okay. so in fact you are only okay with the revolution if most people are on board. otherwise the dissenters will yell louder than you and since yelling back is the only proportionate retribution, you wont win.
do you think most people are on board? do you think more people are getting on board? when do you think you will hit critical mass? do you trust violent revolutionaries to have the same standards of proportionate retribution as you do, as opposed to less principled tactics?
Which one do you disagree with and why?
also, why do you have a proportional retribution standard? if i was doing a violent revolution and some dissenter was super charismatic and effective and turning people against me i think i should arrange for him to be killed.
What's my mechanism of violence? My mechanism is not doing (Or Supporting/encouraging) things which are violent, as they are not productive, achieve nothing, and are morally wrong.
Hey, I linked this shit before for you. Read it, moron
All of the above
Why - because they are not rational, they are emotional arguments
Yelling doesn't have an affect on the actual conditions of change: that's the point. Nonviolence does nothing. Violence does
Because I'm not a shitty person. If he's advocating for his followers to kill me, maybe
There it is
yes im saying that if the objective of occupy and BLM is violent revolution, it is correct for the FBI to crack down on them based on the FBI's job description. if they are "normal" protests, then it is not. but this is just theoretical conceptualizing. i think people participating in occupy and BLM have lots of different motivations, so you cant categorize it or declare the FBI is right or wrong so easily.
You are. You've advocated for a lot of people to kill themselves
i dont think good people make good revolutionaries. you will be betrayed by your less-good-colleague with lower moral standards. we must accomplish the objective 
also, do you trust your fellow revolutionaries to have the same standards as you? if you dont kill the dissenter, i bet someone else would.
No, what is the mechanism of violence that we commit against the "Other" we construct (lol). The same as the mechanism of violence the conditions of society construct against the Other in the actual definition of the word?
I've said this over and fucking over. Nonviolent movements accomplish nothing
This is wrong and the correct response is rooting out corruption in the media and govt that allowed it to happen - through legal reform and voting out the people that don't have the value system to prevent it
The objective of OWS was not violent revolution. They did the shit you said they shouldn't be doing. What the fuck?
Guys it's been 8 years and you're still arguing
okay. then the FBI is in the wrong. i didnt say the FBI was not in the wrong, i said that if there is threat of violent revolution they should quash it.
It's everything you've been describing in this thread. Do you think you haven't been otherizing the people you described as rich, the business owners, all the people whose houses and businesses you advocated for burning down?