Surly Megathread of destruction and doom. [BEWARE VERY DOOMY]

[bad_teammate 13195]

Define: "an explosive"

What would be super helpful is to see what damage was caused by the "explosive" to get a rational idea of whether we're talking about IED or firework.

[BNB 100]

1 minute ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Right, clearly the solution is goon squads in unmarked cars grabbing them off the streets!   With 20 or 30 normal cops standing guard in spandex with  bicycles.   

Undercover police make arrests all the time.  I suppose they could have tried to track her all day and try to get her alone or hope to track her to her home.  Seems like a lot more wasted police resources.

Someone used the term "normal" above, we are not in normal times.

People swarmed that van.  If you arrested her normally, it might take 10-15 minutes, what is the situation going to be like then?

 

[bad_teammate 13195]

Would be a SHITLOAD more productive to not just rely on angry sarcasm as our communicative method, boys.

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 minute ago, BNB said:

I suppose they could have tried to track her all day and try to get her alone or hope to track her to her home.  Seems like a lot more wasted police resources.

"Wasted" only if maintaining public order and tranquility isn't actually a goal.

Track the person, follow them, arrest them in a normal way. If it takes time and you have to wait, great, that builds character.

[Buzzrock 14920]

Define: "an explosive"
What would be super helpful is to see what damage was caused by the "explosive" to get a rational idea of whether we're talking about IED or firework.

Read the thread. There’s video of him throwing whatever it was. He also white knighted for Athena. Then theres this:

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

2 minutes ago, BNB said:

Undercover police make arrests all the time.  I suppose they could have tried to track her all day and try to get her alone or hope to track her to her home.  Seems like a lot more wasted police resources.

Someone used the term "normal" above, we are not in normal times.

People swarmed that van.  If you arrested her normally, it might take 10-15 minutes, what is the situation going to be like then?

 

So for a non-violent criminal, can’t you just arrest them outside or in their home, or something?  Why the public display of intimidation?

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 minute ago, Buzzrock said:

Read the thread. 

 

 

 

I did, and nowhere in it is video, photo, or even written description of damage done by this "explosive".

[BradInATX 9208]

4 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

When I visited the Civil Rights Museum in Memphis a few years ago, I missed the section of the museum that described violent, Marxist-inspired radicals spray painting and burning buildings and throwing incendiary devices at the cops. Instead I saw a lot of Christian inspired non-violent civil disobedience. 

That's because morons like you don't write history books.

[Buzzrock 14920]

I did, and nowhere in it is video, photo, or even written description of damage done by this "explosive".

Well, there was an earth-shattering kaboom.

[Message Board User 12395]

Our discourse today (just like this thread) is almost entirely devoid of critical thinking and substance.

It's just 2 sides yelling past each other using hyperbole/hysterics and strawmen and ad hominem attacks and seeking out their own echo chambers.

[Hate 20108]

1 hour ago, elguapo said:

There’s a lot of videos of this incident, here’s another one

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Hate said:

Is there legitimate source that can verify that is real?  It looks horribly acted. 

Well, apparently it is true and the woman was wanted for vandalism?  Seems aggressive for vandalism considering everything else that is happening.  At any rate, mea culpa for doubting its authenticity. 

[BNB 100]

16 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

So for a non-violent criminal, can’t you just arrest them outside or in their home, or something?  Why the public display of intimidation?

I would agree.

Playing devils advocate, They stated 5 separate times, so maybe they were having a hard time following her.

[workswithseed 2103]

11 hours ago, Js1 said:

You have an interesting definition of “not too long ago.” Are you the same age as ArmyBrat? 

Ha, Biff said I looked 12, so damn wish I look like like a 12yo at 100,000,000,000, or however old ArmyBrat is.

[dcar00 14182]

2 hours ago, BNB said:

Yeah, lol, I watched the vid, b/c the article was lacking.

that one guy has a helluva disguise.  need some Dave Chappelle.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

11 minutes ago, BNB said:

I would agree.

Playing devils advocate, They stated 5 separate times, so maybe they were having a hard time following her.

Yeah, just the reaction to vandalism of the establishment reminds me of this.

[BNB 100]

10 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Yeah, just the reaction to vandalism of the establishment reminds me of this.

I'm sorry if you choose to see your reference equated to the current situations.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

Fair enough.  Sorry you don’t.  See you at the voting booth.

