What are your thoughts on the use of direct action? is violent direct action justifiable or does it hurt one's cause? Speak up!!!
Good. It's almost always justifiable. I draw the line when innocents start getting hurt.
Only action that works.
What's "violent"? USG defines potentially almost any effective protest against an animal-dependent enterprise as terrorist. Pacifism is a problem, but IMO illegalism runs the risk of pointlessly creating social capital for the state. That said, we can't have a bourgeois morality about direct action or we'll never get anywhere
I justify Direct Action, particularly destructive action, through the philosophy that if we hit them harder than they can hit back then we can create pockets of liberation that'll spread throughout the Nation, and the world.
