Violence isn't the first answer, but it is very often the last.
Like people say, unions are there because burning the factory down with the owner still inside was often the alternative.
this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
845 points (98.1% liked)
History Memes
3375 readers
703 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism, atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Lemmy.world rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's a little more complex.
If you can win the fight, and there's not that much to talk about, violence is the answer. The American Revolution, the Civil War, World War 2.
If you can't win the fight, violence isn't the answer but sometimes there is a way. The US civil rights movement, Gandhi's movement for Indian independence. It doesn't mean you won't have to fight. But when the badness of the landscape is more to do with everyone's attitudes and understand of the world, and they're assigning "the good guys" to the wrong people, and "a good system" to something that's destroying you, sometimes going to war against all of them without trying to correct the understanding piece is not the answer, because they are going to fight back.
If you can win the fight, but you don't have a good plan for after, and the understanding piece isn't there, sometimes violence makes things much worse even if you win. The French Revolution, the Russian revolution, the Cultural Revolution.
I'm not saying you won't have to fight. Our current political class's apathetic conviction that all they have to do is say the right words, and someone else will come in and put a stop to Trump, is pathetic. But sometimes there's a lot to talk about, too.
This is French Revolution slander, go straight to the guillotine
Yeah fair enough. Kind of. I guess it is relevant that the end goal was okay. I'm just saying that (a) that came against a backdrop of a highly-educated enlightenment-era elite, with a genuine commitment to better government and better things, a lot of systemic structures of debate and good formal education, the specific recent example of the American Revolution to draw on, and (b) they still executed tens of thousands of people at the hands of successive waves of tyrannical revolutionary governments that sometimes chopped the heads off the previous leaders, before they eventually got their stuff straightened out.
I'm saying that the eventual success is more the exception than the rule, and there were specific reasons supporting the eventual good outcome that a lot of times don't exist when a big bunch of people kills the government.
'The American revolution" is a very bad example in that context
Why?
The Age of Enlightenment and all the revolutions that it inspired were directly influenced by the Indigenous Critique of Native Americans. How did you think Europe thanked them after the American Revolution?
What?
Not saying you're wrong, I just have no idea how that relates to what we were talking about.
It's just one, and a big one, reason why The American Revolution is a bad example in the context of 'made the world a better place.' It could've, and that was somewhat the intention, but America would very soon again bend over backwards for wealthy "lords" and reverse all the ideals and philosophies that the revolution was based on. Where the French Revolution was bad because of all the head-choppin', American Revolution was Bad^10 because of the genocide of the peoples and ideas that spurred the Enlightenment, making sure we never read or talk about things like THIS ever since.
My assertion is not "after the American Revolution all progress was done because things were fixed." Obviously there were still massive crimes and inequalities under the post-revolutionary government (including The Big One.) My assertion was that the American Revolution made things better for the people who fought the revolution, formed a better state of being than the one they had under English rule. The brits were killing and displacing native people, too. All those pre-revolutionary cities where they were having meetings about liberty used to be where natives had been living.
I wasn't saying my examples made "the world" a better place. I'm just saying it was the answer for the people doing the fighting. Like I say I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying it's not directly related to what I was trying to say.
If you really look into Indian independence, Gandhi had fuck all to do with it. The british lost a lot in the war and they were making concessions. They already had extracted, exploited, and starved the poor and didn't want the overhead of managing large colonies anymore.
That is why the british marked their borders, that is why they still use british governance, that is why the ruling class are still the ones from high caste and status that helped British subjugate the lower class/caste during their rule.
And all that is why there's still a lot of corruption and class/gender/caste/religion conflicts. They just got new sheep in wolf's clothing.
It wasn't some grassroots movement that won over by peace and protest. It was a hand me down.
The US civil rights movement and MLK are often trotted out as examples of nonviolent resistance bringing change, but people forget that he was the carrot to Malcolm X's stick. MLK brought change because the threat of Malcolm X arming the black community and calling for violence was hanging just over his shoulder.
