I'm a non-violent Communist and I'm getting a little weary of my comrades that support violent means...

there were plenty of non violent protesters in india. the british negotiated with ghandi to save face.

Is your non-violence purely personal, or will you try and interfere with others who engage in violent acts?
The former would be entirely acceptable in a contentious objector sense. The latter is rank treachery.

It's a personal thing. But my one worry is basically "not being violent enough" in the eyes of others and that getting me in trouble.

SO many people forget the actual violent movements running parallel to Ghandi's massive pacifist movement, without it, it wouldn't have had accomplished what it did without this additional pressure.

youtu.be/TmYndY0p058

You have the moral compass of a woman. If something is not okay to you it should be not okay regardless of the circumstance. Have some solid principles to stand on.

How about you shut your whore mouth? Women's liberation is a fundamental part of leftism wether you are a tankie or an anarchist

I'm okay with violence period. I don't care if other people refuse to behead porky (so long as they're fewish in number), but if they fuck with my fidget spinner guillotine they can have the honorary position of being the first head to roll.

Grow a fucking brain, moron.

Come on, elevate your language or don't say anything at all

wow harsh words

Hello Holla Forums

All women are moral relativists and don't believe in objective moral standards. You'll turn on us the instant popular opinion isn't on our side. That's simply how it works.

I'm sorry you haven't met many women, or are one and don't understand your loyalty bankrupt nature.

Shut up you fucking low testosterone Randy Stair faggot ass queer, go jerk off to your cartoons.

I think you meant to post on Holla Forums and /r9k/

Say hi to your wife's son for me.

The necessity for violence comes from the violence of present circumstance. Violence is embedded in society. It exists both as actual violence (e.g. starvation because of exclusive access to food) and potential violence (e.g. cops who will kill you if you attempt to seize the MOP). Any attempt to nonviolently bring about revolution will cause the potential violence to become actual, and there's plenty of actual violence happening already anyway. The situation isn't "we live in a peaceful society, but we could have a better peaceful society if only we engage in violence briefly." The situation is "We live in a very violent society, but most people have come to accept their role as receivers but not givers of violence. In order for a peaceful society to come about, the people must recognize the ongoing violence and accept their responsibility for and complicity with that violence by choosing not to do violence directly themselves."

TL;DR pacifism is literally just enabling other people to be violent.

exactly how spooked are you?

You cant just say it's not without an argument. That's not how it works. But you wont engage in one anyway because you are a pathetic shitposter with nothing real to say.

You probably haven't even read stirner and are just being a memelord.

That's the part that got you? not "All women are moral relativists"? As if that's how any of that works?

He just did.

Nice derail, now back to your cuckshed

>>>Holla Forums

OP: Just become a socdem.

Burden of proof is on the person making a claim.

Just stop taking the bait you dumbasses.

...

Okay, let us be serious. I don't believe there is an objective moral truth and the burden of proof is not on me. So you must either give me the proof or quit being such a faggot

eh, he's entitled to his opinions. I'm not the stereotype police

It's necessary to take the bait because otherwise uncontested stupid opinions give the impression that those stupid opinions are welcome. Lack of response implies bored acceptance.

I think they would go both ways: encourage both unnecessary pacifism and unnecessary violence.

i think he got the message, we don't need a 400+ reply thread because someone didn't fuck in high school.

they've been doing this shit for decades now. there's a reason talking about violence even against property and not people is absolutely taboo.

It's a good opportunity to remind people why the commonly held idea is wrong.

you need to fight for the revolution if not physically then you must help the wounded or anyone who needs assistance with other matters pertaining to the revolution.

Purge all "communists" who won't fight in the streets. Violence is essential, and those who refuse to partake are just as good as Nazis.

...

What does this mean?

If it makes you feel any better, the revolution to end capitalism and kill the bourgeoisie once and for all will be the last great act of violence we'll ever have to resort to. Peace awaits us all by the light of socialism from that point onward. That is why we choose to fight with such fervor.

...

This, same with MLK, if it wasn't for Malcolm he wouldn't have been seen as an alternate choice

Mit aufrechtem Gang und menschlichem Antlitz schreitet er immer im Kreis, betet dabei sein Brevier aus den Schriften der Klassiker.
"Genosse!", ruft ihm der zu, der sich auf die hohe Klostermauer gezogen hat, "was tust du, Genosse?".
"Ich gehe den dritten Weg", sagt der beim Schreiten Lesende, ohne von seinem Brevier aufzublicken, mit aufrechtem Gang und menschlichem Antlitz.
"Komm rüber zu uns!", sagt der auf der Mauer. "Sicher, wir müssen gebückt laufen, manchmal, durch Schlamm und schlimmeres kriechen. Und vielen von uns fehlen die Zähne, gebrochene Nasen haben wir und gequetschte Ohren. Sihe mich an, mein gemeines Gesicht. Aber es lohnt sich zu kämpfen auf dieser Seite. Vorwärts, und meistens geradeaus. Jedenfalls nicht im Kreis. Wir können gewinnen! Komm zu uns!"
"Ich lasse mich nicht deformieren", sagt der mit aufrechtem Gang und menschlichem Antlitz. "Und was nützt uns der Sieg, wenn wir ihn feiern müssen mit krummen Rücken und gebrochenen Nasen, gequetschten Ohren, zahnlos, gemeinen Gesichts."
"Es geht nicht um uns allein", sagt der auf der Mauer und will noch mehr sagen, aber der andere hört nicht mehr hin, schreitet mit aufrechten Gang und menschlichen Antlitz seinen dritten Weg, immer im Kreis.
youtube.com/watch?v=C2qHDg6Ssao