• steeznson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Your argument here is just saying, “Political violence is justified if a minority are being oppressed.”

    Maybe you are tweaking it to be, “Political violence is to be expected if a minority are being oppressed.”

    This is literally the dictionary definition of advocating for something.

    Advocate, verb, to publically suggest an idea, development or way of doing something.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Your argument here is just saying, “Political violence is justified if a minority are being oppressed.”

      I mean, I believe that, but that’s not my point. The point is that minority populations will strike back, regardless of advocacy.

      Maybe you are tweaking it to be, “Political violence is to be expected if a minority are being oppressed.”

      That’s literally the argument, though. You misunderstood it.

      • steeznson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The 2nd argument there, the one you claim to be making, is advocating for political violence.

        I don’t think you’re debating in good faith here.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          How is saying “people will eventually fight if oppressed hard enough” the same as saying “oppressed people should fight their oppressors?”

          The first statement is analysis of cause and effect, the second is advocacy. You’re intentionally misframing it to spread a narrative.