[bad_teammate 13195]

32 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

Well, there was an earth-shattering kaboom.

 

That doesn't make it physically dangerous to the cops.

So the Tweeter saying "ANTIFA is trying to kill feds" doesn't seem technically accurate unless the assertion is that feds can be killed by loud noises.

There might be evidence that this was a dangerous explosive; I'd like to see that evidence. It shouldn't be hard to find since we know exactly where the thing blew up.

[Celery Man 20946]

3 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

It's cute and wholly naive to think that even 20% of these current nightly events is actually about black lives. That horse left the barn about 2 weeks ago, in places like Portland. At this point if people are truly sincere then they need to be the change they expect. Join the police force, join the DA's office, get rid of the politicians/laws that protect shitty cops. You know, do the stuff that actually matters.

And how exactly is the below going to save lives or make someone sympathetic to the cause? What's the purpose? Any jackass can stand in traffic, begging to get ran over.

 

Don't even get me started on the 'selective outrage'. And yes, you CAN question why BLM is only popular with certain events and still not want to see black people murdered. Those who try to squash that conversation, need to remember that 'silence is consent'. 

It's possible that, while the protests were initially about BLM, the tactic of using federal troops of unknown origin often out of uniform and against the explicit direction of state and local government to execute extralegal arrests or kidnappings by grabbing people off the street and throwing them into Kia minivans has failed to de-escalate the protests and has not only had the opposite effect but has altered the purpose of the protests as well.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19101]

Our discourse today (just like this thread) is almost entirely devoid of critical thinking and substance.

It's just 2 sides yelling past each other using hyperbole/hysterics and strawmen and ad hominem attacks and seeking out their own echo chambers.

Yup, and this website represents probably some of the most educated folks in America. And we act like this. Sigh.

 

[Anastasis 23469]

2 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

Damaging police cameras?

Well, it’s a relief to know this dangerous criminal is off the street and all other crime has been stopped.

 

I am actually glad to know that the NYPD is taking tampering with police cameras so seriously.  I assume that the next cop that tampers with a body cam or has a body cam "malfunction" is going to get rolled up on and kidnapped in broad daylight by internal affairs? Right?

[ChickenSandwich 9834]

3 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

It's possible that, while the protests were initially about BLM, the tactic of using federal troops of unknown origin often out of uniform and against the explicit direction of state and local government to execute extralegal arrests or kidnappings by grabbing people off the street and throwing them into Kia minivans has failed to de-escalate the protests and has not only had the opposite effect but has altered the purpose of the protests as well.

Is it possible these protest were happening for the last 4 weeks before the Feds showed up?  Is it possible these officers are wearing other identifying marks because of harassment to families?  Is it possible they are arresting people away from large crowds to avoid confrontation?  Is it possible they get the identity wrong and simply releasing the person?  Is it possible we clearly don’t have all of the information and 30 second twitter videos don’t tell the whole story?

[Stinkpalm 687]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Joining the police force and joining the DA's office is not a way to accomplish things, are you joking?

 

How is it not? Do you believe you could do their job without singling out and harassing/arresting people just because of the color of their skin? Or that you could de-escalate a heated situation without having to shoot them? Is that not the exact type of officer that the current movement is asking for? Or do you feel that as soon as a badge is pinned on your shirt, you magically become a racist with an itchy trigger finger?

 

Everybody is asking for less/no bad cops and more good cops, but nobody wants to step up and be one of the good ones. Like BrothaHorn said, be the change. 

[3shot 139]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Joining the police force and joining the DA's office is not a way to accomplish things, are you joking?

No, he's not joking.  But you need to reread his post. 

[Enchubben 5510]

 

8 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

 

2) The amount of injuries/violence is so rare relative to the number of people involved that it doesn't characterize the entire protest.

There's a critical mass of overall violence that can be met, and we're not even close to it. To honestly and dispassionately characterize a 2+-month-long protest involving tens of thousands of people "violent" we would be talking about a stack of dead cops and ERs full of seriously injured cops. The amount of physical harm even dozens of ACTUALLY VIOLENT people could do is tremendous. The fact that the cops and mercenaries release photos of small abrasions on social media as evidence of widespread violence reveals just how non-violent this whole thing is in Portland.

Put your feelings down and think calmly and rationally.

