Sure, sure. 
Trolling is better when itâs a little bit believable, micro
If you think you deserve congratulations for not liking Trump, you really want to be graded on a curve, huh?
Dude, Iâm not FlyWf. You can find my posts directed at you at the time. Theyâre still online.
I think the reason you donât want to equate property damage with violence is it ends up being used to justify violence against people in response. I donât care how nice your house is, someone burning it down without hurting anyone doesnât deserve a death penalty.
1 Like
Iâm surprised that youâve forgotten about a little event called Kristallnacht. Or maybe rather than violence, that was just a bit of German horseplay.
Or more likely, âwhen my virtuous team does it, itâs not violence.â
You also seem confused about what semantics means.
2 Likes
Itâs not even that. Heâs just butthurt about stupid things or about other things entirely and lashing out because of it. He knows that none of us are like Rittenhouse. He just feels bad for whatever reason and is trying to make other people feel bad.
1 Like
For sure a lot of it is people suggesting that itâs acceptable to hurt people in order to protect property.
Weâve argued this before, but it canât be hopeless by any reasonable historical standard. We overcame segregation and womenâs suffrage within the last 5 generations, we can overcome this.
Intellectually speaking, the main difference between the 2020 protests and the 2026 protests seems to be the lack of riots and property damage (so far). And as a result they seem to be a lot more effective and popular (so far). I say this as someone that supported the 2020 riots, maybe you remember.
The general idea is if you want to live in a society without property crime, you shouldnât endorse property crime. Support your community and be the change you wish to see in the world.
2 Likes
I think if someone is in the act of burning my house down itâs reasonable to use force like calling the police to stop them.
Iâm basically a nazi now I guess.
Thatâs besides the point and I didnât say it wasnât ok in my opinion, sometimes, to do violence to someone who did something other than violence to you.
Some people never get the distinction between describing reality and making normative statements.
2 Likes
Why is ok to do violence to someone who is being non-violent?
Well I didnât say it was ok either. I think some reasonable people think itâs sometimes ok and some donât. Itâs not a law of nature or anything, itâs an opinion.
1 Like
So you can be reasonable and use violence against people who arenât being violent now? Youâre not just like Kyle Rittenhouse? I agree.
Have a good day micro, I hope you work out whatâs troubling you.
That was like the arc of history bending towards justice. The whole arc is bending the other direction now. And, Iâm not sure human civilization has 5 generations left and certainly not sure that the USA in its current configuration does. Like, you could say Germany overcame things because itâs so much better now, but itâs essentially a different country.
The arc of history may bend towards justice, but itâs never linear. Even during those periods there were backsteps. The victories of the Civil War were followed by Reconstruction and the Gilded Age. Womenâs suffrage led to prohibition. 
If I caught someone in the act of lighting fire to my house, Iâd use violence to stop them if I couldnât get them to stop through non-violence. As a general proposition, I do think there should be some kind of criminal penalty associated with destruction of another personâs property, but the devil is in the details.
2 Likes
I like to think the statement is true only because justice gets defined by whoever is in power, but that makes the statement worthless.
1 Like
Iâm not saying there is no penalty for property crime or that it isnât illegal. Iâm not even saying you canât use force to stop someone from fucking with your property. Iâm saying that there should be limits on it, and it shouldnât be a free-pass to cripple or kill someone. You are right, the devil is in the details, but in general we shouldnât be killing people for messing with our stuff.
What penalty would be deserved in your opinion?
This is where I part ways from many liberals. When you tread on an innocent person whoâs minding their own business, you donât get to choose their response. If I walk up and tweak your nose, maybe you walk away. Maybe you tweak my nose. Or maybe you crack my skull open with a baseball bat. The baseball bat is excessive and you should probably get into trouble, but my cracked skull is my fault for initiating a physical encounter
1 Like