I was gonna reply to this person but then it occurred to me that I couldn't possibly have anything to say to someone with their head this far up their own asshole. I will however repost it to mock them relentlessly:

"I know you might construe this as a joke but this post really rubs me the wrong way. As in, you might walk up to the person and help them find a proper way to vent their frustration, but instead you allow violence to exist and propagate."

They key to understand here is that this was a reply to a post about simply not ratting out people who may or may not be vandalizing cars built by a company owned by a billionaire nazi cultist who is trying to end trans people to punish his trans daughter and starve your grandma to death so rich guys like him can get a huge tax cut; among *many* other objectively VIOLENT fascist things.

Of course the person who posted this has nothing to say about THAT violence, only that not turning people over to the gestapo for damaging inanimate objects is somehow "violent."

"First they came for the trade unionists and I totally ratted out my neighbor because tragic though it may be, we are a nation ruled by laws..."

@AnarchoNinaWrites

I'm exhausted with the dissonance over the concept of violence and how it's the most moral side in a conflict's responsibility to avoid it all costs.

This same fallacy is applied against Ukraine. As if a free nation doesn't have the right to defend it's borders.

It is moral to defend ourselves, our friends, our neighbors, our families.

It is moral to deprive these hateful people of their ill-gotten wealth and power.

It is moral to resist.

@401matthall reported for being a fucking brilliant post