Shall I use the example of:

OJ Simpson was mostly peaceful the night he stabbed his wife to death

or

I can’t wait to see you analyze police brutality or bad shootings.

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 hour ago, Stinkpalm said:

How is it not?

Because it doesn't work. (article discussing study showing that increased minority police does not correlate to less police violence against blacks)

And might even make it worse. (study showing an increase in police violence as more minorities are hired into the police)

Black officers might be MORE likely to arrest non-whites.

There's a lot more where this stuff came from, but the idea that if we just HIRE *clap* MORE *clap* BLACK *clap* COPS *clap* we will change the nature of policing is ignorant of basically everything involved.

And on the other hand, without a gun they can't get none
But don't let it be a black and a white one
'Cause they'll slam ya down to the street top
Black police showin' out for the white cop

Quote

Do you believe you could do their job without singling out and harassing/arresting people just because of the color of their skin? Or that you could de-escalate a heated situation without having to shoot them? Is that not the exact type of officer that the current movement is asking for? Or do you feel that as soon as a badge is pinned on your shirt, you magically become a racist with an itchy trigger finger?

You phrased this bold section in an emotionally hysterical fashion, but inside of this is the answer.

There's nothing magical about it, it's simply group dynamics.

You're not talking to someone who thinks police are brutal because they are white racists. Police are brutal everywhere that the class and power dynamics driving them demand that they be brutal. Cops in ethnically/racially homogeneous countries will smash skulls on the regular without any need for being racist against the skin over the skulls they are smashing. Ukrainian police have been going buck wild for a while now. American police are racist against blacks, to be sure, but it's just an intensifier in specific situations.

Quote

Everybody is asking for less/no bad cops and more good cops, but nobody wants to step up and be one of the good ones. Like BrothaHorn said, be the change. 

You don't seriously believe this. If you were to take a step back and think you wouldn't say something this dumb.

I am not a fan of cops/police, but even I can see the basic reality that many cops join because they want to do good and want to make things better. To believe otherwise is kind of insane, honestly, if you really interrogate it, because you would have to believe that ALL COPS joined specifically with bad intentions. Again... that's insane.

The truth is that it's structurally impossible to actually be a "good cop" the moment a "bad cop" acts up nearby.

The demands our unequal society places on police forces them into brutality and the century-old culture of urban American policing is entrenched. Thinking an influx of black rookies would change that culture is like thinking 20 guys with oars are going to change the course of an oil tanker.

32 minutes ago, Axiom of Choice said:

He is asking you normative questions (what do you condone, what actions do you believe are justified, etc) and you are answering with descriptive claims (telling him the way things are).  Strange for a logic expert like yourself to make such a basic mistake.  Or maybe you are deliberately avoiding the actual questions.   

Avoiding engaging in a personalized, emotional debate is the right move for Brisket if the goal is productive discussion.

[edit]

Apologies if this discussion is more worthy of a different thread.

Edited July 29, 2020 by bad_teammate

[Rougarou 594]

7 hours ago, Rougarou said:

I've asked you this now three times, without you giving me an answer.

What do you condone as the next step in the escalation path when incel weirdo and dufasses with hockey sticks and larping shields leads to zero change, yet again? When all the rioting and looting and protesting does nothing, yet again?

Your position is that "nobody was listening or doing anything when we asked politely or did things non-violently, well now we are going to be violent and that'll learn 'em! Then we will get what we want!" When that will obviously not happen, then what?

Are you going to be on these boards justifying it if people start trying to hurt other people who don't agree with them? Is that the next step?

To distill the question I'd like you to answer:

Because the odds are that all this protesting and looting and rioting is going to be much ado about nothing with respect to the power structure and society. If you are logically condoning protesters sowing their oats because they are frustrated from being ignored, then what about the next steps when these protests/riots are ignored as they most assuredly will be?

 

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Rougarou said:

You give only two options (which sounds an awful lot like political extortion or great negotiation tactics, depending on which side of the political fence you live on). I don't agree.

My take is that the logical answer is what has always happened-- incremental, micro, and ever-so-tiny real change is made accompanied with a lot of lipservice-- and things more or less stay the same and time continues it's march onward.

So what then? Where does that leave the rioters, looters and the peaceful protesters? What card is left to play, and will you be condoning it?

