| |
| ▲ | ethbr1 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | His point was that once the physical power individuals/governments hold exceeds a threshold, a pluralistic society cannot coexist with violence being an acceptable option. In the context of the 1960s, governments and nuclear weapons. But more broadly the same holds true for individuals. Either we learn to live together despite our differences, or we use our newfound great power to annihilate each other. | | |
| ▲ | Retric 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Society can be shockingly resilient to personal violence especially if it’s primarily people at the top in terms of status, wealth, or political power are regularly getting assassinated. Recently gangs have been shockingly stable despite relentless violence but historically duals between gentlemen etc where quite common. By historical standards we’re living is a near paradise of non violence and that’s worth persevering at significant cost. | |
| ▲ | denkmoon 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh. https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/douglasmacarthurra... | |
| ▲ | giardini 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | ethbr1 says "...or we use our newfound great power to annihilate each other." That isn't possible without bio-warfare. I sometimes hear people foolishly speak of a shooting "race war" in the USA but always remind them that the active phase of such an event would last about 15 minutes. | | |
| ▲ | ethbr1 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Distributed mass hunting rifle shots on high voltage transformers. Unguarded. Scattered around the country. Any oil leaks potentially destroy them. Manufacturing backlogs of multiple years. https://www.energy.gov/oe/addressing-security-and-reliabilit... The only thing that's kept domestic terrorism to a minimum is that anyone smart enough to do it well has better economic opportunities. | | |
| ▲ | more_corn 4 days ago | parent [-] | | The tragedy is that several players in the transformer market went out of business because they ramped up due to the building boom before the financial crisis.
If I weren’t busy I’d go buy one of those old factories and open it back up. Great boring business to be in. |
|
| |
| ▲ | 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | PicassoCTs 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | dfghjkl1 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think when it becomes normal for 10% or more of the citizens of a country to say they wouldn’t be upset if some member of the opposing political party were to die or when it becomes normal for that portion of the people to make fun or celebrate the death of someone from an opposing party or their murderer, everyone needs to take a step back regardless of which side you’re on and say “Why?” Because these people are not murderers or accomplices, and they are generally good people. These aren’t people that would lynch anyone or burn a cross in someone’s yard. It’s awful that anyone dies. Let’s not escalate this on either side. We don’t need another Hitler, and we don’t need a French Revolution either. We just need people that stop trying to outdo each other. | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > everyone needs to take a step back regardless of which side you’re on and say “Why?” It's easy to get sucked into a learned helplessness doing this, though. We know exactly why it happens - Charlie Kirk explained it himself: "You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won’t have a single gun death. That is nonsense, [...] But I think it’s worth it. I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational."
America means guns. It's written in our constitution, reinforced through our history, reflected in our multimedia franchises and sold to American citizens as a product. The only way out of this situation is through it - we can't declare a firearms ban in-media-res without inciting even more violence and dividing people further. At the same time, America cannot continue to sustain this loss of our politicians, schoolchildren and minority populations. The threat to democracy is real, exacerbated by the potential for further "emergency powers" abuse we're familiar with from both parties.When people push for firearms control in America, this is the polemic they argue along. You can say they're justified or completely bonkers, but denying that these scenarios exist is the blueprint for erasing causality. | | |
| ▲ | goshdangit 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 2 days ago | parent [-] | | None of that matters, though. Democracy continues working because the transition of power persists. If you disagree, there are plenty of other countries you can immigrate to that don't practice democracy. But this is how America works, and I'll defend it to the last even if I disagree with the extremists. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 2 days ago | parent [-] | | What are you thoughts on http://anthonyflood.com/rothbarddemocracy.htm? | | |
| ▲ | 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think the "neoliberalism contradiction" point was tired when Hegel noticed it. America is (and has always been) mired in inequality, the system we have today doesn't need a refit. Judging by the last paragraph, it seems like Rothbard agrees on this. There's not much else to add that isn't buffeted in the essay itself. Representative democracy sucks dick, and the fact that Americans engage in politics vicariously ensures that our Volksgeist is reduced to petty arguments about Michelle Obama's penis. Appeals to transgression are a threat to all political systems, not just democracy. See my other comment about the Red Guard. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, but with this comment in mind, I do not quite understand "but this is how America works, and I'll defend it to the last even if I disagree with the extremists.", because it seems like you do want to change some things with regarding to how it works. This is what I was interested in. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | agensaequivocum 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | No it's not because of the guns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Shinzo_Abe | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Shinzo Abe's killer was captured immediately, he had to walk right in front of him to get a shot off. Charlie Kirk's assassin is still at-large and fired from a standoff distance, with a conventional long-barrel firearm. Make of that what you will. