Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 529185851196964876
yeah
Precedent
> order requires the threat and capability of violence
says who
as @..... said
but i can disprove it right now
Precedent
i dont need violence to get some kids in a classroom to behave
literally every interaction you have in a civilization requires it
theyll do it if i ask nicely
yes you do?
If they're disciplined, well-behaved children
Lots of kids won't do it if you ask nicely
but the point is, some did
@Deleted User you do know that the threat of violence still exists, right?
in that classroom, if a kid doesnt listen and disrupts the room
> literally every interaction you have in a civilization requires it
so this right here is disproved
theyre removed
by force
so yes
no?
ive seen this very thing happen many times
and ive seen opposites
if a kid continues to be disruptive, violent or so on
so your absolute statement is disproved
what happens?
no it isnt
yeah it has
if i a police officer arrests me
and i comply
that doesnt mean the threat of violence doesnt exist
it just means i complied
not talking about being arrested
would you understand this better if i used the term force instead of violence
im talking about whether order can exist without violence
`and ive seen opposite` as have I
same logic applies to a class room
same thing
order can only be enforced through violence
Lots of anarchists and libertarians essentially believe in the idea of the "better angels of our nature"
no