 

7 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, we only have two shitty choices.  Even worse brutal repression against the have-nots, or complete social collapse.  Either the masses rising up and breaking shit a whole lot worse than they've done, or the masters cracking down and brutalizing the masses.  Those are your choices.  Pretty shitty menu.  I'd prefer to order the fish.

I mean, we COULD choose real introspection, and actually acknowledge a reality outside our own sheltered experience that sucks, and that we all ought to collectively work to improve....but we won't.  We're really, really, really bad at learning from our mistakes and fixing them.

 

 

Here are the questions again Brisket if you want to respond, as Axiom mentions, you didn't.

[Stinkpalm 687]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Because it doesn't work. (article discussing study showing that increased minority police does not correlate to less police violence against blacks)

And might even make it worse. (study showing an increase in police violence as more minorities are hired into the police)

Black officers might be MORE likely to arrest non-whites.

There's a lot more where this stuff came from, but the idea that if we just HIRE *clap* MORE *clap* BLACK *clap* COPS *clap* we will change the nature of policing is ignorant of basically everything involved.

And on the other hand, without a gun they can't get none
But don't let it be a black and a white one
'Cause they'll slam ya down to the street top
Black police showin' out for the white cop

You phrased this bold section in an emotionally hysterical fashion, but inside of this is the answer.

There's nothing magical about it, it's simply group dynamics.

You're not talking to someone who thinks police are brutal because they are white racists. Police are brutal everywhere that the class and power dynamics driving them demand that they be brutal. Cops in ethnically/racially homogeneous countries will smash skulls on the regular without any need for being racist against the skin over the skulls they are smashing. Ukrainian police have been going buck wild for a while now. American police are racist against blacks, to be sure, but it's just an intensifier in specific situations.

You don't seriously believe this. If you were to take a step back and think you wouldn't say something this dumb.

I am not a fan of cops/police, but even I can see the basic reality that many cops join because they want to do good and want to make things better. To believe otherwise is kind of insane, honestly, if you really interrogate it, because you would have to believe that ALL COPS joined specifically with bad intentions. Again... that's insane.

The truth is that it's structurally impossible to actually be a "good cop" the moment a "bad cop" acts up nearby.

The demands our unequal society places on police forces them into brutality and the century-old culture of urban American policing is entrenched. Thinking an influx of black rookies would change that culture is like thinking 20 guys with oars are going to change the course of an oil tanker.

Avoiding engaging in a personalized, emotional debate is the right move for Brisket if the goal is productive discussion.

[edit]

Apologies if this discussion is more worthy of a different thread.

So, because the badge got pinned on you, you would magically fall into the group dynamics then? And just look the other way when bad cops smashed skulls? How is flooding the ranks with good cops who will speak up and not look the other way, not a way to change the group dynamics? 
 

and I made no  mention that it has to be “black rookies/cops”.  I’m assuming from your first couple of links that you’re a black man, but I didn’t know that prior (if it is the case). My original post has nothing to do with trying to encourage black people, or any person or color, to become cops. It was encouraging anyone, regardless of race, who believes they could be “one of the good ones” to be “one of the good ones”. Does a handful of good people becoming cops change the cop culture? Absolutely not. Does flooding the agencies with genuinely good people change it? Absolutely. It’s naive to believe that nothing can be done because it’s a system with specific group dynamics so that’s all it’ll ever be. But few will sign up because “it’s a broken system and I’ll get fired for speaking up”, thereby leaving the old guard running things and making up the majority. What changes that? A big influx of genuinely good, well-intentioned people that won’t look the other way, making the old guard the minority in the profession.  But you don’t want to be a part of that change. It’s cool. Just keep bitching about it  while doing nothing to help it.

 

 Ukraine police? Really? Do they have the exact same issues that we do in the US? No? Then it’s really not relevant. Oh and,  “American Police are racist against blacks, to be sure”... every single one of them? Nice blanket statement. Wow

[Stinkpalm 687]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

 

The truth is that it's structurally impossible to actually be a "good cop" the moment a "bad cop" acts up nearby.

 

IS that the truth? How would you know? How many acts by bad cops DO get reported by the good cops that we never hear about? I’d be willing to bet it’s better than “none”. But those don’t make the news. I’m not saying that those bad cops ALWAYS get disciplined or fired when they get reported, but it happens. So maybe it’s just your belief then, that it’s “structurally impossible”

[staboner 4969]

5 hours ago, Message Board User said:

Our discourse today (just like this thread) is almost entirely devoid of critical thinking and substance.

