In relation to this, thinking about a new community for Political Activism. Calls to action, that kind of thing.

The rules would be super simple:

  1. Purpose is for protest organizing. [Country, City, State]

  2. Absolutely no calls for violent action.

  3. No links to fundraisers. Too rife for fraud and abuse. Stories about fundraisers would be fine, but no GoFundMes, etc.

Think there’s room for PolticalActivism?

  • libertyforever@lemmy.world
    19·
    2 days ago

    Nazi analogies aren’t evidence. Self-defense is judged on imminent threat and reasonableness, not rhetoric or insults.

      • libertyforever@lemmy.world
        16·
        2 days ago

        I am engaging — by rejecting rhetoric and focusing on the legal standard. If you think the threat wasn’t imminent or reasonable, make that case directly.

        • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
          21·
          2 days ago

          Here, since you seem to have trouble reading:

          There is no mention of use of force being justified. Do you even know how to read, or are you just copy-pasting talking points from an AI?

          • libertyforever@lemmy.world
            16·
            2 days ago

            The analogy doesn’t address the legal standard. What does matter under DHS policy and legal analysis is whether the officer reasonably perceived an imminent threat at the moment shots were fired — not whether a hashtag slogan or metaphor mentions “justification.”

            • AlexanderTheDead@lemmy.world
              11·
              2 days ago

              Okay, but that’s not what was being discussed.

              This analogy only works if you assume the conclusion first — that ICE is equivalent to the Gestapo and therefore any force used against them is justified.

              You said this, and I challenged this claim. You have failed to refute this challenge, and still are.

              The analogy does not need to presuppose that assertion to work.

              Maybe if you were literate and not using an AI to talk for you? Maybe then you could adequately respond.

              • libertyforever@lemmy.world
                13·
                2 days ago

                The analogy doesn’t actually address the legal standard that matters here. The question in this case isn’t whether ICE is like some historical regime — it’s whether the agent’s use of deadly force met the objectively reasonable imminent‑threat standard under federal and state law.