I agree with your anti-violence stance, but can’t ignore the reasoning behind it.
I don’t believe there’s some special class that either accumulates or breeds violence. I don’t believe that the “lowest” class, whatever that might be, is fixed on killing its kin. The people ruling Nazi Germany certainly weren’t the “lowest” class when they were making their impactful decisions, many of which killed members of other classes, not theirs.
Neither Trump nor Musk are “low” class, yet they tend to hold the more absurd and anti-human views, separating people into worthy and not-so-much and believing they can make destinies.
There are dangerous people in our world, which are often attracted by power, often any sort of power they can rise to. Violence included.
Regardless, violence only breeds violence, for so many reasons that no comment can hold. Violence traumatizes and creates examples and “Why can’t I, too?..” questions, etc.
I’m Russian, living in Russia, who’s never even been abroad.
I was agreeing with you the whole time, saying that violence is never the answer and does eventually bring peace and prosperity.
If I consider myself to be the upper class, will that make me upper class? Most likely not, so I don’t see how that makes literal top figures of their state at their respective time anywhere near “lower” classes.
The tyrants you’ve mentioned also all lived in the 20th century and operated within very hierarchy-based political systems, at least in terms of influence. Each had immense power of their country and everyone around, and especially everyone lower in the hierarchy. There is nothing “low” class about any of this.
This is what I’m agreeing with.
You just seem oddly focused on the class aspect of this, especially the “lower” class, in a way that seems condescending and patronizing. All I’m saying is that it seems very disrespectful and a wrong thing to focus on.