Please don't do this here.

I'm not sure you can _legitimise_ violence just because you think you are in the right. Justify? Maybe--it depends on the the circumstances. Take people who are violent in the name of religion - those people have a _fundamental_ belief they are in the right, and might well couch it in terms of having "the right, no, duty to commit violence against the evil <whatever>", but I don't see many legitimising their actions.

I get the appeal of achieving noble goals through whatever means necessary, but the question of "What is a noble goal?", and the impact those means have the rights of others, is an _incredibly_ tough question to answer. I worry that legitimising violence just because you believe what you are doing is right short-circuits the necessary questions: is this _necessary_? (are they other means that could achieve the same end/be tried first?), is it _justified_? (is it a net gain for _everyone_/society, or is it just a personal opinion?), is it _proportionate_? (is the short-term impact of the violence justified by the long-term goals, or is it significant violence for little gain?). Maybe at the point, it could be seen as legitimate, but I find the idea of legitimising violence merely "in the name of something" worrisome.

>Sjw culture has the right, no, duty to commit violence against the evil reactionaries.

Did you stop to think that your "culture" might be someone else's evil reactionaries?

"I'm right, they are wrong, and the ends justify the means".

For as horrible as I hear the right is, it seems to be only the left advocating explicitly for violence, while I'm told that the right simply arguing for something such as stronger borders is actually committing violence.