905
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
905 points (98.8% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2355 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
All violence is not equal. Unjustified and unprovoked violence is not the same as justified violence in self defense, for example. To say that one does not support violence is to paint with a very large brush and over important nuance and context
I don't believe self-defense is violence. For example, I believe Ukraine has every right to capture, injure, kill, and drive out all Russian invaders as they protect their country.
I get what you're saying, but believe me: I understand how broad my brush is, yet I still don't like violence. In my opinion some things are just black and white... 🤷♂️
A little surprised that you're getting downvoted for this, but I suppose your opinion on what constitutes violence is a value judgment rather than a dispassionate definition. Ukraine driving out Russian invaders from their homeland using whatever means necessary, including violence to the fullest extent allowed by the Geneva Convention, is absolutely justified in my book.
Remember, one of the biggest instances is Lemmy.ml, run by Tankies. Fuck fascism.
being justified or not has nothing to do with whether something is violent. if someone is getting hurt, maimed, or killed, that's violence, no matter how much they deserve it.
Sounds like the end justifies the means, which is itself a tricky statement. Though I think I know what you're saying.
Not even close to what I'm saying. But I'm glad you're listening...
I think it is what you're saying but not what you are intending to say. It sounds like there are conditions under which violence is ok, though violence itself is something to be avoided. Eg. Ukraine can defend itself using violence because violence in defence is ok, which in my mind sounds a lot like the end (self preservation) justifies the means (war).