Commentators like the New York Times’ Bret Stephens have called slain CEO Brian Thompson a “working-class hero.” You don’t have to condone murder to see through that ridiculous claim about a man who was at the helm of a legalized extortion racket.
This is a historically illiterate reply. The French Revolution was enacted by organized political resistance, not random assassinations. As the author points out, such acts never achieve any substantial or lasting change.
I’m not sure what CIA involvement has to do with violence, but I think it’s very interesting that you’re denouncing the nonviolent revolution that got Putin’s minions out of power.
The eventual violence being what, the war a decade later?
“Eventual violence” does not prove that non-violence can cause systemic change any more than Napoleon being crowned emperor proves all popular revolutions against monarchies fail.
And I gave you one single example. There are so many others. Of course, I’m sure you’ll find some reason to say each one of them doesn’t count. “One guy got his toes stomped on, so it was violent!” or “all the people involved were dead within 80 years!” That sort of thing.
Well I meant lasting positive change. This means building better systems—there’s just no other way to do it. Some assassinations have clearly altered the course of history but they didn’t really improve society.
This is a historically illiterate reply. The French Revolution was enacted by organized political resistance, not random assassinations. As the author points out, such acts never achieve any substantial or lasting change.
I keep telling people here that you usually cannot cure a systemic issue with violence but they refuse to believe it.
Please cite all the systemic issues solved with peace
Really?
Shall we start with this one?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution
I don’t think a CIA-backed movement qualifies.
I’m not sure what CIA involvement has to do with violence, but I think it’s very interesting that you’re denouncing the nonviolent revolution that got Putin’s minions out of power.
Because of the eventual violence that occurred. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
The eventual violence being what, the war a decade later?
“Eventual violence” does not prove that non-violence can cause systemic change any more than Napoleon being crowned emperor proves all popular revolutions against monarchies fail.
And I gave you one single example. There are so many others. Of course, I’m sure you’ll find some reason to say each one of them doesn’t count. “One guy got his toes stomped on, so it was violent!” or “all the people involved were dead within 80 years!” That sort of thing.
Organized vigilante violence, then.
The only recent-ish example I can think of that actually applies is Gavrilo Princip, and the consequences were mostly accidental.
Well I meant lasting positive change. This means building better systems—there’s just no other way to do it. Some assassinations have clearly altered the course of history but they didn’t really improve society.
And also wildly catastrophic