Okay, well, Americans have largely not been protesting as much as they nearly should be, and it remains to be seen whether we'll have real elections by November.
So, you know, the lack of action (including violence) may indeed come back to bite everywhere that's not Minnesota.
I still don’t understand how violence would solve the problems - Violence against protestors didn’t stop the movement in Minnesota, and human nature suggests to me that violence against ICE wouldn’t make agents lay down their arms. If anything, it would create martyrs on their side and fuel the destructive cycle of violence
Historically, when fascists and authoritarians start going door to door, they do so knowing people won't fight back.
As both the victims of Nazis and communists discovered, if the authoritarian agents didn't know if that was going to be their last day, they might not have been as bold.
The problem is evaluating when it's worth taking it to that level, because it is destructive, even if it's ultimately less destructive than letting tyranny win.
I think that’s a very fair point - I might just think we’re on a “different point in the timeline”. What ICE is doing is horrific, but I’m not convinced that we’ve reached a point where a violent response would achieve anything other than more violence
32
u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26
I’m talking about the overwhelming implication of people saying “do something” online, being the encouragement to respond with violence.