Measureless violence?
A paragraph before that was Bakunin's Genius: Don't reform, push for more and more control, until the people have had it.
Yet in the following part there's exemplified measures of violence, and how each act, is endearing in different ways, so that if a good son kills a bad father it's worthy, but if a bad son kills a good father it undermines fatherhood. Then closes, implying that Bakunin, and Anarchism promoted good fathers being murdered to change the system.
The real purpose of killing judges under anarchism to undermine the rule of law, and it's lawlessness, you don't pose philosophical conundrums to a would be attacker, you resist them.
Maybe we shouldn't kill people that aren't attacking us, nor paying others to do their attacking for them?
Clearly, yet a whole group of people beg for masters to impose rule of law, they aggress by default, at all times, through the people they promote and advocate for, and who are at odds with liberty. In any other circumstances, outside authorized force, the obvious would be yes, kill the people who support the mafia directly, kill the ones involved directly, duh. When this mafia and it's rackets is authorized, it magically grants a +10 protective shiled. Magical rainbow farting unicorns.
Rule by force is the disease, who and how are just symptoms.
Dismissive bullshit. Rule by force is what we're disusing, and that includes who and how, especially how. We were discussing the inherent right to resist and killing judges good or bad is one way to do that, and it's not "killing people that aren't attacking us" like you implied, but it's killing people that are actively attacking us.
I agree, judges should stop sending their thugs to rough us up.
We weren't discussing what judges ought to do, we were discussing what to do, and who to do it. Killing judges.
Well, I know if one feels the need to do that I wouldn't vote to convict.
Well, I know if one
feelssees the need to do that I wouldn'tvote to convictcondemn it.