Comment by mothballed 7 hours ago
People still think that. They will use violence and men with guns to enforce welfare schemes because they believe without the government people won't help others and therefore their violence is justified.
They're using violence against charities? If you're talking about the Israelis or the US insofar as they support the prevention of aid reaching gaza, sure. Generally it's quite rare I think.
When you talk about "men with guns" in reference to a welfare state, you're really talking about the process of taxation and the taxes being used to create a safety net for people. But it's telling that when you're trying to counter someone talking about the government being used to strip away these things from people through the executive branch and not the legislative branch, you suddenly require there to be real, physical violence before you'll accept the example.
No, I'm saying the opposite of using violence to fund charity would be using violence against charity.
I don't need to see further evidence to believe it's happened, I'm aware it is being used against some charities (Gaza aid organizations for instance). I literally acknowledged such and then you go on some weird tangent about me needing evidence.
Except now it’s the complete opposite.