• booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Consistency is when you can’t call an act of violence what it is if it’s cops committing the act of violence

    • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Are you an anarchist? I’m not. Like every AES state, I think it’s possible to have justifiable government actions. Governments have a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, so yeah, a cop making a legal arrest is not the same as me hitting a stranger over the head and stuffing them in a van.

      • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s not hitting a stranger over the head and stuffing them in a van. It’s “an arrest.” You can’t call it hitting a stranger over the head and stuffing them in a van, because of who’s doing it.

          • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            This isn’t a theory discussion, it’s a fucking linguistics discussion. You’re insisting that the word “abduction” refers only to a legal term, which it does not. Obviously it does not. Idk what more to say.