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 4 days ago | parent [-] | | You added the term "conventional", except nothing about this is conventional. You said it yourself that the shooter is still at large... despite the involvement of the FBI and other agencies. | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 4 days ago | parent [-] | | The firearm certainly seems conventional. Early reports suggest it was a bolt-action Mauser: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/what-we-know-about-weapon-u... Is there something I'm missing here? > despite the involvement of the FBI and other agencies. Many such cases. We're still looking for D. B. Cooper, aren't we? Did the FBI ever dig up Hoffa's body? The feds are hardly a panacea with these things. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Not everything is about the firearm itself and not even the shot, that many people focus on. And you need more context and the training required to take such a shot and then evade the local cops and FBI, with a solid escape plan from a fuckton of witnesses and so forth. And I did not mention that most people would probably panic and mess up, let alone take the shot and escape. It is much more complex than that. When you look at the pattern fit, it no longer looks like a spur-of-the-moment act by a "typical gun owner". They gave us some 22 years old kid as the person who pulled this whole operation, allegedly, and acted alone. Even if someone had been shooting since childhood, the rooftop selection, escape route, and casing inscriptions suggest deliberate operational planning and situational awareness, not just trigger skill. Shooting skill alone doesn't cover the logistics and environmental awareness. Plus a 22-year-old who "trained since childhood" might have technical skill, but most young adults still lack the composure and foresight to execute a high-stakes assassination with minimal mistakes, especially under the psychological pressure of killing a person in a public setting. FWIW, some cases remain unsolved for decades because of scarce evidence, degraded scenes, or lack of witnesses, which does not come into play here at all. Modern investigations, by contrast, often benefit from immediate CCTV, cell-data, social media, and so forth. ...thus I remain skeptical. | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 2 days ago | parent [-] | | What is irregular about the firearm? The only details I've seen are the engraving, everything else is reportedly COTS. Please give me links to the information you're looking at if I'm missing anything. > but most young adults still lack the composure and foresight to execute a high-stakes assassination with minimal mistakes This is conjecture, unless you can back it up with a source. The history books are filled with 22-year-old kids shooting politicians and getting away with it, famously the Red Guard uninstalled an entire government with this strategy. With a bunch of riled-up students. I spent a lot of time at the range when I was a kid - hitting a 200yd shot from an elevated platform is not difficult with a M1903. A modern 63mm loading can easily push 3,000fps in a long-barrel rifle and if you reloaded the cartridge for a single-use assassination, I see no reason you couldn't push 5,000fps if the barrel doesn't explode from overpressure. With those kinds of ballistics its not a very tough shot unless you're shooting into a hurricane. All you need then is a hunting scope, and that can be bought for $170 in cash at Cabelas. > Modern investigations, by contrast, often benefit from immediate CCTV, cell-data, social media, and so forth. This I absolutely agree with. It sounds like the only reason they found him is because his friend turned in his Discord DMs, he might still be on the loose if not for the digital breadcrumb trail he left behind. Bit of a harrowing precedent for online privacy, but I presume that will fall on deaf ears. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Not everything is about the firearm and the shot, I am more interested in everything else (all the patterns and requirements) to pull this operation, including the composure I mentioned. There are many other things as well. > This is conjecture, unless you can back it up with a source. The history books are filled with 22-year-old kids shooting politicians and getting away with it, famously the Red Guard uninstalled an entire government with this strategy. With a bunch of riled-up students. Sure, it is, and I cannot back it up. He was operating alone, which is much different from doing it as a team, I believe. > It sounds like the only reason they found him is because his friend turned in his Discord DMs, he might still be on the loose if not for the digital breadcrumb trail he left behind. I thought it was his dad that turned him in, but regardless, the Discord messages are suspicious, because he went to great lengths as to successfully complete the mission, but he would talk about it on an online platform? Something makes me skeptical about it, but who knows. It is just pure speculation from me at this point, but it does not align well with the rest of his behavior, IMO. I get that criminals make mistakes, and perhaps it was just that. We will never truly know. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | alsetmusic 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Just because you can cite an example of a killing without a gun says nothing about the reality about gun violence and gun culture in the USA. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | s5300 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | bccdee 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | orwin 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | To be clear: Hitler was not put in power by any election. Von Papen and Hindeberg, under advice from industry leaders, gave him power. In fact, the Nazi party electoral results were down from the previous election. Both the socialist and communist party were up however, and so the men in power chose Hitler to change that. All of those were killed or politically neutered within 6 months, and honestly, they made their bed. | | |
| ▲ | bccdee 5 days ago | parent [-] | | The Nazis and the Communists won enough seats between them in 1932 that it was impossible for Hindenburg to form a government without one or the other. Hitler didn't win a majority, but he won more seats than anyone else, which was enough to ultimately finagle his way to the Chancellorship through broadly legitimate means. I'd call that an electoral victory, albeit a weaselly one. Of course, then the Reichstag caught fire, and that was about it for Weimar democracy. But up until that point, his political success came off the back of genuine popularity at the ballot box. He only managed to became Chancellor because enough people voted for him. | | |
