What happened to the riots that were promised if Roe vs. Wade was overturned?
Honestly I’m surprised we didn’t get George floyd/blm levels of protest after Dobbs was official, though a lot of it would’ve been moot since liberals and progressives have spent several decades disarming themselves and fostering a hatred towards guns. Christian nationalists don’t give a single fuck about peaceful protests and if things come to blows, our side is the one with far less firepower and far less zealots willing to risk personal harm for this topic (not saying the second one is good or bad morally, just pointing out that the right’s fostering of that kind of zealotry is an additional hurdle we’ll face).
That is what overturning Roe vs. Wade is about.
I was specifically referring to extra-judicial here. If/as they understand they can’t force their draconian laws on everyone through the normal channels of government, they’ll switch to embracing direct, physical violence as a first resort.
They absolutely are and pretending they’re not is stupid. They’re a last resort, but they’re still a tool that needs to be on the table if worst comes to worse. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box.
For progressives to abandon every principle they espouse and start using violence as a political tool and direct threat would mean the very last nail in the coffin.
Please, I’m engaging this conversation in good faith so don’t take my words out of context. I am not encouraging the use of violence out of hand and I think you know that. I’m encouraging a healthy respect for a tool of last resort, and a deterrent against things progressing to the point where we want to use that last resort. Armed but peaceful protests often result in less violence from the cops and alt right counter protesting, because at the end of the day they see disarmament as an invitation for violence.
There’s a reason that if you go far enough left, you start to get your guns back. Some people still understand that right wingers and the elite would prefer fascists and genocide to losing control.
This is why they leaked the decision but said “it could change it’s not the final decision” to slow roll the information and make it less likely people would take direct action.
Honestly I’m surprised we didn’t get George floyd/blm levels of protest after Dobbs was official, though a lot of it would’ve been moot since liberals and progressives have spent several decades disarming themselves and fostering a hatred towards guns. Christian nationalists don’t give a single fuck about peaceful protests and if things come to blows, our side is the one with far less firepower and far less zealots willing to risk personal harm for this topic (not saying the second one is good or bad morally, just pointing out that the right’s fostering of that kind of zealotry is an additional hurdle we’ll face).
I was specifically referring to extra-judicial here. If/as they understand they can’t force their draconian laws on everyone through the normal channels of government, they’ll switch to embracing direct, physical violence as a first resort.
deleted by creator
They absolutely are and pretending they’re not is stupid. They’re a last resort, but they’re still a tool that needs to be on the table if worst comes to worse. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box.
Please, I’m engaging this conversation in good faith so don’t take my words out of context. I am not encouraging the use of violence out of hand and I think you know that. I’m encouraging a healthy respect for a tool of last resort, and a deterrent against things progressing to the point where we want to use that last resort. Armed but peaceful protests often result in less violence from the cops and alt right counter protesting, because at the end of the day they see disarmament as an invitation for violence.
There’s a reason that if you go far enough left, you start to get your guns back. Some people still understand that right wingers and the elite would prefer fascists and genocide to losing control.
deleted by creator
This is why they leaked the decision but said “it could change it’s not the final decision” to slow roll the information and make it less likely people would take direct action.