We have a few years to improve our asteroid deflection capabilities to change that

“Kingsley Shacklebolt”

I mean, sure, but what else? I wouldn’t call ‘not voting for a candidate you don’t like’ a movement

If they get life without parole they can’t, either. But if in ten years you figure out they were actually innocent, you can release an inmate. You can’t unkill an executee

The deterrent argument usually goes “people are more afraid of dying than of getting imprisoned, so they’ll not commit that crime”. This probably doesn’t work. Because even if the basic premise was true (it likely isn’t), the consequences are bad anyways. You need to draw the line somewhere. Let’s say murder gets you the death penalty, and so does rape. Now a rapist has nothing to lose, might as well kill the victim to hide the evidence.

As you said, the standard for evidence needs to be very high. That means long and protracted trials, multiple rounds of appeals, etc. You’re condemning the loved ones to years upon years of proceedings, having to face the perpetrator again and again. This is not a gut feeling, there’s empirical studies about this.

Reduce that time and barrier of proof, more innocents die. What percentage is acceptable?

There is no rational reason to use the death penalty over life without parole. The only reason is the base, if very understandable, instinct to have people that did unspeakable things suffer. But if suffering is the point, why stop at executions? Why not first torture them for what they did?

I firmly believe that the carceral system should serve to rehabilitate those that can be rehabilitated, and for the worst offenders, isolate and protect victims, their families and wider society from them. Putting punishment over the well-being of victims and co-victims, and over the risk to innocents, is not something we should want from a civilized society.

The death penalty does not work. Not as a deterrent, not as closure for the families, not even to reduce costs. Even if you think there are acts so vile that someone forfeits their right to life, there are many reasons against the death penalty. For example, what does rock-solid evidence mean? There have been cases with good evidence, multiple witnessed and a full confession, that later turned out to be wrong convictions. What percentage of innocents among the convicted is acceptable?

Here’s a great video by Shaun that goes through the arguments better than I could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L30_hfuZoQ8

What movements? As an outsider watching the US, are there any notable workers’ movements over there at the moment?

Ah, you’re both going through my history now and exposing yourself as a shill for the modern Tsar. If you think Russian imperialism furthers the left, we can end it right here and you’ll end up on the blocklist. Have a good life!

Also, what do you think a germanist is? lol

Direct action is not convenient. Building on-the-ground worker solidarity is not convenient. Building and maintaining syndicates to aid and support both those alienated- and those discarded by capital is not convenient.

But I’m sure a keyboard warrior like you is much more knowledgeable and involved in the class war than little naive me. Please, enlighten me. What do you suggest we do to abolish capital?

That’s funny, how many CEOs have you shot so far?

reading comprehension of a Tumblr user, wtf? I’m literally an anarchist

Also don’t call me bro, please

You sure know a lot about my political beliefs, huh? Check my other comment before you jump to conclusions. I don’t disagree with violence as a tactic (but I still don’t like it, and try to avoid it), but assassinations are only useful in so far as they are used to build a movement. The vindication you feel by seeing someone horrible killed will not change the system, collective action will. And that takes actual organizing, not posting Luigi memes online.

lol, lmao even

Who is “you guys”? I’m not saying the revolution was (or will be, in the future) bloodless. But to have a revolution, you need to organize, before you go out and shoot someone in the streets. To think that simply assassinating some of the worst offenders will bring about systemic change is naive, imo.

There is an argument to be made that in the age of social media Propaganda of the Deed could make a successful comeback as a tool to build collective action (and some anarchists are making that argument), but it’s this collective action we need, not lone wolves.

That’s not the point I’m trying to make. As one of the ‘bloodthirsty subfucks’ I’m well aware that the war likely would have started either way, all the imperial powers in Europe were eager to try out their new weaponry. But the commenter above claims that assassinations can solve structural problems. Which I don’t think is true.

That was an execution after the revolution had already been fought. A more apt comparison would be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Alexander_II_of_Russia

You cease, we fire

You raise good points. They deserve it too

Cons

• they’ll get hired by Microsoft instead

Flip a coin every time you read an article whether you get quick and easy significant issues