what's more important?

liberalism

or

liberation

Whatever way seems to get liberty for the most would be ideal.

the question was motivated by the insistence by some on DU that non-violence is an unbreakable tenant of liberalism. this is of course historically untrue. in any case the argument is made that violence, even when used as a tool of self-defense or as a means to liberation & self-determination (intifada, chiapas, etc...) should never be condoned by 'liberals' (although apparently it is acceptable to maintain 'solidarity' from a safe distance).

so what is more important? liberal purity in theory & practice (however you want to define that) or liberation (self-determination)...even if that requires the use of violence or other supposedly 'non-liberal' practices.

context.

with no context it's a fail.

Or maybe bacon.


Gosh I just can't decide.

Could it be Liberalism? Is that what is taking your liberty?

*blink*

Here's to me.

I slay me.

but I rise...

hehehehehehehe