However I find myself being disagreed with quite often, mostly for not advocating or cheering violence, “by any means possible” change, or revolutionary tactics. It would seem that I’m not viewed as authentically holding my view unless I advocate extreme, violent, or radical action to accomplish it.

Those seem like two different things to me.

Edit: TO COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN’T MEANT FOR YOU.

  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Why do leftists always have to acquiesce to liberals, but liberals never have to compromise with leftists?

    Therein lies your answer.

    • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      Why do slash and burn farmers always have to compromise with ecologists, but ecologists never have to compromise with slash and burn farmers?

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        If you’re going to call people who want to restructure society along more ethical lines “slash and burn farmers” and the maintainers of violent Imperialism and dying Capitalism “ecologists” like an elaborate soyjack meme, rather than honestly engaging with the points raised here, what are you actually trying to accomplish?