You can’t stop the state from committing violence with a handgun, for crying out loud. Or even with a million handguns. The state will always have better equipment than you, most of which doesn’t require anyone to get within handgun range if they don’t want to. Granted, big missiles make a tremendous mess and they’d rather not use them, but the possibility is always there.
Expecting citizen violence to overthrow a modern government that’s dead set on preventing it is, to put it politely, unrealistic. Unless you can convince the military to take your side or at least bow out, removing the government’s ability to exert force, but you aren’t going to accomplish that by directing violence at the military.
i believe the implication is that when injustice is commonly met with this response, those seeking to exert force upon others do their due diligence
versus the “only the state can do violence and we never make mistakes hurr hurr” that (ahem) they really want the global population to internalize
How’s that working out for no-knock warrants in the USA?
You can’t stop the state from committing violence with a handgun, for crying out loud. Or even with a million handguns. The state will always have better equipment than you, most of which doesn’t require anyone to get within handgun range if they don’t want to. Granted, big missiles make a tremendous mess and they’d rather not use them, but the possibility is always there.
Expecting citizen violence to overthrow a modern government that’s dead set on preventing it is, to put it politely, unrealistic. Unless you can convince the military to take your side or at least bow out, removing the government’s ability to exert force, but you aren’t going to accomplish that by directing violence at the military.