If only I had addressed that issue directly
Violence is always an option. It should be the last to take but it is always an option.
In fact that has been the implicit threat driving democracy. If you give the angry an out though voting, you can get out of the way before the threat of violence.
Attack people's democratic voice and you risk the violent answer.
Eat the rich. Shoot Nazis. Break stuff.
Violence isn't the answer; it is the question, and sometimes the answer is "yes"
"Violence is usually the answer."
- Roadhog
Authoritarianism, racism and misogyny are not the answer either no matter how much you find examples of it in the history books.
Authoritarianism, racism and misogyny are not the answer either no matter how much you find examples of it in the history books.
Damn, so what do we use to fight those awful things
Education, economic stability and social mobility, political reforms and democracy, media and free speech, legal protections and human rights movements.
Violence on the other hand, even when it topples oppressive systems, often leads to power vacuums, further repression and new forms of extremism.
Education, economic stability and social mobility, political reforms and democracy, media and free speech, legal protections and human rights movements.
Surely the powerful can't say no to any of that.
they wouldn't dare
If your argument here is that violence is the answer, then please, tell me how much violence does it take for you to change your core beliefs? Because for me the answer is that no amount is enough. At best it'll just make me hide them. Now, because I know it doesn't work on me I thus don't expect it to work on other people either.
I... Don't think the violence needs to change minds.
Why not, kill enough protestors and eventually the rest won't want to protest any more. See? Changing hearts and minds, one machinegun spray at a time. Like the Marines in Afghanistan.
/s
your argument here is that violence is the answer, then please, tell me how much violence does it take for you to change your core beliefs?
No reason to force a false dichotomy, I don't think anyone here is saying that violence is the answer to every problem. Just that sometimes it's the only appropriate response to people who are themselves willing to do violence.
how much violence does it take for you to change your core beliefs? Because for me the answer is that no amount is enough. At best it'll just make me hide them.
That's the entire point of fascism. Fascist don't actually care about actually swaying everyone to their ideology. All they have to do is achieve a monopoly of violence and use it to make sure people are too afraid to stand up to them.
Now, because I know it doesn't work on me I thus don't expect it to work on other people either.
A confident claim from someone who's likely never experienced the level violence that can be levied by an oppressive regime.
Violence isn't always the answer.
But violence is very often the answer.
Education, economic stability and social mobility, political reforms and democracy, media and free speech, legal protections and human rights movements.
And... How exactly do you get these things? Because nine times out if ten asking for them will get you shot.
Yeah, the problem is never that you have no one or no place or no money to make these things exist. People do want to teach and facilitate travel. You'll always find ways to create a place for those things, and have some people help. The problem is the people who try to stop it because they like it better when everyone is stupid and uneducated, and all discussion is in bad faith. And that problem has a clear solution.
Education, economic stability and social mobility, political reforms and democracy, media and free speech, legal protections and human rights movements.
Surely, the arab gulf monarchs will respond well to this and not shoot at protestors 😃
On a serious note, i live in one of those countries and most of the things you list? We don't have at all. I would love to topple the oppressive royal family, but how would violence not play a role in it?
Unfortunately we know that manipulation of elections, the MSM and social media trumps all the other solutions, as we have witnessed.
Education, economic stability and social mobility, political reforms and democracy, media and free speech, legal protections and human rights movements.
Tell that to Allende lmfao
That’s too left wing for the average lemmite
Reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw many moons ago: "War is not the answer. It's the question."
If violence isn't the answer you haven't used enough of it
If violence isn't your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Maxim 6
we're going to be late to the party and they will be anticipating us because we didn;t take the initiative when we still had a chance to gain surprise.
Test
Test seen?
Downvote accepted.
I wasn’t able to upvote the post and thought I was Bannnnd’e from this community 👻🥴🤧🙂😃😄😊