Rougarou

“I will not be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.” was the battle cry of that era. Fascinating, indeed.

“She was a bigger lady; black.” “oh yes Her! Be right back!”

I don't think there is a lot of data there. I don't think we have seen a lot of situations involving what I would call bystanders. People engaged and involved where those folks are engaging in their destruction are onboard and agreeable to being there and with what is going on, right? I do think that bystanders property have been the victim of destruction, from what I've seen. Burned up cars or graffiti'ed vehicles that were parked in the streets, etc.

Do you realize you quoted me but it was Nivek that said that?

I think it helps to classify the data into two sets. Let's call Set 1: anti-racist protesters and lets call Set 2: destructive rioters. Next let's try and cluster these two data sets around time/place/event so we know which data set to avoid because of rational deduction of violence (i.e. destructive rioters) and which we can engage around without irrational fear (i.e. anti-racist protesters). Oh? We can't make a clear distinction? I guess then, in an abundance of caution (because we are dealing with human lives and property) we should treat all these as unknowns with similar nominal characteristics and default to potentially dangerous. Call it the Law of the Poisoned Well, if you will. So there, you see how one could rationally deduce where you couldn't see a natural pattern or logistical flow-- because you were working under the faulty premise that there is only persona participating in these affairs, after-hours, and with semi-automatic rifle openly carried. Now, add in a flavor of competing ideologies (e.g. John from Finance is a MAGA guy who drives a car with a Trump2020 or Thin Blue Line sticker on his car, but otherwise wants no trouble and happens to find himself in the middle of a protest, legally sanctioned or otherwise) and you have more cause for the rational deduction you are denying exists.

Sounds reasonable. I think if take a road map approach to this and scale this up while working to scale down the militarized police force and funding in, again, a road map approach which necessitates a plan over time, you might have a workable solution. The problem is instead of defunding police, you are actually going to need to fund both things at the same time for a period of time as one winds down slowly and over time in a sunsetting motion and the other ramps up responsibly and to optimize for it's success as a long-term solution. This is the only way that I can see it working that won't make diversity, inclusion and equality in cities that choose this path, worse. And not just in the short term but in the mid and long term because the new processes will never get the oxygen to take flame and show the success and ROI to maintain the political/stakeholder momentum. In my opinion, of course.

Fair enough; I redact the words "coward" and "wuss" and let the record reflect that accordingly. I also will concede you have a strong point that if you cannot name an instance, you are doing so out of an irrational fear. But, I think there could be some nuance there. I think one could be prescient or forecasting or hypothesizing or hazarding a guess at what, previously undocumented or untried, a new flavor or brand of threat could be, based on a new set of variables and stimuli coexisting in a specific beaker that's never been mixed before, and I don't necessarily think that is irrational. Or, if it is technically irrational, it's only irrational until the first time it happens and you are ready for it. After that you are a genius or visionary and everyone gets 20/20 Monday Morning Quarterback hindsight and crows about "why did we not see this was the inevitability when you mix A with B and C in Z?!?"

Agree. But what exactly is the point of view you've tried to take her the last couple of pages? Tell me if I've summed it up right, "Because nobody can link a youtube video of someone being beaten up by protesters and rioters while they sat in their car, that means it's actually never happened and sitting in a car amongst protesters and rioters, whether they are damaging property or not, whether they are totting semi-automatic weapons at the ready position or not, does not mean you are in a reasonable state of threat or danger and you should feel like a coward or a wuss for not only panicking, but also if you have a heightened sense of stress or fear or confusion."

Also, this seems like bad form to announce this policy 18 days before school starts, deposits have been made, etc. This seems like a big input to have known to gauge whether you wanted to potentially defer enrollment and do a gap year, as I'm reading is what a higher percentage of incoming freshman are doing, or jump in for this no fun, zoom-only, online learning for 75% of the premium of a flagship school. Heck, you could at least just knock out 30 hours at a community college to transfer in for 2021 when there is a vaccine, for a fraction of the cost and at an easier path to a good grade if you knew you weren't going to be able to grow socially.

Spring semester, freshman year, I got put on probation. Not scholastic or academic probation, but behavioral probation. Because I got hammered and was walking back from West Campus to Jester at 4 am and a police/security guard detained me, took my information and two weeks later I had to go to a meeting and take this punishment. Didn't even know you could do that or that was possible, but essentially I just had to stay out of trouble and do an alcohol class (with like 8 other students) and the hold would be lifted. I can foresee UT trying to enforce their no parties rule like that, maybe?

