• booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 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
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 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
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 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
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 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.