It's just 2 sides yelling past each other using hyperbole/hysterics and strawmen and ad hominem attacks and seeking out their own echo chambers.

Its remarkable and its easily the biggest issue the world faces.

I dove into page 4 to see what was up. A poster got pissed off about being accused of white washing and making assumptions - then the very next sentence was "every this is that".  I mean one fucking sentence later and voila. 

Using instances to define everyone and everything. Its destroying us.

We have to choose what to care about - and what to comment on. There are assholes everywhere. On all sides. We have to stop giving them airtime to define our worldview. Otherwise we are headed for complete chaos. Assuming we aren't already there. 

[Buzzrock 14920]

That doesn't make it physically dangerous to the cops.

So the Tweeter saying "ANTIFA is trying to kill feds" doesn't seem technically accurate unless the assertion is that feds can be killed by loud noises.

There might be evidence that this was a dangerous explosive; I'd like to see that evidence. It shouldn't be hard to find since we know exactly where the thing blew up.

It was probably one of those peaceful, nonviolent explosives.

[Anastasis 23469]

1 hour ago, staboner said:

Its remarkable and its easily the biggest issue the world faces.

I dove into page 4 to see what was up. A poster got pissed off about being accused of white washing and making assumptions - then the very next sentence was "every this is that".  I mean one fucking sentence later and voila. 

Using instances to define everyone and everything. Its destroying us.

We have to choose what to care about - and what to comment on. There are assholes everywhere. On all sides. We have to stop giving them airtime to define our worldview. Otherwise we are headed for complete chaos. Assuming we aren't already there. 

Death spiral.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

11 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

 

Damaging police cameras?

Well, it’s a relief to know this dangerous criminal is off the street and all other crime has been stopped.

 

I don't care what she damaged. it was public property, and it has a cost to tax payers. You wanna play the game expect to get in trouble.  Sucks to be her....

Her damaging of police cameras was probably intended to help hide other criminal activities.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Onboard 2.0

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

11 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Define: "an explosive"

What would be super helpful is to see what damage was caused by the "explosive" to get a rational idea of whether we're talking about IED or firework.

A firework will blind, and or maim a person, so exactly what is your point ?  I know you don't even believe that would be considered violence.  They're using laser pens to blind officers... the pen really is mightier than the sword, but hey it's just a pen....

Edited July 29, 2020 by Onboard 2.0

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

10 hours ago, BNB said:

I would agree.

Playing devils advocate, They stated 5 separate times, so maybe they were having a hard time following her.

Well, she HAD been damaging  police cameras... so there's that.

[Guest Lobo]

those cameras are pretty damage-resistant though based on those photos.  They can take a licking and keep on ticking.  Except of course they're being handled by a NYPD cop and there's a black person in the area...then of course, they unfortunately shut down for preventative maintenance.  

[Armybrat 40841]

11 hours ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

So for a non-violent criminal, can’t you just arrest them outside or in their home, or something?  Why the public display of intimidation?

Vernon Howell shrugs.

[Armybrat 40841]

57 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

A firework will blind, and or maim a person, so exactly what is your point ?  I know you don't even beech that would be considered violent.  They're using laser pens to blind officers... the pen really is mightier than the sword, but hey it's just a pen....

And as the dead dude in Austin said, they’re just cops.

[Brisketexan 105125]

7 hours ago, Rougarou said:

Here are the questions again Brisket if you want to respond, as Axiom mentions, you didn't.

Sorry, I also sometimes sleep, and work.  And I'm pretty sure I have stated an answer to several of these (perhaps you were surprised by it being in short form).

Quote

What do you condone as the next step in the escalation path when incel weirdo and dufasses with hockey sticks and larping shields leads to zero change, yet again? When all the rioting and looting and protesting does nothing, yet again?

Your position is that "nobody was listening or doing anything when we asked politely or did things non-violently, well now we are going to be violent and that'll learn 'em! Then we will get what we want!" When that will obviously not happen, then what?

Are you going to be on these boards justifying it if people start trying to hurt other people who don't agree with them? Is that the next step?

