>>724217812
This isn't me picking a side, but this isn't really indicative of overall behavior. Conservatives (in theory) conserve, they want the status quo preserved. They don't want things like regime change, societal upheaval or revolutions which almost exclusively occur through violence.
It is functionally impossible to achieve anything of note without power and the average person has no power. Their votes mean nothing, their representatives don't represent them and they have no means to directly vote on the issues they face. There are some other avenues like PACs but those too require large amounts of money that average people don't have, while those in power can just dump even more money into their own Super-PACs to drown out their opposition.
With no democratic routes available within the system, the only available ones are through protest. Non-violent protests can work if they get enough attention, but again, those in power can just tell the media (who they own) to not pay attention to it. Violence cannot be ignored. Its message can be twisted and manipulated by the media but it is one of the only options available to the powerless desperate to be heard.
I'm not saying violence is good, but I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding behind the purpose of politically-motivated violence. It is rarely the first sought option. If it were more feasible for people without money and political influence to exert some control over the system they're beholden to then it would occur less.
4chan Search
3 results for "0c50bba1a76d68edfc8793874686178f"
>>23514548
This isn't me picking a side, but this isn't really indicative of overall behavior. Conservatives (in theory) conserve, they want the status quo preserved. They don't want things like regime change, societal upheaval or revolutions which almost exclusively occur through violence.
It is functionally impossible to achieve anything of note without power and the average person has no power. Their votes mean nothing, their representatives don't represent them and they have no means to directly vote on the issues they face. There are some other avenues like PACs but those too require large amounts of money that average people don't have, while those in power can just dump even more money into their own Super-PACs to drown out their opposition.
With no democratic routes available within the system, the only available ones are through protest. Non-violent protests can work if they get enough attention, but again, those in power can just tell the media (who they own) to not pay attention to it. Violence cannot be ignored. Its message can be twisted and manipulated by the media but it is one of the only options available to the powerless desperate to be heard.
I'm not saying violence is good, but I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding behind the purpose of politically-motivated violence. It is rarely the first sought option. If it were more feasible for people without money and political influence to exert some control over the system they're beholden to then it would occur less.
This isn't me picking a side, but this isn't really indicative of overall behavior. Conservatives (in theory) conserve, they want the status quo preserved. They don't want things like regime change, societal upheaval or revolutions which almost exclusively occur through violence.
It is functionally impossible to achieve anything of note without power and the average person has no power. Their votes mean nothing, their representatives don't represent them and they have no means to directly vote on the issues they face. There are some other avenues like PACs but those too require large amounts of money that average people don't have, while those in power can just dump even more money into their own Super-PACs to drown out their opposition.
With no democratic routes available within the system, the only available ones are through protest. Non-violent protests can work if they get enough attention, but again, those in power can just tell the media (who they own) to not pay attention to it. Violence cannot be ignored. Its message can be twisted and manipulated by the media but it is one of the only options available to the powerless desperate to be heard.
I'm not saying violence is good, but I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding behind the purpose of politically-motivated violence. It is rarely the first sought option. If it were more feasible for people without money and political influence to exert some control over the system they're beholden to then it would occur less.
