Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SnowCode OP wrote

But at the same time you don't have to kill people to be an anarchist? I am not (anymore) an anti-violence. I know violence is necessary in many cases, but I sometimes wonder what effects it has. What's the point of killing an authority if just another authority is going to come next? The only thing it created is likely casualties on both sides.

It may be a very foolish thing to say from me, I come from a very "christian" background so I am aware that one of my biggest resistance against violence comes from that given the fact I was always educated by people that spend their lives trying to limit the harm they did to others, and was educated with the principle that violence is always bad and should always be avoided. But I am still interested in your response.

4

ziq wrote

I don't know what you're talking about. Don't kill people.

8

SnowCode OP wrote

What do you think of the anarchists that committed acts of mail bombing and terrorism, killing cops. Basically the "propaganda of the deeds". This is the kind of things I was talking about.

2

ziq wrote

Sorry, I don't know anything about that.

7

SnowCode OP wrote

Oh OK I thought that's what we were referring as violence.

2

[deleted] wrote (edited )

6

SnowCode OP wrote (edited )

Thanks I appreciate this. I can relate. What do non-violence means for you? I know society is already violent, but I still kinda have a problem with personal violence like that. Especially when it's more about destroying things than creating things (demonstrating force, bombing, etc).

4

nulloperation wrote (edited )

I come from a very "christian" background [...] Especially when it's more about destroying things than creating things

Since you're from a Christian background, perhaps you can relate to this Quaker and Methodist attempting to destroy fighter jets that were to be used to bomb school buses in Yemen.

By not "destroying things" you allow violence to happen. The Bible is all about "beating ploughshares into swords". Also Jesus once destroyed a massive pig rearing industry by ordering demons into the pigs. As a Christian, you pretty much have to destroy stuff if it's evil.

4

SnowCode OP wrote

I don't consider myself Christian per se. But I've been educated by Christian parents with Christian morals and values. Also what I don't understand is: what's the point of breaking things for the sake of breaking things? I am not against it if it has an actual effect, but when is it useful? If you destroy a police car, isn't the State just going to replace it and makes the repression even more intense?

3

[deleted] wrote

2

nulloperation wrote

Yea. A better solution would have been to just let the demonic pigs roam around. However, I'm not sure if the decision to jump into the water is taken by Jesus or the demons, really. The story is not totally clear there, but one could argue that it's the demons in the driver's seat.

Question of the day for the Christians here: Is it really violence when you do exorcism and the demons kill their new hosts?

3