A refutation of the argument that property damage is not violence.
This is from Stephanie Zvan, incidentally, who’s hardly a right-wing capitalism apologist. In fact, her argument is basically built around the fact that leftist anti-capitalists themselves are usually the first ones in line to point out that destroying the possessions of the people who have the least (such as the homes of the poor, or the blankets of the homeless) is absolutely a form of violence. And often a form of serious inter-generational violence, at that.
Which isn’t to say that smashing Starbucks’ windows is the Major Threat to Democracy it often gets made out to be when leftist protesters get riled up. Only that dismissing it as violence at all is disingenuous.