this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
71 points (98.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43776 readers
896 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Self defense? Only on the battlefield? Only to achieve a β€˜noble’ end?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Violence, by definition, is an unjustified use of force. If a use of force is justified then it isn't violence.

For example, suppose you're walking across a bridge and you see someone about to jump to their death. So you run over, pull them back from the brink, knock them down, and sit on them. Have you committed an act of violence? I would say not.

On the other hand, suppose the person is just standing on a street corner waiting for the light to change. If you run over, pull them back from the curb, knock them down, and sit on them, that would in fact be an act of violence.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

A legal arrest can be violent. A soldier killing another is definitely going to be violent. Both can be legitimate uses of force.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Violence, by definition, is an unjustified use of force. If a use of force is justified then it isn’t violence.

You're right, but just to be clear: That is an English differentiation that doesn't exist in many other languages.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That's just a rhetorical device. I'm not suggesting that word definitions are prescriptive.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago

Weird. The question was asked in English.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Violence, by definition, is an unjustified use of force.

Downvoted for being factually incorrect. Nowhere in the (non-doctrinal) definition of violence does it include "unjustified"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm the one defining violence here.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As someone who uses the original definition of fascism (before liberals changed it to exclude themselves) people generally don't like that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The OP is a prompt as to the nature of violence.