I oppose violent revolution and "overthrow".
Violence in general.
Discussion
What do you think of Abe Lincoln? I say if he lived forever he might regret being so brutal and believe there were lives that could have been saved, but he fought a fight that did need to be fought
I'm generally not a fan of statists or waging wars of aggression.
I'm also against slavery because it's coercion/aggression.
Those two things can exist at the same time. I don't have to be pro-war just because I'm anti-slavery.
I'm anti-war too, generally, but wasn't Lincoln probably too?
My point is, you can recognize times where violence is needed. But I highly respect how strong your instinct is to avoid it and protect people
Violence is absolutely warranted for **defense** of one's bodily autonomy and intended use of legitimately-acquired property in response to the unintended interference of the same by others. (Where "interference" means your use would preclude mine. You can think about my stuff all you want, since that doesn't preclude my use or access). My position is that this is the only time violence is warranted.
Ideally the minimum amount of force to prevent the unintended interference would be used.
Some people would say the problem with being extremely strict like this is that it prohibits "wars of liberation" and other Fun With Democracy abroad and domestic 😆