3 ms·

Just because someone is a catalyst, I don't see how it logically and necessarily follows that 100% of the causal responsibility falls on them. This seems objec

Just because someone is a catalyst, I don't see how it logically and necessarily follows that 100% of the causal responsibility falls on them. This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts. Maybe the masses are upset and this is a sign of things to come, that should be listened to.

stjohnswarts 3y ago
Myself, I'm a peaceful guy, if every protest I called (assuming I'm a "leader" of cause $INSERT_CAUSE_HERE ) resulted in violence, I would not call any more protests because that would go against my personal values. So it's hard to believe a group is peaceful if every time they have a protest it turns into a riot.
- Out_of_Characte 3y ago
  Would you be okay with being jailed for destruction of property because of a protest you organised that was co-opted by bad actors?
- skitout 3y ago
  Then you could not organize any "leftist" protest in France :-) Note that they do destroy stuff, they just don't call violence against people. And definitely don't turn in riot every time
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  So now the state can silence you by simply sending plainclothes cops to start riots in all your protests
ilyt 3y ago
Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you. > This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts. No, you just didn't liked that thing you like got attacked for the thing they did and are making up excuses.
- mistermann 3y ago
  > Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you. Technically, it "is on" whoever objectively plays a role in the underlying causality. You "may" be referring to your perception of what is going on, as opposed to what is actually going on (which is unreachable). >> This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts. > No, you just didn't liked that thing you like got attacked for the thing they did and are making up excuses. Except I have the ability to describe the various ways in which it is (at least plausibly) objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts, whereas you have a much harder problem: proving that you can actually read my mind (or, are omniscient).
- froggit 3y ago
  > Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you. Yeah, they "accidentally" carried swords, firebombs and molotov cocktails to a protest. It was an honest mistake, right? I mean, those are normal things people carry around on a daily basis, aren't they?

stjohnswarts 3y ago

Myself, I'm a peaceful guy, if every protest I called (assuming I'm a "leader" of cause $INSERT_CAUSE_HERE ) resulted in violence, I would not call any more protests because that would go against my personal values. So it's hard to believe a group is peaceful if every time they have a protest it turns into a riot.

Out_of_Characte 3y ago
Would you be okay with being jailed for destruction of property because of a protest you organised that was co-opted by bad actors?
skitout 3y ago
Then you could not organize any "leftist" protest in France :-) Note that they do destroy stuff, they just don't call violence against people. And definitely don't turn in riot every time
mrguyorama 3y ago
So now the state can silence you by simply sending plainclothes cops to start riots in all your protests

ilyt 3y ago

Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you. > This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts. No, you just didn't liked that thing you like got attacked for the thing they did and are making up excuses.

mistermann 3y ago
> Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you. Technically, it "is on" whoever objectively plays a role in the underlying causality. You "may" be referring to your perception of what is going on, as opposed to what is actually going on (which is unreachable). >> This seems objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts. > No, you just didn't liked that thing you like got attacked for the thing they did and are making up excuses. Except I have the ability to describe the various ways in which it is (at least plausibly) objectively reductive and represents ideological beliefs as objective facts, whereas you have a much harder problem: proving that you can actually read my mind (or, are omniscient).
froggit 3y ago
> Again, accidents happen, but if you are the catalyst over and over again it's on you. Yeah, they "accidentally" carried swords, firebombs and molotov cocktails to a protest. It was an honest mistake, right? I mean, those are normal things people carry around on a daily basis, aren't they?