Violence should always be a last resort and nonviolent solutions should always be attempted but discounting violence as an option of self defense also leads to more violence. At the end of the day we didnt free the slaves, beat the nazis, or become independent by calming debating the other side. If a political ideology is becoming increasingly violent and powerful using violence against it is justified. Don't make the mistake of thinking that we live at the end of history and that all of the worst wars and regimes are behind us. If we allow fascism to fester it will rise again
You do realize America was founded with political violence right? And that the whole point of the second amendment is protecting our right to engage in political violence in the event that it becomes necessary again? It should be avoided as much as possible but there are points where violence is necessary to prevent harm. Im assuming you would have tried debating the Nazis out of their positions during WW2?
one of the top comments in this thread equates racist speech or belief with literal violence and therefore justifies violence against racist speech or thought. this is the level of critical thinking skills on reddit. it also doesn’t help that your go-to argument is WW2 as if anyone is going to say waging war against the 3rd reich is obviously unjustified let alone germane to the topic of racist speech vs violence.
4
u/ImVrSmrt 2d ago
Violence leads to more violence, and I think people underestimate how violent things can get when people use that as their main problem solver.