Comment on Would the United States actually risk a Tiananmen Square incident?
Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 days agoI clearly went too far because I was satirizing your mischaracterization of other people’s arguments that you really didn’t address but said you did (powerful obama giving a medal to obama meme energy).
I’m obviously more of a syndicalist. Buying “a” gun won’t do anything meaningful in and of itself. We need some people to buy a lot of guns and ammo. Not everybody needs to buy a gun, there’s more guns than people here as it is. The gun threshold, if anything has already been reach. If it gets to the guns mattering we’ve already lost a thousand battles.
We need lots of people thinking about each other. We need people thinking about things like food, water, waste, etc. Like the US government has never caved because somebody shot a bullet at them. They cave because airports get shutdown, because trash stops being collected. The guns help if it goes further, but the step before the guns is the determinate on whether the guns will work or not.
Like a bunch of military drones come through your door you won’t even have the opportunity to kill a single fascist. You’re just dead, killed by a guy essentially playing a video game. A missile is the same thing. There’s no heroic fantasy where just owning a gun lets people takedown a fascist.
My main real issue is the one size fits all prescription. Buy a gun is just so overly simplistic and dumb.
Objection@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
Who’s arguments did I mischaracterize in the initial comment I made? The National Guard’s? What a load of horseshit, you came out of the gate attacking me for no reason.
What does it matter if one person buys 10 guns to give to 10 people, or if 10 people buy their own guns? The end result is the same. You’re just putting ideological hangups before pragmatism.
None of which is precluded by buying a gun.
Neither of these is correct. For example, the US government caved when the NVA shot a bunch of bullets at them. They also have the capability of suppressing strikes at gunpoint, if it comes to that. Just as they did the student demonstrators at Kent State. Strikes can be effective, but if you have no capability to fight back, then it’s not likely to be enough.
Of course. I never disputed that. But they aren’t sending drones or launching missiles, they’re sending people.
That’s just obviously false. Are fascists impervious to bullets now? Is Charlie Kirk still alive, then?
Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 days ago
You’re clearly just reiterating your belief in gun ownership and not addressing anything. “Buying a gun” is the tankie version of libs saying “go vote”. Solves nothing, they say it will fix everything. Might help in a very niche scenario that nobody disputes but is so ridiculously overprescribed as to be a useless platitude.
If you’re actively hunting notable fascists that’s totally different than just “buying a gun”. That is a very specific type of gun use and like the kirk shooting was somewhat tragic because the kid that shot him will be going to prison. He bartered a lot more than a few bucks for that outcome.
If like a couple dozen people started doing that the fascist movement would likely lose most its notable members in a year.
Objection@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
Where did I say that it would “fix everything?” Weren’t you just complaining about “mischaracterizing arguments” (which I never did)?
Fedizen@lemmy.world 4 days ago
You said the magic platitude. If somebody put “go vote” at the bottom of the kent state shooting I would also have issues.