feotakahari | On violence and oppression

Suppose people A and B live in a stand-your-ground state. A thinks B is threatening them, and B thinks A is threatening them. Whoever survives the shootout is determined to have stood their ground and isn’t legally liable. But whoever died was also standing their ground! The judgment of right or wrong is meaningless, because the goal should have been to not have a situation where people had to stand their ground.

I just saw a post that I’m pretty sure said it was good and necessary for Palestinians to kill Israelis. It didn’t use those exact words, but I can’t think of an alternate way to interpret it. But Israelis justify killing Palestinians because they’re standing their ground! If you argue that you’re standing your ground against Israelis, you’re conceding the logic under which they claim they’re justified to kill you.