The founding fathers debated the merits of war over and over until they decided to go to war with England.
It seems un-American to deprive the type of speech that founded this country and conflate it with actual violent speech, examples being "people need to start killing people in the streets". That would be an example and I'd be right there with you. Or saying "someone needs to do a gary plaunche" or whatever that guys name.
Laying the philosophical justifications for why a civil war would be preferable to the continued rotting of this country is the type of thing politicians would debate about; this is not at all the same as someone encouraging vigilantism or any other sort of lunacy.
EDIT: Moderator messaged me back as to why what I said was not prudent, and he made good points and in fact out-philosophized me, noting that the founding fathers wanted to avoid a war and only agreed to it when it was unavoidable. He also pointed out some other things that were worth considering in terms of the wisdom of his rationale so I feel the moderator was completely justified. Being vague because it's his private conversation and all that needs to be noted is that he brought up wise points I didn't consider.
You're wasting your time. Trying to reason with the clown in charge of this place is a fools errand as hundreds before you have found out over the last half decade. He's a Reddit janny who does Reddit janny things.
I did send a complaint a few days back after someone attempted to Doxx me & called me a raft of hellacious names to boot. (I had to look some up! Still don't know what one meant) Sent a reminder today, we'll see.
In the past they were pretty quick to respond and/or take action. I haven't exactly sent a lot of complaints in ofc.
So because the founding fathers tried to avoid war, we shouldn’t be able to talk about violence that needs to be done? You don’t think there was a couple of them that were on board for war a lot earlier than the rest? How can we open discuss when it’s reached the point where violence is necessary if we can’t discuss when we reach the point where violence is necessary?
Signed: totally not the moderators alt!
Are you going to share? Right now this just comes off as really bizarre to me.
Not exactly true, they agreed to it when the only options were war or continuing the injustice of allowing people who didn't represent them rule over them, with no guarantees it wouldn't keep getting worse.
Rolling over and pretending it was more reasonable was always an option. The British didn't force them into war, their dignity, determination to not be second class citizens, and desire to leave a better country for future generations did.
TL;DR surrender was an option so war isnt ever unavoidable. The funding fathers chose a war they didn’t have to fight.
For evidence of that just look at Canada.
Plauche. No N.