Zoe @ekg@librem.one

@PandaCab no, I don't. If that is the case I apologies. It just that it seemed directed towards me. And I thought this was an appropriate time to summarise my thoughts on our previous conversation. which might also have been rude, I am bad at judging when it is appropriate to speak out. But it's hard to stay quiet when someone literally call the reason I am alive and well for violent.

Just as with guns, swimming pools and cars. States doesn't kill people, they allow people to kill. That is why I am for regulations on cars and guns.

States shouldn't be built in a way that makes killing easy, quiet the opposite they should be built to make killing impossible.

A driver is a murder, a gunslinger is a murder. A leader shouldn't be.

Swimming pools are more complicated.

@HeavenlyPossum if states are violent people aren't responsible for their actions.
I know a group chat of people that should* serve the rest of their life in prison for their actions, but according to you it was the state that did it.

States are social constructs that exist in part to abolish responsibility for peoples actions, this only work if the state is violent rather than permits violence.

*obviously no one should be in prison, but for the sake of the argument.

@31113 empathy isn't violence. Asking people to mindful of others, one of the most common way to enforce laws, is entirely voluntary. You don't have to listen to the advice.

My mom spoke about how she used this approach with kinder gardeners, literally sitting them down in a cirkel and asking how should we treat each other. Obviously with a lot of guidance.

I need to be far more careful with how I approach people here. I have burnt more bridges then I have built.

I am not good at the social rites expected, in part because of neuro divergence, esl and the lack of cultural awareness.

I am trying, but it's really hard to be careful without being completely isolated. This is one of few forums that I feel somewhat comfortable being.

@31113 what you are describing isn't violence, but institution to manage violence. With the exception of prisons, that are inheritantly violent.

But law enforcement isn't, it can be done voluntarily.

@HeavenlyPossum @mxrn@social.tchncs.de their exist a difference between states cannot exist without violence, and them being the cause of violence. And on some reflections I think you are right.

States are tools for managing violence. if their exist no violence, their exist no need for a state.

@mxrn@social.tchncs.de @HeavenlyPossum well we are both wrong, as I used the wrong words.

I think I going to leave being lecturered on what a state is to my law professor. I am happy to listen to what you belive a state is, as that is interesting. Wikipedia isn't.

@HeavenlyPossum @mxrn@social.tchncs.de I don't disagree with you. I grabbed the wrong word, for which I am happy to apologise.

A state can exist without violence, in principle. The limitation is that it has to call the shot on what violence is legitimate, or legal. The Holocaust was very much legal, which is why the Nazi state was responsible for it.

@31113 the state is in part defined by it's ability to call certain kind of violence legitimate. That doesn't mean it is violent.

An organisation that successfully called all violence illegal, would still be a state.

@HeavenlyPossum @mxrn@social.tchncs.de okay, I forgot a word.

My argument stand. The state is the state because it define legitimately of violence, not because it uses violence.

@HeavenlyPossum The state is a tool to achieve an aim, the Icelandic state is controlled by people. The EU threatens those people to achieve their aims, the Icelandic state is used to achieve that aim.

You might as well ask me me to find an unblooded hammer on a battle field, and on my failure argue that hammers are inherently violent.

@HeavenlyPossum I might say the EU, but remember they're an imperialist project of the us. Many core EU states are occupied by the US, including Germany. The former Warsaw states are scared by the Soviet experiment. And Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy, and others basically had no experience with democracy before they joined. The EU is a project of manged democracy to protect US interests.

@mxrn@social.tchncs.de @HeavenlyPossum monopoly of rightful violence, doesn't mean exerciser off.

The monopoly of rightful violence is the ability to dictate what violence is acceptable and witch isn't.

By the way the USA is losing this ability, which is way people fear civil war.

@HeavenlyPossum the rule of thumb is that a half the workforce work for the state, and about half the populous is in the workforce.

How is it different from the border guard exempl; when the the EU tells 75k Icelanders: "enforce you border or eat Icelandic shark"?

@HeavenlyPossum which Is why I specified nation state, as the Icelandic state is made up of the Icelandic people.

@HeavenlyPossum Does border guards that violently protect their nations borders because they want to eat* responsible for that violence? *or stay out of prison as is the case in many places.

The UK invaded Iceland because they didn't think they would protect their borders. Is Iceland responsible for UK troops actions on their island?

Nation states can be as much subject of violence as anyone else.

@HeavenlyPossum yes, my argument is that that violence doesn't originate from the Icelandic state.

Capitalist doesn't make up the Icelandic state, they are foreign investors. Which they have to let im to follow international agreements.

Iceland didn't choose to be a member of the EU, in fact they aren't. They had to join when the rest of the nordic did, unless they wanted to live on fish and warm rocks. They found a compromise.

It's not their violence.