That's the basic point, I think.
football violence vs political violence
- Thread starter bluestreak
- Start date
That's the basic point, I think.
I think you both have to define what you mean by political violence. I would say that violence used by the state, for example the police, is political violence. Can you see what I'm saying here?
Yeah. You want them to stop hitting you and you think the best way is to hit them back.
you should read up on rioting psychology and methodology because you have no idea what the hell you're talking about...
The Black Hand
Unclean
You all should read "Understanding Political Violence" by V. Ruggiero - OUP/Open university press, 2006.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Or maybe the works of Class War Hooliganz?
The Black Hand
Unclean
There was none.
Simplistic but in a sense not untrue. Unless of course you're some kind of martyr.
You didn't comment on violence by the state, and it's agencies, being political violence.
It doesn't work, though.
What's theere to comment on? It's violence and it's political and it's wrong. It's not that much of a problem here and therefore retaliation is innappropriate.
If using force to defend yourself against someone violent stops them then it's worked.
In the short term. And on an individual basis.
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
The thing is kizmet, I think that things are getting really bad in this country. I'm a pacifist at heart, but I'm also angry. You think I'm wrong, and that's fine. I'm not going to argue with you, you're a moral agent as much as I am. I also don't disagree that my stance is also slightly wonky, it is. But we live in an age where dissent itself leads to being treated like a criminal. Free speech is rapidly becoming a redundancy. In the end, we can either put up with it and toe the line, or we can express our anger. The system as it stands now is no longer one in which multiple opinions are expressible, and when too many people are disenfranchised, extremism naturally follows - extremism of all political flavours.
I'm not interested in trying to force you to agree with me, merely want to make sure that my opinions are expressed properly.
Would you ever consider rioting against any conceivable political regime or law? In any circumstances?
I'm not interested in trying to force you to agree with me, merely want to make sure that my opinions are expressed properly.
Would you ever consider rioting against any conceivable political regime or law? In any circumstances?
On what scale? Bad compared to?
Violence happens. The only thing I think is wrong is promoting it as a course of action.
We live in an age where dissent and free speech are at their most powerful due to the rise in communications and the internet.
I understand the concerns about the limitations that society puts upon the individual in the name of 'the good' of society.. but in the context of very real dangers I can also understand the desire for these limitations.
It's complicated.. which is why the last thing we need is people getting all het up and angry about stuff. Cool, calm heads. That's what will ultimately help.
Rioting? No. Personal physical action? Yes.
I don't believe in mob justice.
Just seen your edit, and that's fair enough, because I did move it on to an individual basis as I think it's easier to comprehend violence by the police against an individual, rather than against a group of individuals. But I think the same principle applies if it's an individual or a group of people who are forced to defend themselves against that violence. The important thing is to ensure immediate, short term safety.
Looking to the longer term I've heard the violence begets violence argument more times than I care to think about. What I haven't heard is an honest discussion of how allowing state violence, turning the other cheek, means that next time you will be met with the same level of violence if it takes their fancy.
Eventually people are going to become tired of being pushed around, bullied and walloped with batons or whatever. That's when they tend to turn their backs on the whole thing, and walk away...
bignose1
Searchlight Spoiler
Did they win on aggregate!!!It does work, I have seen this happen time and time again. Plus most footie punchups like last nights are just a load of drunks throwing plastic chairs and getting a beating from riot police.
The exception would be the Millwll vs Brum puchup wit the police a while back, that was hardcore, or was everyone throwing hardcore?
sunnysidedown
caput mortuum
The old ones are the best...
el-ahrairah
forward communism, forward gerbils!
A classic thread.
malatesta32
Not Serb. No, Really!
a very interesting dissertation!
http://afaarchive.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/thesis-p2.pdf
http://afaarchive.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/thesis-p2.pdf
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Kizmet's arguments on this thread are utterly incoherent. The idea that we shouldn't engage in political violence because this would serve to legitimise it is at odds with his acceptance of the fact that the state uses political violence every day. If the authorities use it then that legitimises it to a far greater extent than if we use it. So it's already been legitimised - in which case we might as well use it, nothing to lose innit.
Ole
Well-Known Member
What we do have to lose is any reasonable possibility of mainstream support. The police are not viewed by the masses as 'fair game' for violence even in retaliation, whatever you think of the sense of that view. Violence in general tends to destroy public sympathy for a cause and on that basis alone should be avoided.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
That's a different argument completely though. And it depends on the situation - sometimes the only way to retain public support if not sympathy is to engage in violence.
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
Andrew Hertford
Chocolate Jesus
Despite Tomlinson I think there's still large support for the police. The only poll I can find (ICM - The Guardian, after the riots last year) suggests support of 61% and that would probably rise once riot fetishists started bashing them over the head.
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
unlike ole you've got the wit not to make up claims you can't support.
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
you seem to take 61% as a starting point, whereas it's not clear it's anything of the sort. and indeed it's not clear what you mean by 'support' - do you mean 61% of the population will support the police come what may? i'd say that if after widespread rioting of the sort seen like august the police can only muster 'support' of 61%, then a large portion of the population - 2 people out of five - have no truck with the police when all 'right thinking' people are rallying behind the cops. i wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of people who answered the question in whatever poll you refer to - and a link would be nice - if asked now would be nearer 55% or lower.
Andrew Hertford
Chocolate Jesus
As I said, I can't find any other polling that asks such a question, but if you can find one that puts the figure at around 55% then that would be interesting to see. 61% was in answer to the question: "Are you confident that the police enforce the laws fairly, uniformly and without prejudice?" After the riots, a lot of people were pissed off with the police because they perceived to have not done enough to stop them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/12/riot-poll-public-back-police
In the wake of the Manchester murders I'd say that there is a lot more sympathetic support for the police now, but either way, even if almost half the population didn't support them there's no evidence that many people would actually support violence against them and when there is violence against them, support for them would probably increase.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/12/riot-poll-public-back-police
In the wake of the Manchester murders I'd say that there is a lot more sympathetic support for the police now, but either way, even if almost half the population didn't support them there's no evidence that many people would actually support violence against them and when there is violence against them, support for them would probably increase.
Similar threads