Because the odds are that all this protesting and looting and rioting is going to be much ado about nothing with respect to the power structure and society. If you are logically condoning protesters sowing their oats because they are frustrated from being ignored, then what about the next steps when these protests/riots are ignored as they most assuredly will be?

Other than this being a shitty "push poll" question, I'll try to answer it.  How about we rephrase it -- when mass protests don't work, when mass protests escalating to violence don't work, when the powers and elements of society that hold power do not give a fuck about the masses, what do I condone?

I don't know.  I really don't.  That's my point.  I want us to have a functional society that actually works for people.  And after those options fail, then the only option left is full, violent revolution....which would utterly break society.  There is no winning answer.  The ONLY winning answer is for the people in power to make good decisions.  I'm not optimistic.

That's my damned point.

Society sets up and perpetuates unjust structures.

People peacefully seek out change -- they are told to fuck off.

People get frustrated, and commit acts of violence -- they are told to fuck off, AND are told that now, their cause is illegitimate.  Because violence.  Oh, and the state uses brutal violence against them.

What's next?  Losing.  Lots of losing.  Either the masses continue to be fucked, and a violent state gets to triumph yet again, or there is bloody revolution, and we all lose, at least in the short and medium term.

There's only one path that gets us to a better place.  So, what do I CONDONE?  I fucking condone the powers in our government and society listening to legitimate grievances and doing the work to bring about structural change to create a more just society for everyone in it.  The fucking responsibility here falls on the powerful, not on the all-but powerless individuals marching in the streets.  That's what I CONDONE.

Think I'm pissing in the wind?  I do.  We'll just seal the pressure cooker again.  One day, it blows.  We've been warned, but we're too goddamned greedy and stupid to listen.

 

[Celery Man 20946]

9 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Is it possible these protest were happening for the last 4 weeks before the Feds showed up?  Is it possible these officers are wearing other identifying marks because of harassment to families?  Is it possible they are arresting people away from large crowds to avoid confrontation?  Is it possible they get the identity wrong and simply releasing the person?  Is it possible we clearly don’t have all of the information and 30 second twitter videos don’t tell the whole story?

We could talk about all of that (like, discussing if protests are different than violence, how it's possible to identify who you are and what authority you represent without putting your family at risk of being kidnapped or harassed without cause, how if you are wrong almost all of the time it might be better to go ahead and revert to upholding the Constitution, if you think decontextualizing events is harmful to understanding what is happening you should probably feel that way all of the time) but I'm not sure if we can do that without veering into politics rather than the documentation purpose of this thread.

[Rougarou 594]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sorry, I also sometimes sleep, and work.  And I'm pretty sure I have stated an answer to several of these (perhaps you were surprised by it being in short form).

Other than this being a shitty "push poll" question, I'll try to answer it.  How about we rephrase it -- when mass protests don't work, when mass protests escalating to violence don't work, when the powers and elements of society that hold power do not give a fuck about the masses, what do I condone?

I don't know.  I really don't.  That's my point.  I want us to have a functional society that actually works for people.  And after those options fail, then the only option left is full, violent revolution....which would utterly break society.  There is no winning answer.  The ONLY winning answer is for the people in power to make good decisions.  I'm not optimistic.

That's my damned point.

Society sets up and perpetuates unjust structures.

People peacefully seek out change -- they are told to fuck off.

People get frustrated, and commit acts of violence -- they are told to fuck off, AND are told that now, their cause is illegitimate.  Because violence.  Oh, and the state uses brutal violence against them.

What's next?  Losing.  Lots of losing.  Either the masses continue to be fucked, and a violent state gets to triumph yet again, or there is bloody revolution, and we all lose, at least in the short and medium term.

There's only one path that gets us to a better place.  So, what do I CONDONE?  I fucking condone the powers in our government and society listening to legitimate grievances and doing the work to bring about structural change to create a more just society for everyone in it.  The fucking responsibility here falls on the powerful, not on the all-but powerless individuals marching in the streets.  That's what I CONDONE.

Think I'm pissing in the wind?  I do.  We'll just seal the pressure cooker again.  One day, it blows.  We've been warned, but we're too goddamned greedy and stupid to listen.

 

Thanks for the response; I appreciate this take.

