Ancestors

Toot

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-02 at 18:23

To all of you who expressed support for Mangione's assassination of UHC CEO Brian Thompson:

Do you also support Livelsberger's suicide car bombing of a Trump hotel in Las Vegas?

If not, where exactly do you draw the line and why?

Seriously, I'd love to puzzle out the ethical questions with somebody who's interested.

[Full disclosure: I'm a pacifist antifascist and don't support either]

[#]USPol #Antifa #Resistance #Anarchy

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Descendants

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-02 at 22:53

@felyashono

I don't know anything about the Livelsberger's suicide car bombing, so I have no opinion on it specifically, but generally, when it comes to any act, whether one of violence of not, I determine whether it's justified based on whether it can achieve its intended goal. In the case of suicide bombings or other acts of suicidal protest, I'm usually against them since a person would be capable of achieving much more in terms of advocating for whatever cause... 1/3

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-02 at 22:54

@felyashono

...they're in support of alive rather than dead, but I also realize that this may not apply to every person's situation and that there may be extreme situations where such an act may be the best way to advocate for a cause. 2/3

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-02 at 22:54

@felyashono

As for your position of being a pacifist anti-fascist, I find such a position as pacifistic anti-fascism as a rather useless position in terms of actually defeating fascism, which is something that has historically and contemporarily required violence to achieve, making any anti-fascist who refuses to engage in violence as at worst useless and at best unwilling to give their full support for the fight against fascism. 3/3

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-02 at 23:12

@Radical_EgoCom

I’m contemplating what "full support for the fight against fascism" means. I think you're implying that my refusal to take a human life diminishes my ability to fully support the cause.

So here's a clarifying question for you, if you don't mind: are there any methods of warfare you would never consider in the fight to defeat fascism?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-02 at 23:27

@felyashono

By "full support for the fight against fascism," I mean supporting either in action or in word the full fight against fascism. That doesn't mean you have to kill anyone. It means that, in the fight against fascism, if an anti-fascist ends up killing a fascist, you would at the very least recognize and accept the fact that such acts are an inevitable aspect of fighting against fascism. 1/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-02 at 23:27

@felyashono

Out of all of the methods of warfare that I'm aware of (conventional, asymmetric, psychological, cyber, nuclear (preferably as a deterrent), biological, chemical, economic, proxy, terrorism, covert, occupational, naval, scorched earth tactics, etc), I would be completely fine using any of them if they could be used to defeat fascism. 2/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 00:50

@Radical_EgoCom

I think you've made it quite clear what you are (or will be) fighting against. I'm curious: what would you say you're fighting for?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 01:02

@felyashono

If the two hammer and sickle's next to my username didn't convey it, I'm fighting for communism as an ultimate goal and the creation of a socialist state as a more immediate goal.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 01:35

@Radical_EgoCom

And there is the core of our disagreement. I think I'm in favor of democratic-socialist policies like universal healthcare as a human right and UBI. I'm opposed to communism. To put one specific point on it, I believe America should have more than 2 political parties, not fewer.

In the end, we would have opposed each other. Maybe that's because I styled myself a “pacifist anti-fascist”. I think more likely it's because I believe your goals are also worth opposing.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 01:42

@Radical_EgoCom

This is also why I think it's so important to have these discussions, to engage in the non-violent act of opposing fascism. It helps us know each other. Not all anti-fascists are the same. If we fight together, without knowing each other, we will naturally fight against each other sooner or later.

Also, thank you for the open and honest discussion!

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 02:04

@felyashono

Our differing opinions on communism aren't the core of our disagreement. There are communists who are pacifists, and there are likely social democrats who support violence against fascists. Our core disagreement relating to this conversation is our opinions on how to deal with fascists. This next statement, however, isn't an opinion, but a fact: ...1/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 02:04

@felyashono

While there are nonviolent ways of opposing fascism, there is no nonviolent way of eliminating fascism since fascists believe in using violence against anyone who opposes them. A peaceful protest isn't going to stop the people who are capable of doing something like the Jewish Holocaust. It'll take violence and repression to stop people like them. 2/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 03:10

@Radical_EgoCom

While I agree that “a peaceful protest" won't stop the fascists, how do you know that “isn't an opinion, but a fact"? Can you prove this fact to be universally true?

3% of the world's population died in WWII. In today's numbers, that's 240 million people. I'm not ready to write that off as "the cost of doing business.”

