The protest is about a draconian bill that amongst other serious criticisms, potentially outlaws peaceful protest
The protestors arenât protesting against violence. Their actions shouldnât be perceived as ironic.
I suppose itâs ironic that a government which had violent protest largely supressed, has sought to quash peaceful protest as well, but has instead unleashed a bit of violent protest. However, I donât see how that supports any point you are making.
I said that violence is a reasonable response to violence. Which is a blatantly obvious rule of nature which can be justified by reason as well.
An apologist for a disgraced state is a lickspittle.
I love the word âlickspittleâ. It is not used often enough, along with âGuttersnipeâ âFustilugâ and âFopdoodleâ, among others. The rather wonderful Susie Dent is a rich source of such underused insults.
I am also rather partial to the comic character âRaffles the Gentleman Thugâ, from Viz. Heâs no stranger to giving the Peelers a bloody nose, in a humorous Victorian-worded way.
I am not an apologist for the state. I just donât think that using violence against the very people who are there to protect us in the first place is productive or helpful.
Most protestors seem able to go and make their protest without injuring a member of the police or smashing windows.
