Seriously though, don't do violence.
This is HORRIBLE! Now CEOS might Fear for their LIVES and in Turn make Decisions that HELP US! That's SICK! We should let them KILL US without Consequence!
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
1566 points (98.6% liked)
memes
10675 readers
1905 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Aggressive negotiations
I'm not saying to track down do what this guy did to huge multi-hundred-billion dollar CEOs, but it's hard to say that it doesn't work.
Yeah, that's about what I'm getting at.
It goes to show how morally bankrupt these people are that it takes the fear of death being out into them to get them to do something even remotely good/ethical.
It also unfortunately proves, once more, that violence can absolutely be the solution.
I wouldn't call it violence, I would call it a justified use of force.
violence is bad
It is bad if used as the first approach.
It is fine when used in self defense or when all peaceful approaches have been exhausted in response to oppression and other malicious actions. It does matter when and why it is used.
Agreed. This happened because both parties are bought and paid for by big corpo. Our vote is only on how to address some of the social issue symptoms, if at all, of our crony capitalist economy, and only if they don't meaningfully effect corpo profits.
Example "please leftwing Obama, save us from this for profit healthcare hell!" proceeds to further enshrine for profit insurer leeches in a plan made from the heritage foundation because big corpo demand line go up.
The people don't get a vote on the crony capitalist economy.
When we wish to protest, we're now sent to designated protest zones out of the eyelines and profit operations of those we protest, making such "protests" as effective as masturbation in creating change.
This is happening because they have made us this desperate,and taken away/castrated our non-violent options. Some are apparently finally realizing that our votes and our protest have been manipulated by the capitalists that know they're doing us harm into still technically existing, but no longer mattering.
Gotta hand it to them, it's far more insidious than overt slavery with chains.
load more comments
(1 replies)
At best, this will cause insurance companies to spend more on PR, and maybe make some small token changes they can use as headlines.
"Violence is bad"
-Sincerely, every country that came into existence from the violent overthrow of the country that existed before it.
If it works it works. Humans have been using as an effective way to accomplish things for millennia.
The current capitalism overlords may not be happy when it's used the other way around to what they are used to.
Humans? You mean every living thing that ever existed?
"Violence is a precipitation of two sides unwilling to compromise."
- Sun Tzu The Art of War
If violence isn't a solution why does the government use it?
Aw man. You're gonna bring the "I like hospitals and roads but not taxes" crowd out of the wood work, claiming governments are just warlords with good PR.
The state is nothing but a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. To a hammer, everything is a nail. To a state, everything is a target for violence.
The state even sometimes uses violence on itself.
See: Civil Wars.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(19 replies)
When you crush folks into the ground for decades, ensure there's no legal recourse, and bleed them for every dollar until the money runs red. It's hardly a surprising outcome.
Here's the song that's been playing in my head last couple days, for no related reason: https://youtu.be/o9mJ82x_l-E
Here's the song I've been thinking about
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm1nCYOZB-s&t=175s&pp=2AGvAZACAQ%3D%3D
Oh damn, I don't think I've heard that one in since I was in middle school.
I have a soft spot for what my friend calls, "divorced dad rock."
To me this is, "rock my edgy older sister listened to." Gave me a nice nostalgia hit too.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Only in Connecticut
I certainly agree with that, but that agreement is not a call to violence, and definitely not an incitement of violence...from a legal perspective.
Legal smeagol. When the legal system (jury box) fails us, time to move on to the next box.
I don't disagree, but I don't want to get on the wrong side of any of the ToS. Or wind up on a government watch list.
The government stopped using watch lists. It's easier just to watch everyone.
One of the things I remember Snowden saying about the NSA's data collection is, something to the effect of, "It doesn't even make sense. If you're looking for a needle in a haystack, the answer isn't more hay." I was still outraged by the government's collection of my meta data, but it did make me feel a little better about their ability weaponize that data competently.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You're not even willing to risk THAT to help fight against evil?
I mean... I'm not willing to risk that for a meme post.
What do you think that the difference is between a meme post and public conversation?
There's a public, digital record of one and a very slim chance (for most people) that anyone who would care is listening to the other.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Except when it isn't.
Well, I definitely can't agree with that...in writing.
I don't know why you chose the title you used. I would've upvoted this post but i couldn't because of the title. Violence absolutely is the right course of action in certain circumstances. Violence should never be used first, but once all non-violent means have been tried and failed to correct a grave injustice, then violence becomes the appropriate action for any moral person.
If you do nothing while you watch a murderer kill an innocent person, then part of the guilt falls on your hands. As the saying goes "the only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing."