• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    They are extremely different, and both should be perfectly acceptable in their repective contexts.

    Griffin’s severed head was not a call to violence. It was a reaction to Trump saying shitty stuff about Megyn Kelly bleeding:

    GRIFFIN: I did say, I want to do some kind of a picture to shame Trump.

    SANDERS: Griffin said she was mad at Trump for what he said about Megyn Kelly, the former Fox News host, after she grilled him in a presidential debate in 2015.

    PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: You know, you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her - wherever. But…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      274 months ago

      not a call to violence

      fuck that

      when are we allowed to call for violence then? How many people does a fascist have to kill before we are allowed to wish death back on him?

      How Nazi does a Nazi have to be before you’re allowed to kill it?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        274 months ago

        I didn’t say a call to violence wasn’t warranted, just that Griffin’s photoshoot was not a call to violence.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          134 months ago

          i didnt misunderstand you, i was speaking to the royal you

          I think you’re swell and you did a good job conveying your thoughts above

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
        link
        English
        154 months ago

        The pearl-clutching about political violence is rich coming from people who celebrate political violence on 7/4 every year.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          124 months ago

          im not suggesting political violence

          im suggesting self defense against social murder and fascism

          but yes i agree w you

      • _NoName_
        link
        fedilink
        44 months ago

        I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again:

        Political systems hinge on people following the nonviolent bureaucratic process for them to exist, so anyone who supports a political system’s existence will always condemn violence for political gain, and will punish any violence they feel threatens the status quo. You can still do violence, but you will face punishment for it. Same as during the Union Wars.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          thats a good fucking point actually

          its unreasonable to demand that your opponent follows the rules without doing so yourself.

          im mad that my opponent has broken some of the rules, but if i start doing it too then what was the point