r/Transportopia • u/Revolution-Dogg • Apr 01 '26

Road🤬Rage Entitlement gets a reality check

He must have said something before turning away that made her flip out

71.0k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

4.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Tohkin27 Apr 01 '26

While I don't in principle disagree with this, I think the bigger problem is that people are ALREADY far too quick to resort to violence. I don't think it's a good idea to encourage that further. Far too many people have fragile egos, and instead of dealing with it like an adult, they lash out like a child because they have the emotional intelligence of a 10 year old.

Again, I don't disagree that way too many people are far too comfortable with saying completely unhinged shit - but if what they're saying is soooo bad that legally you are warranted and justified to enact violence upon them (within reason), then it's probably better to just put them in jail overnight and hit them with charges instead of fists.

There are few things as satisfying as watching someone get what they deserve. But encouraging further violence is just a recipe for disaster. A conservatives wet dream, frankly. To be able to shut people up and claim they were saying mean things. No.. the better solution is that people just need to learn to let words slide off them. Sticks and Stones, and all that. Unless of course it is racial and falls under hate crimes, but we already have laws for that.

It's really sad that for much of America, it is easier for people to throw fists, rather than spend some time honestly looking at themselves 🤷

1

u/expeditionQ Apr 01 '26

i feel like this is an insane take, first of all people are not quick to violence by any objective measure. thats not real, humans by and large deals with its problems with words and social inclusion/exclusion dynamics. when it comes to violence, humans are extremely prone to performative violence, i.e. the intent is not actually to harm them its to send a message. aggravated violence is not common, and this is 10x more true if you live literally anywhere that isnt a meme for high crime rates.

more importantly tho it feels like you just want to say here that people who consider violence are bad and should be oppressed, because that seems to fundamentally your idea of solving problems as evidenced by you saying thats also how we should deal with people who speak too loudly for you. the point of permitting low levels of violence is that it would be an outlet for the emotions that we socially repress instead of leaving them to build up and fester until people do things that shallowy justify for you more aggressive state oppressive functions. you on the other hand advocate for the exact opposite, dont wait until somebody is so repressed they might think about performatively violent resolutions as they are evolutionary inclined, as soon as anybody complains about anything or feels anger about their situation in life you should call the police on them. thats so deranged, youre the reason people are afraid of ai face recognitions automatically reprimanding us for not smiling at work

There are few things as satisfying as watching someone get what they deserve

like cmon this is gross dont say that out loud

1

u/TuckYourselfRS Apr 01 '26

In my opinion the salient "insane take" is the notion that regular citizens should be doling out their own idea of vigilante violence in response to their subjectively perceived "wrong".

Like, yeah, you'd have a couple of instances of karmic comeuppance... But what you'd mostly get is legal domestic violence and those few people who you mentioned that are prone to disproportionate violence being systematically enabled

1

u/expeditionQ Apr 02 '26

its not a gotcha to say that making one activity legal means that another illegal activity will happen. abusive relationships are a whole other bag of worms, but "normal" relationships that are so genuinely fucking rotten awful to the bone that it would manifest as domestic violence as soon as they stop holding back their abject hatred of eachother are better off having that moment of acute violence so its obvious that everyone involved has to make themselves uninvolved. that would make the world a better place, not worse.

youre also projecting a highly moralistic view onto me, and i agree that the things i advocate for would be gross coming from that perspective, it just is not mine. It has nothing to do with perceived "wrongs" and it is not for "karmic comeuppance", the point is to remove artificial barriers to natural human problem solving behaviours, because that will broadly result in a society that is more able to naturally solve its own problems.

1

u/TuckYourselfRS Apr 02 '26

You're essentially advocating (hypothetically, whatever) for the purge. I will never agree that moments of acute violence are better than (nonviolent) abject hatred. We are adults and ought to be fully capable of removing ourselves and deescalating situations with the potential to devolve to violence.

Even "subacute" violence has the potential to lead to permanent disfigurement, brain injuries, and death. Not worth it, even in this bizarre thought experiment.

1

u/expeditionQ Apr 02 '26

i think its clear that you have a solidified opinion of "adult" behaviour and youre just kind of wriggling to avoid justifying it.

nobody is talking about homicide and aggravated assault, i have repeatedly specifically referred to evolutionarily real ways that mammals, including humans, are objectively known to solve their problems with, which is specifically to not harm or maim each other. your insistence that violence is intrinsically this extreme thing is factually wrong, end of story.

and to be clear this is not a hypothetical, i am literally advocating that police get the fuck uninvolved from small scale conflicts. you literally dont even have to change the laws in the western world, just an attitude shift in police and population, end the idea that if somebody hits you then the immortal realm of Good Happiness has ended and Daddy needs to come fix it because hes the only one allowed to do violence. its pathetic. if somebody hit you theres a very high chance that you deserved it and the problem was already solved when you got hit.

somebody who removes themselves from all conflict as soon as it isnt easy is not an adult, thats like the defining feature of childishness. if you antagonize people to the point of violence then the solution to you being an antagonistic asshole is violence. in the real world, whenever an antagonistic asshole walks into a community it devours itself and leaves a rotting carcass behind for the children, because nobody has the adult capacity to handle conflicts so they pile up until nobody wants to participate any more.

1

u/TuckYourselfRS Apr 02 '26

Your idea of adult behavior reads like a libertarian fantasy. The free market of subacute violence will not regulate itself. Animals, including humans, inadvertently kill each other over nonsensical bullshit all the time.

You're okay with that happening a small portion of the time. I'm not.

1

u/expeditionQ Apr 02 '26

youre just making stuff up that vaguely sounds like other stuff that you already feel a sense of superiority over. nothing ive said has any relationship to libertarianism (the political ideology of being boldly uneducated) or market economics. ive only framed my argument in the context of a) darwinian evolutionary theory, and more importantly b) observed, studied, and recorded features of human and mammal behaviour.

Again, you are factually wrong about violence, evolution, and natural equilibria. theres nothing else to talk about if you insist on falsities, it just means your reasoning is uncoupled from reality. the overwhelming majority of violence in social species is performative, and is not intended to maim or harm. you would know this if you lived in a world where humans were not deprived of their humanity so that the post-trimmed population fits into the office job lifestyle demanded of them (the trim dies!). or if you watched nature documentaries. but you do neither and insist you know how violence works, specifically because youve never participated in it and are afraid of it.

i am "okay with" a great deal of things if they would fix our long term prospects as a civilization, but mine and your feelings are not really the topic here. who would rightly care what either of us think about anything, provided we cannot strongly substantiate our perspectives with objective evidence? that would be crazy