That doesn’t even attempt to address my point. You’re not saying that taking up violent means wouldn’t make the problems you bring up even worse. You need to say that part. So I can show that you are wrong.
But you’re not disagreeing. Tell me what you disagree with about my statement: When you take up violent means, you invite violent means. Aren’t you using the state’s violence as an invitation to reply with violence?
You’re reading that in. I never said violence has to be invited, just because it can be. I did not say something like, “if you never invite it you never suffer it.” You’re disagreeing with something that was never said.
So you don’t think the Black Panthers invited violence, or the protesters at Blair Mountain invited violence - they were responding to the state’s invitation?
That doesn’t even attempt to address my point. You’re not saying that taking up violent means wouldn’t make the problems you bring up even worse. You need to say that part. So I can show that you are wrong.
I’m addressing the part with which I disagree. The violence is here whether we literally fight back or not.
But you’re not disagreeing. Tell me what you disagree with about my statement: When you take up violent means, you invite violent means. Aren’t you using the state’s violence as an invitation to reply with violence?
The need for an invitation. It’s going to escalate from here no matter what.
You’re reading that in. I never said violence has to be invited, just because it can be. I did not say something like, “if you never invite it you never suffer it.” You’re disagreeing with something that was never said.
So you don’t think the Black Panthers invited violence, or the protesters at Blair Mountain invited violence - they were responding to the state’s invitation?