I didn’t mention them at all. I was using sarcasm to show how ridiculous it is to claim destroying stuff is peaceful. As for right now, I think a lot of yelling and a little bit of property damage is a whole a very valid even if tame response to violent kidnapping of your neighbors.
Sons of Liberty activists boarded the Dartmouth, a British ship that had docked in Boston carrying a major shipment of East India Company tea, and set about throwing 342 chests of the tea into Boston Harbor.
I didn’t mention them at all.
Then, in your analogy, who’s home was “broken in to” and who’s property was “thrown in the rain to be destroyed?”
You mentioned them analogously, clearly.
But fine, it’s technically not peaceful to resist the world’s largest regime by salting their tea, I suppose.
The commenter I replied to. I was using a hypothetical situation to refute his claim that the tea party was peaceful. Violent actions aren’t always unjust and vis versa.
Tbf I still wouldn’t call it “violent,” violent and peaceful are not a binary choice, things can be not peaceful but also not violent. I’ll accept that wasting tea isn’t peaceful, but you’ll never convince me it’s violent.
At this point I’m suspecting you’re just criminally British and see assault against tea as the highest form of treason, or should I say teason.
Tbf I still wouldn’t call it “violent,” violent and peaceful are not a binary choice, things can be not peaceful but also not violent. I’ll accept that wasting tea isn’t peaceful, but you’ll never convince me it’s violent.
Yep, That’s like the point I made in another comment. I only originally implied that the tea party wasn’t peaceful(using sarcasm), that doesn’t mean I thought it was violent.
At this point I’m suspecting you’re just criminally British and see assault against tea as the highest form of treason, or should I say teason.
Is what I get for not putting the /s with the obvious sarcasm? smh
If it makes you happy to imagine me as an ye old British tea enjoyer outraged about tea parties 300 years ago go for it lol.
I didn’t mention them at all. I was using sarcasm to show how ridiculous it is to claim destroying stuff is peaceful. As for right now, I think a lot of yelling and a little bit of property damage is a whole a very valid even if tame response to violent kidnapping of your neighbors.
Then, in your analogy, who’s home was “broken in to” and who’s property was “thrown in the rain to be destroyed?”
You mentioned them analogously, clearly.
But fine, it’s technically not peaceful to resist the world’s largest regime by salting their tea, I suppose.
The commenter I replied to. I was using a hypothetical situation to refute his claim that the tea party was peaceful. Violent actions aren’t always unjust and vis versa.
Tbf I still wouldn’t call it “violent,” violent and peaceful are not a binary choice, things can be not peaceful but also not violent. I’ll accept that wasting tea isn’t peaceful, but you’ll never convince me it’s violent.
At this point I’m suspecting you’re just criminally British and see assault against tea as the highest form of treason, or should I say teason.
Yep, That’s like the point I made in another comment. I only originally implied that the tea party wasn’t peaceful(using sarcasm), that doesn’t mean I thought it was violent.
Is what I get for not putting the /s with the obvious sarcasm? smh
If it makes you happy to imagine me as an ye old British tea enjoyer outraged about tea parties 300 years ago go for it lol.
This game of I-said-you-said has been fun. Have a nice day, Guv’na.