this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2025
649 points (99.5% liked)
History Memes
1184 readers
1213 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Piefed.social rules.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:
- !historymusic@quokk.au
- !historygallery@quokk.au
- !historymemes@piefed.social
- !historyruins@piefed.social
- !historyart@piefed.social
- !historyartifacts@piefed.social
- !historyphotos@piefed.social
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I believe it was along the lines of "actually solve the problem".
There's so many diverse causes of violence that there's not one solution or alternative. Resource shortage? Find a way to fix it. Land shortage? Find a way to use what you have more efficiently.
If you can't solve the problem you're by definition not competent.
I don't believe he thought the incompetent should meekly roll over and die, but rather that violence was a failure to solve the problem correctly. If you find yourself in a position where you need to do violence it's not because you had no choice, but because you didn't know what that other option was.
It's worth remembering he was one of those people who said exactly what they meant. If he meant that violence was unacceptable no matter what he would have said that. He was a pacifist in the "what if we don't invade Vietnam?" sense, not in the "I will let you beat me rather than raise my hand in anger" way.