So yeah. I am kinda split about self-defense. On the one hand self-defense isn't using violence as an oppressive force on the other hand in for example Gandhi's non-violent resistance it was essential that they didn't use self-defense so to convince the general public that the British army was indeed the oppressor. I wonder what your opinions are on this matter. When should one use self-defense and when should we not?
This is a tough one. If you use self defence, they may turn it around and make you look like "just another violent anarchist", but if you don't, not only could you get seriously hurt, but they're likely just to ignore you. I think it kinda depends on how much risk you're willing to take. That's just my humble opinion, though, and I'd also be intriuged to hear what other people have to say. Hope this has been helpful.
I'm personally opposed to violent self-defense in nearly all cases, primarily for moral reasons (but also for tactical reasons).
