If —your ideals— are motivated by a hatred towards —the hypervigilance of the Left,— I understand your frustration. However, I don't condone violence in protests because it proves your naysayers right. Self-defense if you are not the aggressor is ok, but a real person with balls will say what's on their mind and if someone physically attacks them, they document it to discredit the aggressor.
It's like those anti-segregation protests where the black people would eat at the white restaurants; those people had balls; they didn't pester anyone and didn't get their asses kicked and didn't even fight back when they got their asses kicked. They shouldn't've had to get their asses kicked and they were either very brave or very stupid for doing it, but when you look at the footage, who looks like the bad guy and who looks like the good guy?
I'm not saying that you should have to get the shit beaten out of you for your opinion to be heard; I'm saying that violence at its worst can result in death. Negative words (with the exception of harassment) at their worst can result in hurt feelings. Now which one do you think can hurt your credibility more?
Anyway, it's bad to be prejudice, but it's also bad to bend over backwards to new ideas (mine included) without considering their implications. How about trying to have an intelligent discussion no matter what side you're on instead of being a fucking caveman? Fox and CNN are biased, but you don't see any of their staff physically attacking people do you?
No comments:
Post a Comment