| ▲ | orwin 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | He could forma coalition with the Socialists, but they pushed for an agrarian reform that would have taken power away from landlords/landowners in east germany, which was the conservative base of power. It was a choice: Socialists, Nazis or communist, and as always "Plutot Hitler que le Front Populaire", the extreme center choose fascism. The more thing changes, the more they stay the same. | |
| ▲ | ZeroGravitas 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | bccdee 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Oh I agree, I don't think the Republican agenda reflects some sort of authentic "will of the people." It's produced as much by propaganda as anything else. Nevertheless, it's propaganda that many Americans have swallowed, and those people then go on to put Republicans in power year after year. I can't fault Democrats for their bitterness towards Republican voters. | |
| ▲ | d1sxeyes 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I’m not aware of any rigorous modelling that supports what Goering argued though. It’s certainly possible but it’s also not a given by a long shot. FPTP in the UK is not based on the popular vote, it’s essentially the outcome of 650 mini-elections. If Nazi support was efficiently distributed, there’s a good chance they’d have won a strong majority, but if support was focused geographically, they might have ended up with fewer seats. If you’re aware of any more accurate modelling, I’d be super interested though! |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | jepj57 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | bccdee 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Trump is actively arresting and deporting people for participating in pro-Palestine protests. What are Democrats doing that is even a fraction as censorious? | | |
| ▲ | jepj57 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Arresting and deporting illegal aliens or legal aliens, not citizens. Big difference | | |
| ▲ | lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > people Well, they didn't say citizens. > for participating in pro-Palestine protests And you missed their main point. Your reply doesn't really seem to be in good faith. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ImPostingOnHN 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | That doesn't really address anything in the post you responded to. Are you sure you replied to the right post? Usually replies address the post they respond to. If you're intentionally responding to just any post to vent your anger at people who you disagree with (i.e. it wasn't a mistake) then feel free to ignore me. | | |
| ▲ | jepj57 3 days ago | parent [-] | | It was a very one-sided post. Just balancing it out with exa.ples in the other direction. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | chipsrafferty 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | flipwassal 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Do you know of whom they are speaking of when they say the 10%? It could be liberals, conservatives, moderates, expats from Europe, etc. I cannot believe that people think that violence is a good answer to anything. I don’t upvote these recent killing of political figures or C-levels at companies that destroy people’s lives. I sympathize with those that fight injustice and want the world changed for the better. But, there are often non-violent ways to do this. | | |
| ▲ | lovich 4 days ago | parent [-] | | > I cannot believe that people think that violence is a good answer to anything. There is quite a bit of philosophical arguments and discussions backing violence as _a_ solution, albeit not the only solution and usually one reserved for when other measures fail. Look to this treatise as a start[1] If you think it’s never a solution then all you have done is unilaterally disarmed, and ceded decision making power to those who still keep violence in their toolbox [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_War |
|
| |
| ▲ | ndsipa_pomu 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | nobodywillobsrv 5 days ago | parent [-] | | No the empathy comment is about it being confused with naive sympathy. Empathy means fully simulating the other person state of mind and world. Empathy is cognitive spend. Love thy enemy is a short cut because human brains seem to be unable to think properly in anger. You need to simulate your enemy to understand their positions and seek deals. | | |
| ▲ | ndsipa_pomu 5 days ago | parent [-] | | I don't follow what you're trying to say here. If you think that encouraging empathy is a bad thing and discouraging empathy is good, then there's little hope for you. The lack of empathy can easily be shown to lead to the evils of Nazism and the desire to be cruel to people who are not "in our group" (e.g. their skin colour is different or were born elsewhere) |
|
| |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | | |
| ▲ | nobodywillobsrv 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | | |
| ▲ | idiotsecant 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | NeutralCrane 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The French Revolution was such an abject failure that within a decade they abandoned their republic and willingly made Napoleon a dictator. | |
| ▲ | dolmen 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | However France has strict firearms control so the scale of violence is still in control and shooting political figures is not common nowadays. | | |
| ▲ | ttoinou 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | This is quite backwards. Right now revolts in France are useless. When they were useful back in the days, a lot of citizens had guns. Guns laws changed to reduce their powers | | |
| ▲ | prmoustache 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | They are not useless in the sense that they are visible and at some point the state cannot only respond with more violence from police force forever or else the dictatorship becomes assumed. But current protests aren't revolts nor violence anyway. There is side/peripheral violence but that is not the point of the protests | | |
| ▲ | ttoinou 5 days ago | parent [-] | | the state cannot only respond with more violence from police force forever
As long as they control the media narrative it's all good it can continue for a long time |
| |
| ▲ | more_corn 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Revolts don’t need guns.
