Is intimidating, manipulating, or coercing people an act of violence?

>>2789494
Yes it violates NAP

Intimidating or coercing is, obviously.

By manipulating you'd have to be more specific. A white lie might be manipulative, but not sure I would call it violence.

>>2789494
anything can be considered violence now.

this post is violence

>>2789909
I am triggered by this display of violence and have developed PTSD. Gibs money.

>>2789909
I'll commit violence on your anus if you don't explain your reasoning behind this.

>>2789494
Yes, except manipulating

>>2789507
>Intimidating or coercing is, obviously.
Not at all.

If I point a gun at you or threaten to beat you up I'm not violating the NAP, I'm only making use of my right of free speech. Only when I actually shoot at you or hit you I am violating the NAP.

>>2789501
The NAP doesn't actually work unless somebody can prove objective morality and everybody in the world speaks the same language.

>>2789494
Nope, it's all just a sppok

No. Its a form of kindness.

People are dumb. That's a fact, 90% of humanity has no fucking clue what is going on and they're happy not to, to reject the evidence when they don't like the conclusion and peddle lies to get what they want.

Take /pol/ there's a thread there now that is discussing the mechanics of how "hard time create strong men" blah blah blah, and about how Rome collapsed because of "degeneracy". Note they've skipped the part where evidence is presented that any of this is true, and have just assumed it is because it fits their political purposes.

Same with lefties, and they've even codified rejecting empirical evidence with post-modernism. So no, its not violence, its preventing their utter stupidity from causing violence. Stupid people don't deserve freedom, and they wouldn't know how to use it anyway.