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 03:29

@felyashono

I'm basing this on the history of combating fascism, which has always required violence to achieve. I said that it was a fact, which was a poor choice of words on my part. What I should have said was that, due to it having always been necessary to use violence against fascism to defeat it, and due to no one that I know of having ever defeated fascism through peaceful means, I'm inclined to believe that violence is necessary to defeat fascism until someone proves otherwise.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 17:44

@Radical_EgoCom

I think we have a fundamental difference as to the meaning of anti-fascism. I think your position is that anti-fascism necessitates "defeating” fascism, and that anybody in opposition to any and all means necessary to that end is useless.

I think anti-fascism means “opposing” fascism, which takes a variety of forms, not all of which support the full horror of world war.

FWIW, Merriam Webster agrees with me.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-fascist

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 17:54

@felyashono

"I think your position is that anti-fascism necessitates "defeating” fascism,..."

Is this a joke? Of course anti-fascism necessitates defeating fascism. What do you think is even the point of the anti-fascist movement, to continually oppose fascism but never actually try to defeat it or its supporters? If your goal is only to oppose fascism and not actually defeat it, then you may technically be an anti-fascists, but you would most certainly be one of the more useless ones.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 18:16

@Radical_EgoCom

Let me put this a different way:

I'm pretty confident that you believe that physical violence is the most powerful tool fascists possess.

I believe the most powerful tool fascists possess is the control of information and thought. Control over the truth.

I believe the truth matters. I will continue to use words to fight for that, and I will continue to use the truth to challenge murders and terrorism when appropriate. I know you have already deemed me useless. So be it.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 18:34

@felyashono

I don't know if you're not understanding me on purpose or what. I already told you here https://mastodon.social/@Radical_EgoCom/113761968285760864 that I'm aware of nonviolent ways to oppose fascism, and to add to that, I'm not against them. I've mainly pointed out that these nonviolent methods, while they can be useful, are not likely to defeat fascism based on the entire human history of fighting fascism, which has always required the use of violence to succeed. 1/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-03 at 18:34

@felyashono

Only engaging in nonviolence isn't what makes an anti-fascist useless. What makes them useless (a better word would be counter-productive) is if they criticize and demonize those anti-fascists who do use violence while not recognizing that both violent and nonviolent methods are required to defeat fascism. If you fall into that category, then it would be accurate to label you as useless (counter-productive) to the anti-fascist movement. 2/2

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-03 at 18:54

@Radical_EgoCom

What you're asserting is effectively, "anybody who questions our methods is a hindrance to our cause." It feels like you're saying you're opposed to criticism, opposed to opposition, opposed to oversight.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by None Hitwonder on 2025-01-02 at 23:36

@Radical_EgoCom @felyashono I think your view on the importance of violence is making it hard for you to see the forest for the trees, Cat. While I recognize that violence may have a role in fighting fascism, there are many ways to do so nonviolently as well, and disregarding those roles excludes vital people who can help the broader movement even if they are pacifists or perhaps physically or psychologically unsuited for a violent role. Most community building efforts and mutual aid work, for example, is going to be indispensable during this time.

I've said a version of this to you before: if your focus is solely on the necessity for violence, you'll always find a reason to be violent. If it's to the point that you don't even want to bring nonviolent people along to fight the good fight, then you're hobbling your own movement, and creating an outcome that will just perpetuate the violence and exclude the people that, frankly, you'll need to build a better future.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from nonehitwonder@tenforward.social

Written by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ on 2025-01-02 at 23:45

@nonehitwonder

I just explained this to Felyashono that giving "full support for the fight against fascism" doesn't mean everyone has to kill or even like it. All it means is that anti-fascists should recognize and accept that killing is an inevitable and necessary part of the fight against fascism. If they don't want to kill, then they can contribute in a nonviolent way, but if they start to demonize those who do kill, then that would be counter-productive to the fight against fascism.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-02 at 22:57

@Radical_EgoCom

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/02/cybertruck-explosion-driver-las-vegas?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social

Written by Miakoda on 2025-01-05 at 05:33

@felyashono

Luigi's bullet was targeted, with a fairly low risk of hitting unrelated people.

The CyberTruck was parked out in a public street where all sorts of people wander about.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from hellomiakoda@pdx.social

Written by Felyashono on 2025-01-05 at 05:54

@hellomiakoda

I understand that perspective in the abstract (trolley problem). It's interesting given the facts of both incidents.

[#] of fatalities: 1 (Thompson, non-consenting) vs 1 (Livelsberger, consenting).

[#] of injuries: 0 from Mangione's and 7 minor and recovering from Livelsberger’s.

Livelsberger clearly intended to send a message. Mangione's action hasn't stopped HC murders, or even shut down UHC. I assume his true intent was to send a message.

I'd argue murder > suicide.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from felyashono@disabled.social