It's a mostly peaceful city friend.

@Peachpanther lol

@Legalize hello

@Legalize please no

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GADZ46VXmtU&feature=share

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fuyaC8pOwk&feature=share

oh this your video

Does Matt not think political violence can be justified??????????????????????????????

his new video seems to imply that

Being the one to initiate violence is bad, yes

<:PepeLaugh:565528391336329216>

american revolution?

americas several wars over seas

idk america seems built on hitting first

But muh NAP

?

ohh

is this idea for oppressive stances?

if you see a group of people getting larger and larger in their ideas and they want to take your rights away do you wait for them to do it?

or is the rally itself an act of agression before hand? If not do you then attack your government after the law in implemented while it is already too late?

Depends on how you draw the line on conspiracy, I guess.

conspiracy?

I don't think the views of far right groups are very secret

` An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.`
Yes, conspiracy

Whether it's secret or not doesn't matter

google and merriam webster have different deffinition

for conspire

a secret agreement

or to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreemnet

The general idea is that you shouldn't be the one to escalate from "thoughts" to violence. Advocating for something that others find objectionable isn't cause for violence, but trying to act upon that advocacy could be.
The revolution was fought because the British government was enforcing laws the colonists considered unjust.
I can't speak for the overseas wars because I'm against those.
Plenty of politicians have advocated removing my speech rights, but that alone doesn't justify murdering them

@Deleted User is pointing out a real problem with the NAP mindset--the opposition doesn't reciprocate.

Also, the legal definition of conspiracy is different from the dictionary definition and doesn't require secrecy.

@C1PHER I would consider gun confiscation, for instance, a legitimate cause for political violence.

Right, but advocating for confiscation and enacting it are separate issues. I gathered that Alloy thinks the "far right" needs to be punched because they advocate for the bad things

Yes, agreed.

I challenge any of these people to come up with a reasonable, strict definition of far right

because it doesnt exist :^)

The NAP's other flaw seems to be that always being on the defensive is never really a winning strategy.

Yes, I was going to make the same point.

Much like conservatism in general.

by that metric, much of the US' military involvement has been a "losing strategy" though

the two World Wars in particular

The US fought offensively in WWII