last boost;
literally never met an anarchist who was violent. unless you subscribe to the media's interpretation of violence, where damage to the property of the wealthy is regarded as violence.
as opposed to what i see that as:
an act of resistance or defiance against those whose wealth and power actually directly hurts us all. because wealth actually is violent. at worst, i'd call property damage a futile attempt at self defence against that daily unrelenting violence of wealth, which we kinda know in advance the media will use to further drive a wedge between anarchists and the rest of the left.

but yeah, most anarchists i've encountered literally wouldn't hurt a fly, and are more interested in mutuality, helping those in need, caring for and protecting those who the wealthy have decided everyone should see as expendable.