Fascists pretty much depend on "good, non-violent people" to do nothing so they can continue spreading fascism and liberals buy into it.
-
-
Boy, you got me. That'll do it.
2 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 16 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @justanoldgod @Rrrrnessa
Jeebus. This guy wants to bring a social worker to a gun fight. Nice in theory, but history craps all over that idea.
1 odpowiedź 1 podany dalej 18 polubionych -
No, it doesn't. You cannot defeat bad ideas with force. You can only defeat bad ideas with better ideas.
2 odpowiedzi 4 podane dalej 5 polubionych -
You might want to ask France, Poland, The Netherlands... You can't DEFEAT it with force, but you also should defend yourself.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
They weren't fighting bad ideas. They were fighting people attacking them. And again, we don't have *actual* Nazis here. At all.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 3 polubione -
W odpowiedzi do to @RealSteveCox@cscollard i jeszcze
Antifa are attacking people. It's not defense, it's offense.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 2 polubione -
I am opposed to ANY and ALL offensive violence--full stop. But meeting violence, in self-defense, is always appropriate. Be prepared.
2 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do to @cscollard@RealSteveCox i jeszcze
I will not confront violent threats with understanding. Awful ideas and words? Sure. Direct threats? No.
2 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych
Again, agreed. But a "threat" by definition requires an explicit statement of intent. Is that what you mean by "violent threats"?
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.