It’s not wrong to defend it with force but context matters. Are you defending from a foreign policy you don’t like or is it defending against your right to vote. You can fight for democracy but it doesn’t always need to be violent.
Trump recently admitted that if Republicans vote him in, you won’t have to vote again, he’ll “fix it.” So yes, by you not voting for the best chance to stop him you are very powerful. You’re siding with a future that may mean not having to option to vote again, which would lead to violence. But sure, vote for whatever makes you feel good. The rest of us will vote to protect democracy for you to have the right to throw away your vote.
So, again, you believe that trump is an existential threat to democracy but do not believe it’s necessary to defend that democracy with violence.
There are only two possibilities I can come up with, you either don’t actually believe trump is an existential threat to democracy or don’t believe democracy is worth defending.
I guess you could just have never thought about it that hard either.
Is it possible that you think violence is okay if it’s directed against foreigners but not if it’s directed against Americans?
I’m convinced that your not even reading my comments. That or you think it’s impossible to defend democracy using democracy. But either way, just busy your head in the sand and vote for whoever makes you feel warm and fuzzy.
Then you end with this gem “Is it possible that you think violence is okay if it’s directed against foreigners but not if it’s directed against Americans?” Which is a baseless loaded question. You clearly have no interest in a genuine conversation and are incapable of having an honest one.
Is it possible you don’t care about democracy and are arguing this line of reasoning because you want the US to be ran by a dictator? See how silly loaded, presumptuous questions are.
You literally posed the question in regard to violence “are you defending against a foreign policy or is it defending your right to vote”
I mean, I guess you could be suggesting that stopping, for example, the genocide in Palestine is worth fighting and risking death to stop but preserving democracy isn’t.
It’s not wrong to defend it with force but context matters. Are you defending from a foreign policy you don’t like or is it defending against your right to vote. You can fight for democracy but it doesn’t always need to be violent.
Trump recently admitted that if Republicans vote him in, you won’t have to vote again, he’ll “fix it.” So yes, by you not voting for the best chance to stop him you are very powerful. You’re siding with a future that may mean not having to option to vote again, which would lead to violence. But sure, vote for whatever makes you feel good. The rest of us will vote to protect democracy for you to have the right to throw away your vote.
So, again, you believe that trump is an existential threat to democracy but do not believe it’s necessary to defend that democracy with violence.
There are only two possibilities I can come up with, you either don’t actually believe trump is an existential threat to democracy or don’t believe democracy is worth defending.
I guess you could just have never thought about it that hard either.
Is it possible that you think violence is okay if it’s directed against foreigners but not if it’s directed against Americans?
I’m convinced that your not even reading my comments. That or you think it’s impossible to defend democracy using democracy. But either way, just busy your head in the sand and vote for whoever makes you feel warm and fuzzy.
Then you end with this gem “Is it possible that you think violence is okay if it’s directed against foreigners but not if it’s directed against Americans?” Which is a baseless loaded question. You clearly have no interest in a genuine conversation and are incapable of having an honest one.
Is it possible you don’t care about democracy and are arguing this line of reasoning because you want the US to be ran by a dictator? See how silly loaded, presumptuous questions are.
You literally posed the question in regard to violence “are you defending against a foreign policy or is it defending your right to vote”
I mean, I guess you could be suggesting that stopping, for example, the genocide in Palestine is worth fighting and risking death to stop but preserving democracy isn’t.
Help me understand what you wrote.