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

    What an interesting move, shifting the argument from “the government deliberately antagonizing and oppressing minority populations is bad and will see consequences if this continues” to “if the government doesn’t do what I want, there will be violence.”

    You’re deliberately erasing the core of the argument to insert your own.

    • steeznson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You are being disingenuous here. I’m not shifting their argument. Here is their full comment with annotations -

      Sooner or later, a trans woman forced through male puberty by arbitrary rules/culture-war politics will snap

      Annotation 1: politicians making incorrect choices are going to force the hand of activists for this cause…

      and attempt to assassinate the PM or health minister.

      A2: which will inevitably lead to political violence against members of the government

      Then the other boot will come down: the Daily Mail will demand a crackdown, and the usual voices in the Guardian will join in, and the government will follow.

      A3: Then the media will blame the activists instead of themselves

      In what world is that not advocating for political violence?

      Let’s replace the issue in question and see if it still sounds ok to you:

      Sooner or later, a white nationalist forced to experience mass imigration due to arbitrary rules/culture-war politics will snap and attempt to assassinate the PM or home secretary. Then the other boot will come down: the Guardian will demand a crackdown, and the usual voices in the Daily Mail will join in, and the government will follow.

      Does the above sound acceptable?

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

        It’s simple, the government oppressing minorities will usually lead to said minority group lashing out.

        This is what happened in Palestine.

        This is not an argument for violence, but for government action to prevent violence by ceasing oppression of minority groups.

        Simple.

        • steeznson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 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/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 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
              ·
              3 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/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 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.