Following that line of thinking, it would make no sense for American revolutionaries to kill British soldiers, or for Palestinians to kill IDF, or for European resistance fighters to kill Nazi soldiers. Killing low level stormtroopers “just following orders” is the same as killing an occupying soldier “just following orders.” In both instances, you have low level individuals just going along with a status quo that leads to more victimization of innocents. Police who don’t want to become targets should either fight against oppressive tactics internally, or quit and deprive the force of manpower.
Whose arguing? I’m just having a spirited debate on the role violence has in balancing the power dynamic between the ruling class and the governed. I don’t believe that governments should have a monopoly on violence for achieving their goals and that the people have just as much a right, if not more, in using violence as a tool to prevent objective evils.
So you’re no longer defending fascists against violent retribution by the people? Do you consider agents of a fascist regime (i.e. police) to be exempt from justified violent action by anti-fascists? Should police action in furtherance of fascist policies only be faced with peaceful protest, or is it morally justifiable to not be tolerant of intolerance, up to and including violence?
As others have said, murdering a low level police officer isn’t necessarily justified or going to help a SINGLE thing.
Following that line of thinking, it would make no sense for American revolutionaries to kill British soldiers, or for Palestinians to kill IDF, or for European resistance fighters to kill Nazi soldiers. Killing low level stormtroopers “just following orders” is the same as killing an occupying soldier “just following orders.” In both instances, you have low level individuals just going along with a status quo that leads to more victimization of innocents. Police who don’t want to become targets should either fight against oppressive tactics internally, or quit and deprive the force of manpower.
We really don’t need to argue here.
Whose arguing? I’m just having a spirited debate on the role violence has in balancing the power dynamic between the ruling class and the governed. I don’t believe that governments should have a monopoly on violence for achieving their goals and that the people have just as much a right, if not more, in using violence as a tool to prevent objective evils.
I perceive a conversation where I’m being accused of doing something horrible as an “argument”
So you’re no longer defending fascists against violent retribution by the people? Do you consider agents of a fascist regime (i.e. police) to be exempt from justified violent action by anti-fascists? Should police action in furtherance of fascist policies only be faced with peaceful protest, or is it morally justifiable to not be tolerant of intolerance, up to and including violence?