Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

internet_chump t1_j25niu8 wrote

Reply to comment by TheJudgementIsDeath in Northern California statue of meat-packing magnate beheaded by GZAofTheMidwest

You do understand this is the same justification that runs through the minds of the people shooting up electricity substations, right?

The same justification the Jan 6th insurrectionists used?

This is the same "the ends justify the means" bullshit that leads to the worst of human behavior and never solves any problems. You can't eat the fruits of a poisoned tree. The means are the justification of the end, the categorical imperative demands it.

−1

TheJudgementIsDeath t1_j2600mm wrote

Fair enough, but I'm talking about when there's a genuine need to resist. And I get that paranoid racists could use the same argument for their fucked up shit, but so could the folks resisting the Nazis back in the day, or their contemporary cousins today.

0

internet_chump t1_j266rpl wrote

No, you don't seem to get it.

What constitutes the "genuine need" you speak of? Seems like there is genuine need to reduce carbon emissions, should people be sabotaging our power infrastructure? What if it turned out that these substation attacks were committed by people using that exact justification, because there's a genuine need to use extreme tactics to reduce energy consumption? Are you saying you would condone that? If you don't condone that, are you saying there isn't a genuine need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

There's a genuine need to reduce the growing far-right hate groups, too. What sort of extremist actions are justified in that case? Who gets to draw that line? You? Me?

Two wrongs don't make a right. Whether you want to admit it or not, that's the essence of your justification for whatever romantic notion you seem to have about committing "extremist acts of resistance".

Not only that, they aren't nearly as effective as non-violent respectability politics and passive civil disobedience.

−1