True, I don’t know you. But I do know one or two things about you.

For example, I know you’re the type of person who, when reading a line criticising someone who publicly called for the murder of speakers they disagree with, would not only take exception, but would take the time to write a snarky comment about it. And just for extra brain-dead points, would invoke Hitler (the flagrant disregard for Godwin's law!!) and Mussolini as cover.

I know you’re the kind of person who thinks advocating against the murder of people who you disagree with is smugness and/or some kind of moral grandstanding instead of very basic human decency. I’ll remind you that I’m in much more danger from racists than you are, so I’m not sure how you imagine you take racist ideas and their consequences more seriously than I do.

I know you’re the kind of person who will invent straw men to argue against (I didn’t say or even suggest that violence was never an option). Nor did Shaviro merely suggest "something other than a conversation." He was quite specific. Also, if you think Spencer being punched in the face had anything to do with the downturn in his influence, or if you think that's a model for dealing with disagreement more generally, I’m really not sure what to tell you.

Lastly, assuming I’m right to suspect that you’re not a murderer, I know you’re the kind of person who will do all of this in support of rhetoric you don’t even believe in. Either that or you really are enough of a fascist (yes, that word has an actual meaning, it’s not just “meanies”) to condone the murder of a speaker at a university because you oppose their ideas. And you’d convince yourself that you’re not a terrible person by claiming they were on the cusp of starting the next Holocaust.

Violence can only escalate. So if you respond to words with violence, you vastly increase the odds that the other side responds to your violence with more violence. On and on. But in many cases, far more than not, conversations actually work. And when they don't, there are thankfully many more steps to take before murdering people. Or even punching them in the face.

Again, that’s not to say that violence is never an option. It’s to say that blithely spreading the rhetoric that every person with a bad idea is an irredeemable monster, akin to Hitler, who can't be persuaded or reasoned with, only stopped, is not virtuous or courageous or even true. It’s exactly the same cope that fascists and authoritarians have always used to persuade themselves they’re the good guys.