I say that is complete nonsense. Violence is neither good nor bad. It is the manner in which the violence is used which defines its worth. If a man breaks into a woman’s home to rape her, then that is an evil act, if the woman’s brother, or husband beats that rapist to death with a baseball bat as he is attacking the woman? That is a good act. An act that deserves praise and applause frankly, and possibly a medal as well.
I cannot, for the life of me, grasp why it is that some people have such a hard time distinguishing between good and bad acts of violence. Perhaps it is an addiction to some idealistic value system, that foolishly believes that if good people are forbidden the use of force in self-defense that bad men will automatically drop their evil ways. Perhaps it is that such people are so against the existence of God, that they cannot accept the existence of evil either.
Whatever the cause of their beliefs, I wonder if they ever consider that by toeing their “non-violent, pacifist” ideological line, they are, by their actions, aiding evil doers. Take the fools that were so against the Vietnam War. They claimed to be above things like violence and war. Yet, their “solution” to Vietnam, one that tragically took place eventually, was to condemn freedom loving Vietnamese and Cambodians, to horrific suffering at the hands of evil, brutal and yes violent monsters that slaughtered hundreds of thousands.
If you ever wonder why I use the term “morally retarded” understand that I use it for the people who are delusional enough to believe in peace at any price. I also use it for the fools who say nothing when Palestinian swine launch thousands of rockets, aimed at Israeli citizens every year, yet become outraged when Israel defends itself against such barbarities. What else would you call these people but morally retarded?
Some have questioned my celebrating, on this blog, when our military, or the military of our allies kill Jihadists, terrorists, etc. To them I ask what kind if person would not be glad when violent murderers, who torture innocents, target women, and children,and seek to enslave the planet, are killed by just men? What is your solution I ask them? What else do you do with such swine? Do you actually think we, as civilized people, can reason with such Satanic creatures? You claim to desire peace, but honestly, do you believe we can ever have peace with these bastards? The best the very best you can hope for is submission to them. And then, you will have no peace. You will be but a slave, dependent on the “mercies” of these vermin for every moment of your life.
Understand this, there is no peace with tyrants, not with Nazis, or Stalinists, or terrorists. You have only two options. Fight and defeat them, or subject yourself to their control.
Now, I am not saying we should seek violence, I am saying we must, both as a nation and as individuals, understand that evil is real. And, therefore, we must also understand that being prepared and willing to defend our nation, our homes, our families, is not only a necessity, not only our right, it is, our duty.
darcprynce
Dave C
Gatordoug
As on Old Right (traditionalist/libertarian) conservative and Christian, I don’t advocate violence as a solution. That said though, this shouldn’t imply that violence is completely off the table. Nor does a proper understanding of the non-aggression axiom imply no violence ever.
Like rape for example, yes indeed you have the right (and duty) to go after the offender with no remorse. While I disagree with the nation-building strategery, al Qaeda and the Taliban should have been wiped off the face of the planet for their attacks on 9/11. Afghanistan should have been left to pick up the crumbled pieces on their own to teach them a lesson (more brutal than nation-building).
I’m responding to the post simply because I don’t know if you’re picking on the non-aggressive right or the unicorn left. There are fundamental differences between the 2. What the left thinks however, I haven’t a clue … I’ve been trying to figure that out for over 20 years now. They often claim to be non-violent, but they engage in violent protests to enact laws that require violence and theft.
If we resurrected Carl Jung to figure them out, I think even he’d be at a loss.
All I am saying is that not all violence is the same, as the Left thinks. And yes, it is the only solution in some cases.
My concern lies more in violence against our fellow citizens. You probably saw the SWAT raid video where the cops lit up the family pets in front of a 7-year old over a misdemeanor pot charge.
That kind of violence is not only uncalled for, but it is uncivilized and barbaric.
That was a case of complete irresponbsibility, no doubt.
People get told from the time they are little that violence is never the answer and that defending what’s yours is wrong. We are disproportionately told to always walk away even when fighting is totally justified. It’s the PC world we live in!