> I see. “...to produce social progress” made me think you were asking about violence that produces progress, not merely violence that happens at the same time.
I was originally thinking of "to what degree does social progress vindicate use of violence". Of course it's better to give women the right to drive and vote and not dismember people. A lot of violence doesn't result in social progress, and lots of social progress is achieved without violence. But if someone makes social progress on one hand and uses force immorally on the other, to what degree does the latter need to outweigh the former to be considered a good person.
Basically, 20 or 30 years from know, do you think Bin Salman will be considered a villain or a hero? Plenty of people that had done unsavory things in the past have become seen as heroes. One easy example is the late Thai King Bhumibol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej). I don't know if he ever had anyone killed, but he did give tacit (or more than tacit) nods to the military to conduct their coups.
Ultimately, I have no dog in this fight. I have no relatives or friends in Saudi Arabia and I have no intention of going there myself. But I am interested in looking back on this thread years from know and seeing what the prevailing opinion is then.