It's a hot space, no doubt, but not everyone can be winner.

Bridesmaids was hilarious.

Tomorrow is August. That means we are like 3.5 months away from the election. That seems unreal to me. 2016 election seemed like it was a campaign-fest for 18 straight months, with debates and everything. Now, here we are and covid-19 and economy and riots and peaceful protests are top of mind and the election is essentially sneaking up on us!

Dell just did another 6% layoff I heard. Anyways, for all REAL salesguys, EOQ is today. Take your calendar year fiscal and go eat at the kiddie table, noobs.

Fair enough. I've asked Huckleberry to tell me what he think it means and he seems like a reasonable, informed guy. Maybe I'll learn something about what it means and learn that I've misunderstood.

I don't think it means killing the suburbs. I think it's going to explode suburbs even more (max-out existing ones and keep the sprawl going with newer ones).

I think Defund the Police means rationalizing the Police budget of a municipality. Best case, it means using data-driven inputs to make decisions and scaling the budget back to whatever minimum dollar amount intersects with the maximum amount of crime (violent? non-violent? aggregated?) that is deemed an acceptable benchmark. Worst case, it means just sticking a finger in your mouth and putting it in the air before peanut-buttering a round number across the board (e.g. cut 25% of budget evenly across all functions of the police budget). What do you think it means?

Conan's Pizza in Austin, how is it still open?

Defund the Police is the dumbest idea in the big box of dumb ideas or ideas that are counter-intuitive to integration and inclusion/diversity. Literally no other issue has the biggest impact on driving white flight, as this will also directly impacting schools.

Yeah Herman Cain was the CEO of Pizza place.

Agree he’s 18 and fair game now, but a lot of folks were using past tense language and retro-bullying the kid for what happened when he was 16. Also it’s interesting you belittle or otherwise segment “speak his truth” in air quotes as if he doesn’t have a perspective or experience because he doesn’t fit your model of what a victim looks like, largely based on his response to the whole thing. I guess we only make excuses for why people do or don’t do things after their events and compartmentalize the event and the person’s history and actions afterward, if it’s someone we have an affinity for or whose truth helps our narrative? But sure he’s fair game, I don’t think anyone really cares anymore as it’s roundly understood that certain factions within media, social media warriors and all the would be shamers are holding the L on this one.

Hey, that’s Hollywood, baby.

I think your premise is wrong (and thus your response to my post, is wrong) in that Athletes/Entertainers don't count as rich and powerful until they've reached a certain level (e.g. Jay-Z, LeBron, Sean Combs, etc. aka legitimate business/brand owners) or stayed rich and powerful beyond their "entertainment" shelf-life. It sucks but that's the way it's viewed, in the same way that you wouldn't call a poor rural person "rich and powerful" because they won the WV lottery, knowing because of their background and class caste, the overwhelming odds are that they are going to be broke again. The athletes you quoted above are saying and experiencing from the white, racist world the same things the poorest ones are saying and experiencing (and not the truly class-privileged black people) for the same reason-- they are overwhelmingly statistically speaking the poorest ones in that they've lived most of their life that way and statistically speaking will end back up that way once their entertainment value is beyond salvage value.

Thanks again for your responses. Your question is kinda weird, but you've been super fair and charitable in answering my questions to help me better understand your thought process and position so I'll attempt to do the same, even though it's awkward to try and say what I'd do if I were black (because I don't want to speak for blacks or blackfish/blackface via typing). In your hypothetical I think it depends on my class (bad_teammate is right-- the root cause of all this is class), more than race. If I am black and: -If I am truly class-privileged, I don't care to raise arms and I strive to make changes in incremental ways that de-risk my (meaning my familiy's) stability and comforts. -If I'm middle-class and upwardly mobile (or can't handle the hypocrisy of America and need to follow my higher ideals above all)-- I probably move to Toronto or otherwise diaspora to a less broken place. -If I'm middle-class and upwardly mobile and and see my life as a stoic and sacrifice to give my children the freedom I don't have-- I move to Atlanta and try to continue the "city on a hill" for black people that for decades has been made a real community with the most advanced form of diversity, inclusion and equality for black people that exists in America. -If I am young/poor/hopeless (or idealistic and naive)-- I'm joining the revolution in the streets and I'm rallying under the battle cry of street warriors and poets before me, under the banner of "It's like my nigga Napoleon said, someone gotta explain why I ain't got shit." I mean, they killed Malcolm X, too. "But you know what they say when you're great. It ain't 'kill' it's 'assassinate" - Poet Laureate, Dwayne M. C. Jr.