Quote:
Originally Posted by polonius
I never said it was an option for me -- I just noted that:
a) I'm becoming pessimistic that any non-violent approach will work, because such an approach is only effective when the violators actually have a sense of morality that can be stimulated by non-violent resistence and
b) although I wouldn't undertake a violent approach myself, I certainly won't shed any tears if/when someone finally gives these guys what they've got coming
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Guy
Hypocrite.
|
How do those statements describe the actions/feelings of a hypocrite? If he had said that a violent approach was obligatory, then he would be a hypocrite. However, he said to achieve goal
X (change in gov't behavior), one needs to do
Y (engage in violence). He appears to think that his desire for
X does not merit the consequences of
Y, but would sympathize with someone who felt that
X was necessary.
He may not have agreed to fight for our founding fathers, but he might have sympathized with people who did fight.
