[flagged]
Violence usually implies direct physical force. I find this to be a core aspect of the word.
It’s punitive action, sure, but it isn’t violence because *nobody got hit/shoved/shot/etc. I don’t think any unfair, bad, or evil thing that indirectly affects another persons bodily health is violence. You’d start seeing violence everywhere, it seems.
Bit of a stagnant, but is a tax increase violence because it affects an individuals ability to afford medicine?
Just writing this comment makes me realize the main issue I have with this sort of reasoning is that it distracts from what’s actually happening. It’s playing games with semantics for pizazz, as opposed to critiquing with clarity.
I absolutely agree that Temple's actions here are loathsome, but even reciprocal violence should be avoided if possible.
Can you think of other forms of similar violence that may sit well with you? Some might argue that a strike itself is a form of violence against profits.
Imo once healthcare is touched, which I do agree is a form of violence to remove, the strikers should absolutely respond in kind, by escalating the strike to slow some other part of the operation, perhaps by disrupting deliveries, switching off power to things, whatever else.
Exactly. Punching faces is probably not stategic, and the strikers likely have other ways to respond in the course of this strike. But we should not mince words about what they're responding to, and we should bear the university's violence in mind when examining and discussing whatever the strikers decide to do next.