than killing off the people who want to take advantage of the masses. You'll never kill them all and this is why shit like racism and slavery still exist at all. They go into hiding, rebuild their numbers and use the systems already in place to reclaim the things they want or change the systems to give them what they want and then we get to go killing them again 50-70 or so years later. Then add to this