I think that’s what the comic you commented on is trying to convey. Arguing that violence isn’t a solution is silly, because oppressors will always use violence to prevent an uprising.
No such agreement is made in the cartoon. Only the first character expresses a categorical opposition to violence, and the second character calls him out for it.
Yeah, the comic clearly states that violence is a necessary tool. It lists how it’s currently being used by both the police and the army to maintain the status quo. The woman is pointing out the man’s hypocrisy in believing that change will happen without violence even as violence is exactly what is preventing change. If we want to change the status quo, we’re going to fight back against the violence currently being used to uphold it, which of course means using violence ourselves.
Great, so you also agree that a violent revolution is necessary to stop oppression then
Removed by mod
I think that’s what the comic you commented on is trying to convey. Arguing that violence isn’t a solution is silly, because oppressors will always use violence to prevent an uprising.
Removed by mod
No such agreement is made in the cartoon. Only the first character expresses a categorical opposition to violence, and the second character calls him out for it.
Yeah, the comic clearly states that violence is a necessary tool. It lists how it’s currently being used by both the police and the army to maintain the status quo. The woman is pointing out the man’s hypocrisy in believing that change will happen without violence even as violence is exactly what is preventing change. If we want to change the status quo, we’re going to fight back against the violence currently being used to uphold it, which of course means using violence ourselves.