The Legendary Dragon Alephwyr, named Alephwyr, BA

It's true because it's a valid example of projection: the powerful already exercise violence constantly, and they know that exercising violence is just what people with power do, so they know that the powerless would exercise violence if they had power. No moral high ground.

the *politically* powerful exercise violence, the powerful need not that's why revolutionaries are violent (they have no power), and will *stay* violent (they will only ever have *political* power, because they are objectively inferior)

Politics is more ubiquitous than you think. Anything that fits into a game theoretic framework with zero sum elements can be conceived of as an extension of politics.

of course, i know this and the left is *always* zero sum, because *at their core* they are powerless power means being positive sum, and no (contemporary) revolutionary can reason in positive sum ways, they are forever impoverished if they *could*, they'd just be a capitalist

I think it's worth exploring why some people seem to be stuck playing zero sum games in a notionally positive sum environment consistently without simply committing the fundamental attribution fallacy.

fixating on revenge is one candidate

Revenge is functional. It serves as deterrence. It eliminates negative sum players. It is good.

no, revenge is *always* negative sum, it doesn't act as a deterrent, or feuds would never happen