The legal right to protect one’s home, with defensive violence if necessary, is a concept more than 2,000 years old in the Western tradition. And for good reason.
From a libertarian perspective we would not consider self defense as defensive "violence" ... it would be merely the use of physical force in self defense.
The word "violence" should only be used when describing the initiation of the use of physical force against others, to infringe their individual rights as we understand them to be.
Using the word violence to describe self defense helps perpetuate the legitimization of Fanon Sartre "resistance" wherein any use of physical force utilised in "resistance" is moral.
This is the basis upon which atrocities like October 7 or 9/11 are legitimised.
From a libertarian perspective we would not consider self defense as defensive "violence" ... it would be merely the use of physical force in self defense.
The word "violence" should only be used when describing the initiation of the use of physical force against others, to infringe their individual rights as we understand them to be.
Using the word violence to describe self defense helps perpetuate the legitimization of Fanon Sartre "resistance" wherein any use of physical force utilised in "resistance" is moral.
This is the basis upon which atrocities like October 7 or 9/11 are legitimised.
I don’t believe you were only 10.
Justin Trudeau is a criminal who doesn’t like the idea of true justice. Or of being shot.
…or one and the same.