Look at Nepal. Look at Bangladesh. Look at the Arab spring. When people are so pissed off that millions of people take to the streets governments fall. |
| |
| ▲ | JodieBenitez 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We are 68 million and between hunters and sport shooters we have 5 million firearms owners for 10 million firearms. It's not on par with the US of course but I'd say firearms are pretty common (and it's not even counting illegal ones) and frankly it's not difficult nor long to acquire a good bolt action rifle and learn to shoot an apple at 200m. Long story short: I don't think lack firearms control is the issue in the US, there must be something else. | |
| ▲ | idiotsecant 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | |
| ▲ | philipallstar 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's only because they cut back on the cartoons they draw. | | |
| ▲ | fawkesalbus 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Many people here will tell you that cartoons represent violence, some types of speech represent violence etc. France no longer has free speech rights unless it is coming from the left | |
| ▲ | goshdangit 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | goshdangit 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | fawkesalbus 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] | | |
| ▲ | ath3nd 4 days ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | JPKab 4 days ago | parent [-] | | He was shot with a bolt action .30-06 hunting rifle. There has never been a proposed ban on these weapons. Your comment is essentially saying he deserved it, and that you see some form of cosmic justice here. Meanwhile, I've been reminded by your comment that people like you will celebrate the deaths of people they disagree with politically, which makes me less likely to support gun control. With neighbors like you, I'm going to hang onto them. The irony of people like you is your perceived moral superiority warps you into being a bad person. | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | The parent comment isn't celebrating his death. They did however cut off the quote, so I will render it in full here: "I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational."
The fact that Charlie Kirk was murdered is reprehensible and sets an ill precedent for democracy. That is plainly apparent to anyone with a vested interest in peaceful political discourse. Washington DC has come together across the aisle to condemn this violence.The legacy Kirk leaves behind isn't incorrect or worth discarding; some violence is a part of any collective society. But at what point does the deal stop being prudent? How many politicians, schoolkids and religious groups have to be shot up before we reassess our laws? If we never stop, then the cycle is always waiting to start up again. The tinderbox can be lit for any reason, and give any administration just cause for martial law and "emergency powers" abuse. | |
| ▲ | ath3nd 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | fawkesalbus 4 days ago | parent [-] | | > Do I find Charlie's death hilarious considering his stance on gun laws? Yes. In fact, I think maybe we should come up to something similar to the Herman Cain award, but for gun lovers. No one actively made fun of the deaths of school kids or anyone on the left - the Hortmanns or the injury to Paul Pelosi. No one actually celebrates those tragedies. And yet here you are actively saying you find Charlie’s death hilarious. This is shameful and no sane person should feel happy that a person who advocated for free speech and nothing else has been assassinated. Also please read the guidelines that @dang has posted at the very beginning of this thread. May God help you find more peace and less hatred. | | |
| ▲ | ath3nd 4 days ago | parent [-] | | > No one actively made fun of the deaths of school kids or anyone on the left - the Hortmanns or the injury to Paul Pelosi > No one actually celebrates those tragedies. Yeah, some of the right wing figures outright questioned whether these things happened: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/09/alex-jones-asks-sup... Walking human expired cheese Donald Trump Jr. shared a pic of Paul Pelosi Halloween costume which does count as making fun. But freedom of speech, right? https://time.com/6226946/paul-pelosi-attack-gop-response-pol... And Charlie himself on the Pelosi case wanted a patriot to "Bail out" the assailant: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/charlie-kirk-once-called... > This is shameful and no sane person should feel happy that a person who advocated for free speech and nothing else has been assassinated. I don't feel happy. Nobody should be shot.
However, Charlie did advocate for white supremacy: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/fact-check-charlie-kirk-once-22340... and did say that "Empathy is a made-up term" https://x.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1580241307515383808 so I feel 0 empathy for him, to honor his legacy of hating empathy and embracing gun deaths as worth it. > And yet here you are actively saying you find Charlie’s death hilarious I don't celebrate Charlie getting shot. Nobody deserves to get shot in the first place. Hell, nobody should own guns in the first place. But Charlie? He thought otherwise. He thought "some gun deaths are worth it" (Charlie's own words), and who am I to doubt him? A guy saying gun deaths are "worth it" (Charlie's words) getting shot? Hilarious. It's like Herman Cain opposing masks and social distancing dying from covid. Also hilarious. It's just the truth. > May God help you find more peace and less hatred. God doesn't exist, but if he did, he/she/they made the world a better place. Thoughts and prayers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|