NationStates Jolt Archive

What's your opinion? Is a non-violent protest that advocates and/or threatens violence different to any other non-violent protest? I get the impression that some people feel that it is no different.

Of course it is.
In one situation, people get hurt, in another, they don't.

Or do you think playing Doom III is the same as shooting someone?

Why the hell would you have a non-violent protest supporting acts of violence? Wouldn't you just start a riot instead?






(Pro-war protests advocate violence, but anyone who is protesting for war should serve in the front lines)

Of course it is.
In one situation, people get hurt, in another, they don't.

Or do you think playing Doom III is the same as shooting someone?

I think you are answering a different question (the question I think you are answering = "is non-violence advocation of violence different to violence?"). Either that or I just don't understand your analogy.

What's your opinion? Is a non-violent protest that advocates and/or threatens violence different to any other non-violent protest?

Lemme get this straight. Non-violent protest that advocates and or threatens violence. Does that not interpret into.. "then it's not non-violent" ..? Or am I just some crackhead with no grasp of the language here. I don't even know what you're saying, but I would guess that they're two totally different things. In the first it's violent, the second it's not. Black and White. Red and Green. Chalk and Cheese.

I think you are answering a different question (the question I think you are answering = "is non-violence advocation of violence different to violence?"). Either that or I just don't understand your analogy.
Of course it's a matter of opinion, but let's just assume Doom III is an advocation of violence.

Now, if you make the game, is that the same as actually being violent to others?
Or if you play it, for that matter?

You engage, or are being engaged in, an advocation of violence in both cases, yet no one gets hurt, and importantly, there is no reason to assume that someone necessarilly will get hurt either.

Of course, advocating violence does not fit in with the concept of non-violence, but it certainly is not the same as actually commiting violent acts.