You say the only response for the marginalized/masses is violent revolution. Would or do you condone that if/when this all peters out and no meaningful change is made? That’s exactly what a bunch of the protestors were saying on the video up thread by the way, that the system is unforgiving and broken in a way beyond repair and needs to be burned down and built back up again, as the only way, to ensure freedom and equality for PoC, and specifically blacks.

Are you down for that, today?

Are you down for that if all this is for naught in the off chance that Trump actually wins re-election as a spit in the face of these marches and cause?

It seems from your posts that not only would you condone the violent revolution as honorable/necessary from afar, maybe you would be impelled to actually participate in it, for the noble cause of PoC diversity, inclusion and equality?

[Brisketexan 105125]

3 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Thanks for the response; I appreciate this take.

You say the only response for the marginalized/masses is violent revolution. Would or do you condone that if/when this all peters out and no meaningful change is made? That’s exactly what a bunch of the protestors were saying on the video up thread by the way, that the system is unforgiving and broken in a way beyond repair and needs to be burned down and built back up again, as the only way, to ensure freedom and equality for PoC, and specifically blacks.

Are you down for that, today?

Are you down for that if all this is for naught in the off chance that Trump actually wins re-election as a spit in the face of these marches and cause?

It seems from your posts that not only would you condone the violent revolution as honorable/necessary from afar, maybe you would be impelled to actually participate in it, for the noble cause of PoC diversity, inclusion and equality?

The answers are "I don't know" and "it depends."

I'll ask this -- if you were black, you raised the very real and obvious structural problems, and the government told you to fuck off, emphasized with clubs and teargas....what would YOU do?  

You're asking the age-old question of "would you be MLK or Malcolm X?"  Jury is still out on that.  We love to hold up MLK as the proper way.  And they killed the shit out of MLK.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

The answers are "I don't know" and "it depends."

I'll ask this -- if you were black, you raised the very real and obvious structural problems, and the government told you to fuck off, emphasized with clubs and teargas....what would YOU do?  

You're asking the age-old question of "would you be MLK or Malcolm X?"  Jury is still out on that.  We love to hold up MLK as the proper way.  And they killed the shit out of MLK.

From my admittedly somewhat limited reading on Malcom X, he was changing his views on race relations and how problems should be solved before he was assassinated by the nation of Islam. I believe Malcom would have adopted more of an MLK stance had he lived.

[Guest Lobo]

With all the vehicles our Federal Government has at its disposal...why do they insist on rounding people up in Kia minivans?  

Those are obviously rentals, the Feds don't buy bulk amounts of foreign cars.  And they are civilian plated.  So I'm guessing some Enterprise car rental idealistic young manager is gonna take a stand and refuse to rend a car sometime soon to a federal officer.  

Does the optional insurance coverage they offer you cover stuff like blood, urine/feces, vomit (some of the folks illegally detained probably shit/puke themselves and understandably so) and the lingering stench of tear gas and pepper spray?  I mean, they have that little sign above the stereo that says you'll be charged $250 cleaning fee for smoking in the car, what about burn marks from incendiary devices?  Plus, it's just statistical human nature, a DHS guy is gonna turn in a Kia Sportage with a sidearm still under the seat.  That's gonna be awkward.  And how do you tell a guy with a tactical vest and assault rifle and night goggles on that he didn't bring it back full and you have to charge his personal card that he left for incidentals $7.95/gallon?  

[Enchubben 5510]

11 minutes ago, Lobo said:

With all the vehicles our Federal Government has at its disposal...why do they insist on rounding people up in Kia minivans?  

Those are obviously rentals, the Feds don't buy bulk amounts of foreign cars.  And they are civilian plated.  So I'm guessing some Enterprise car rental idealistic young manager is gonna take a stand and refuse to rend a car sometime soon to a federal officer.  

Does the optional insurance coverage they offer you cover stuff like blood, urine/feces, vomit (some of the folks illegally detained probably shit/puke themselves and understandably so) and the lingering stench of tear gas and pepper spray?  I mean, they have that little sign above the stereo that says you'll be charged $250 cleaning fee for smoking in the car, what about burn marks from incendiary devices?  Plus, it's just statistical human nature, a DHS guy is gonna turn in a Kia Sportage with a sidearm still under the seat.  That's gonna be awkward.  And how do you tell a guy with a tactical vest and assault rifle and night goggles on that he didn't bring it back full and you have to charge his personal card that he left for incidentals $7.95/gallon?  

