You can do all of that, but when it comes down to two parties disagreeing it all eventually comes back to violence. Eventually one party resorts to attempting t

You can do all of that, but when it comes down to two parties disagreeing it all eventually comes back to violence. Eventually one party resorts to attempting to force their will on the world without the consent of another party. Even if _you_ wont, all it takes is a single party to be willing to do so and suddenly the guy in charge is the one whose ok with violence. My example was showing how even amongst a group of people who would have defined themselves as hackers, all the winners have resorted to relying on violence in one form or another. You can sit and be principled all you want, and then maybe you'll be a footnote in a history book