I only brought up Jim Crow in response to the claim that the the state will protect people and that there are ways to appeal the state of it doesn't. The point being that having legal protections on paper is not always enough to keep people safe.
The "fascist enablers" don't have consciences you can appeal to, because what drives them is money, and they are specifically selected for their willingness to serve capital and cause harm to innocent people. The system selects for sociopaths.
You analysis takes absolutely zero account of the systems or material conditions that exist which compel people to act in certain ways. Germany had an unemployment rate of 30% in 1932, but in your mind, it seems like the communists were only fighting because they wanted to and the capitalists were just reacting to that.
Had everyone on the left coordinated on mass nonviolent actions, like mass strikes for example, the capitalists would still have turned to the fascists in order to preserve their money and power. Violence or nonviolence doesn't matter, what matters is whether their positions are threatened. You either never do anything to gain power in hopes of being able to beg your enemies for mercy, or you do whatever it takes to win so you don't have to rely on that. The in between stuff where you pull your punches and try to disrupt things without defending yourself is the surest way to get yourself killed.
"Your honor, it's true that the deceased died of blood loss after I stabbed them, however, the idea that they would've survived had I not stabbed them is a counterfactual and therefore cannot be proven at all."
Does North Korea have the noble class I described? Do you have any evidence that such a class exists?
It's the candidate's responsibility to win over the voters.
It did start back up though. And we don't know if further research could bring the costs down. I'm not proposing it as a magic bullet, just as one potential way to get nighttime coverage.
I don’t keep links for things I don’t need.
This website has a search function. Searching "Khmer Rouge Justified" returns precisely 5 comments, none of which were claiming it was justified or responding to someone claiming it was justified. "Khmer Rouge Wall" likewise turned up nothing of note. Liar.
Almost everybody has seen MLs call it justified, it takes only one case.
Great! Anyone is welcome to chime in and provide evidence. Where is it? Liar.
accusing others of lying in the same comment you are asking for proof in,
That... that's not at all contradictory lmao. Liar.
I think everybody reading this has a measure of you.
Given your comments about how drowning puppies is justified, which everyone's definitely seen but which I have precisely zero evidence of, I think you're the one everyone has a measure of.
How could you say that?
Puppies? Really? Wow.
Ofc, I won't provide evidence, because as you're a puppy murderer, I don't respect you and won't play by your terms. Liar.
Was zero science conducted before the ~1600s then?
I mean, yes. The framework of studying things that we understand as science did not always exist.
There's nothing remotely ridiculous about saying that an apartheid ethnostate does not have a right to exist.
Ranked Choice only matters when you’ve got a third position that successfully triangulates between the other two positions.
Hold it! 
Uhh...
What on earth are you talking about? 
they will take it as an insult if you call them socialist.
Do you have any evidence to support this testimony?
When we do it, it's only a "pseudo-occupation"
When Nazi Germany occupied France, was it only a "pseudo-occupation" because the Panzers then "protected" the occupied territory from the British? What a ridiculous line of logic.