When is Violence Justified?

[A Red]

3 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

You are the person saying violence is never justified while I am citing examples where it forced change and was considered necessary. There was plenty of law breaking and violence being used to change it. A milk shake being thrown simply wouldn't have achieved any of it.

Oh fuck off wasting my time, is what i want to say, but im too polite. So, ill just disagree with you.

 

[VladimirIlyich]

2 minutes ago, A Red said:

Oh fuck off wasting my time, is what i want to say, but im too polite. So, ill just disagree with you.

 

Ah,the TK angle,the flounce.

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, moof said:

I’m not missing any point mate; my entire point, initially, was that violence against certain people is justifiable.

Unfortunately if that is your position you have to accept the flip side as being "justifiable" - seems like there would be plenty of people who voted for him that may want to punch you in the face for example.

You could always do a trial run and see what happens.

[Captain Howdy]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

 

If he also said that it counts as violence, then I would argue that he's wrong. 

 

[cloggypop]

I'm finding the idea of people with fascist tendencies being sympathetic to anything fairly fucking funny 

[Boss]

51 minutes ago, moof said:

Of course the reaction would be different. Corbyn is a decent bloke, and would largely receive sympathy if some blert poured a milkshake all over him. Farage, Robinson, Carl of swindon are utter scum so when it happens to them it’s funny

How is Farage utter scum exactly?

[A Red]

36 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Ah,the TK angle,the flounce.

I wasnt flouncing, i would normally try to answer everything put to me. Today is my busiest day so i'm in and out of the house and dont really have the time. I apologise.

 

I will say your bit has already been covered in the last few pages so perhaps have a look

[TheHowieLama]

Nice - passive flounce. Veteran move that.

[moof]

26 minutes ago, Boss said:

How is Farage utter scum exactly?

You really have to ask?

[moof]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Unfortunately if that is your position you have to accept the flip side as being "justifiable" - seems like there would be plenty of people who voted for him that may want to punch you in the face for example.

You could always do a trial run and see what happens.

Yes, fascism and anti fascism is the exact same thing. Good debate 

[VladimirIlyich]

23 minutes ago, A Red said:

I wasnt flouncing, i would normally try to answer everything put to me. Today is my busiest day so i'm in and out of the house and dont really have the time. I apologise.

 

I will say your bit has already been covered in the last few pages so perhaps have a look

Ok. When you have a chance can you just simplify your position by answering these questions 'Do you believe violence is ever justified?' And 'Do you think the milkshake incident was a violent incident?' If the answer to the second question is 'yes' then I will have to assume the incidents involving Prescott,Miliband and Corbyn are all considered violent even if the Prescott and Miliband incidents only involved eggs,by you?

My last question is 'Why do people consider dairy products to be effective weapons?'

[TheHowieLama]

5 minutes ago, moof said:

Yes, fascism and anti fascism is the exact same thing. Good debate 

Mate -- we are not debating fascism/anti fascism.

In this discussion there is absolutely no difference. It is not about support of one viewpoint over another, it is an understanding that violence begets violence. If you don't want to use that word because of a dictionary definition then civil disobedience begets civil disobedience. Suggesting either is justifiable against any group - which in itself is a ridiculous claim - without realising that group would have equal justification for the same behavior makes you look like a simpleton. 

It is like free speech, it has nothing to do with support for the viewpoint.

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Unfortunately if that is your position you have to accept the flip side as being "justifiable" - seems like there would be plenty of people who voted for him that may want to punch you in the face for example.

You could always do a trial run and see what happens.

I’ve never voted for Farage but the second part sounds lovely. 

[Boss]

20 minutes ago, moof said:

You really have to ask?

Yes. 

[TheHowieLama]

It may also be worth pointing out that Farage, and Trump for that matter, are raging, self serving Capitalists of the absolute highest order - which given the foundations of Fascism in the early 20th century makes it very difficult to consider them Fascists.

[A Red]

27 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Ok. When you have a chance can you just simplify your position by answering these questions 'Do you believe violence is ever justified?' And 'Do you think the milkshake incident was a violent incident?' If the answer to the second question is 'yes' then I will have to assume the incidents involving Prescott,Miliband and Corbyn are all considered violent even if the Prescott and Miliband incidents only involved eggs,by you?

My last question is 'Why do people consider dairy products to be effective weapons?'

1. Yes there are times when violence is justified 

 

2. I believe the milkshake incident was a non justified violent event as were the others involving eggs

 

3. You've got me on the people thinking dairy products are effective weapons, I have no idea.

[A Red]

56 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Nice - passive flounce. Veteran move that.

It was the comparing me to TK that got to me, cut me to the quick

[aRdja]

2 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

He is not downplaying the egg incident -- he is saying if Corbyn got milkshaked there would be a different reaction. 

Anning was a racist and a right winger as well - certainly being struck in the head from behind was violent.

And as has been pointed out - led to escalation.

 

Officials also concluded Mr Anning had acted in self-defence when he appeared to strike the teenager afterwards.

The teen said the stunt was intended to be a “few laughs with mates” and he did not expect Mr Anning to react as he did to the egging. 

 

Mr Anning appeared to hit the teenager twice after he was egged and his supporters then restrained Mr Connolly on the ground.

Calling punching someone in the head whilst holding an egg, “egg throwing” is downplaying it. 

[Rico1304]

9 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Calling punching someone in the head whilst holding an egg, “egg throwing” is downplaying it. 

Have you considered he wanted to egg him and fucked it up?  It’s almost and if throwing something at someone is a bad idea. 

[SasaS]

I would fully expect Mr. Anning to react to the egging as he did.

[aRdja]

 

[TheHowieLama]

19 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Calling punching someone in the head whilst holding an egg, “egg throwing” is downplaying it. 

Oh - so one poster did. Maybe he has an agenda?

 

I think in my posts I have called every incident violent. Do you think any were "justified"?

Or are they all acts of legitimate civil disobedience?

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, SasaS said:

I would fully expect Mr. Anning to react to the egging as he did.

I would too -- except for the few seconds where he realises there is no true threat, it is obviously a kid and he goes in for a second dig. Not sure about that part.

[aRdja]

I couldn’t help but agree with Afua unfortunately. When Corbyn was the victim a lot of people including the media downplayed the whole incident. Complete contrast to when the far right are the victims. People (unfortunately including some posters here) are now lining up, to call someone throwing drinks at another a ‘violent assault’, and a precursor to murder. Very sad to see.

[TheHowieLama]

Media bias lad.