Hotels and rental car businesses took Coronavirus impact squarely on the chin. Gotta get the fleet/rooms utilized somehow even if its deeply discounted government contracts.

[Billy Pilgrim 1962]

You know, it’s ok to denounce and not try to defend the fringe elements of your political views. I would hope rational conservatives would try to distance themselves from the alt-right and white supremacy people who hijack their message. It’s ok to say you don’t agree with the Antifa message or anarchy going on in Portland and Seattle. I don’t think it makes you any less sympathetic to the BLM movement or the fight to end systemic racism. Everyone should be trying to move away from the radical ends of the political spectrum and back towards some middle ground.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Billy Pilgrim said:

You know, it’s ok to denounce and not try to defend the fringe elements of your political views. I would hope rational conservatives would try to distance themselves from the alt-right and white supremacy people who hijack their message. It’s ok to say you don’t agree with the Antifa message or anarchy going on in Portland and Seattle. I don’t think it makes you any less sympathetic to the BLM movement or the fight to end systemic racism. Everyone should be trying to move away from the radical ends of the political spectrum and back towards some middle ground.

It's always the fringes that cause the problems at both sides of the equation.

[Brisketexan 105125]

16 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

From my admittedly somewhat limited reading on Malcom X, he was changing his views on race relations and how problems should be solved before he was assassinated by the nation of Islam. I believe Malcom would have adopted more of an MLK stance had he lived.

And maybe he would have.  Of course, maybe today, he'd see us fighting the same battles 50+ years later and say "fuck this shit, burn it all down."

My recommendations on how the protests should move forward have been stated elsewhere: purposeful and relentless non-violent civil disobedience.  Things like 10,000 people sitting and occupying the public square, stating their grievances and refuse to leave.  Fill the front lines with women, children, clergy, etc.  And let the feds do what they will do -- let the world see American police (who happen to look like militarized jackboots) beating and gassing innocents - using violence against people who are not being violent.

It's been decades since I read it, but "Ghandi on nonviolence" by Merton is really good on this strategy.

Our government and most importantly, the powers within and behind it, are overreaching and capable of great evil.  Let them show the world, so that they can no longer deny it.

[Guest Lobo]

Good point, Billy Pilgrim.  I absolutely and categorically condemn people blinding law enforcement officials with laser pointers and tossing anything larger than a bottle rocket into groups of LEOs.  It's a disgrace to this country and compromises the valorous BLM movement.  

But seriously, there is absolutely no reason to sweep up protestors into unmarked vehicles in broad daylight.  If they attack/assault/blind officers in any way, we have perfectly established and judicially sound protocols for detaining/arresting/transporting them.   There is only one reason why that is being done.  Even the Sturmabteilung put political dissidents into clearly marked trucks.  At some point though, likely next week...DHS will realize you can stoke even more fear and obedience (and whip up the 'Law & Order' crowd even more) by using uniformly marked vehicles.  Their fleet is having its livery paint applies as I type this.  Expect to see these vehicles soon.  That's when we've crossed the Rubicon as a nation.  

Edited July 29, 2020 by Lobo

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And maybe he would have.  Of course, maybe today, he'd see us fighting the same battles 50+ years later and say "fuck this shit, burn it all down."

My recommendations on how the protests should move forward have been stated elsewhere: purposeful and relentless non-violent civil disobedience.  Things like 10,000 people sitting and occupying the public square, stating their grievances and refuse to leave.  Fill the front lines with women, children, clergy, etc.  And let the feds do what they will do -- let the world see American police (who happen to look like militarized jackboots) beating and gassing innocents - using violence against people who are not being violent.

It's been decades since I read it, but "Ghandi on nonviolence" by Merton is really good on this strategy.

Our government and most importantly, the powers within and behind it, are overreaching and capable of great evil.  Let them show the world, so that they can no longer deny it.

I believe in peaceful protest, passive resistance, all of the peaceful ways a group can bring actual attention, and sympathy to their cause.

I do not believe children (anyone under 18 years) should ever be involved in a protest that has the potential to become violent. Using children is a lame tool unless it's for a save the dolphins march.  I think we've all seen the videos of the children with FUCK TRUMP placards around their necks being paraded down the street by their mothers.  Repulsively, disgusted was my first, second, and third thought.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Onboard 2.0