General US Politics

[eclipse]

I'm not talking about the latest police incident here, since I can't possibly think of any sort of sound logic that could justify that officer's actions.  In other words, it's going to be an inherently one-sided argument, and I may have to hand out suspensions if the discussion gets too heated.

Consider this the first and last take on the subject.

[Eden Agleam]

The news recently has left me very tired and very demoralized. I was already a bit down, but the current state of affairs has put me in a very dark place. Yesterday I even removed Twitter from my phone just so I could stop thinking about the issues that are going on. Which was hard for me, because I care a lot about current affairs and believe that staying informed is important. 

For now, I'm just going to wish everyone here the best and I hope that you are all safe. Take care of yourselves the best that you can, and try to find some positives in these times. 

[Shoblongoo]

6 hours ago, eclipse said:

I'm not talking about the latest police incident here, since I can't possibly think of any sort of sound logic that could justify that officer's actions.  In other words, it's going to be an inherently one-sided argument, and I may have to hand out suspensions if the discussion gets too heated.

Consider this the first and last take on the subject.

So given that it should be universally agreed by decent people that the officer's actions were indefensible + he should be facing murder charges right now, lets talk about an aspect of the story that leaves more room for discussion and disagreement among reasonable minds.

...whats the appropriate response....

The big disagreement I'm seeing shaping up right now is between people who say: "Yes. Okay. What the officer did was unacceptable and he should be charged. But rioting, looting, and destroying private property is never an acceptable response."

And then people saying:

 
___________

I think I use to come down more on the side of "rioting, looting, and burning private property is never an acceptable response."

But I'm increasingly leaning more towards the opinion that its appropriate where no lesser means are sufficient to put enough pressure on people in power to arrest and prosecute the murderers.

And to the extent people in power ignore every more subdued form of protest calling for justice. And let the murderers walk free unless and until the rioting and the looting starts. They bring this on themselves.

And the fault rests upon the people in power who made that decision to protect the murderers. Not the rioters and the looters. 

Edited May 29, 2020 by Shoblongoo

[Shrimpica]

Classy.

Arresting reporters.

[Shoblongoo]

Also--Obligatory reminder that Trump is awful:

Edited May 29, 2020 by Shoblongoo

[Lord Raven]

4 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

But I'm increasingly leaning more towards the opinion that its appropriate where no lesser means are sufficient to put enough pressure on people in power to arrest and prosecute the murderers.

At this point, the petty part of me loves this -- they got their violent revolution they wanted so bad, but they don't realize that they're the oppressors here. That's exactly what the white moderate speech is about. We're criticized no matter what at this point, so fuck it, if they think we're thugs for peacefully protesting, we're gonna give them that.

And it's working. Trump has a tweet that was marked as being too violent for twitter, and then he used the official white house account to do the same. He's still trying to suppress media criticism of him, while threatening to bring the people out.

I think it's...  honestly beautiful, more than it is scary. The fact that everyone is becoming uncomfortable around reality. The riots are actually winning people over, and there's so many white people in full solidarity with the riots now.

Trump is the symbol of every single bit of take-for-granted kleptocratic bullshit wrong with our democracy and now that there's a fight back he's reacting with some white supremacist bullshit a cop said in Miami. "They loot we shoot." hahahahaha people destroy a fucking target and our baby diaper president is just threatening with guns?

It's really outed a shitload of bootlickers. I'm not pointing to anyone in this thread at all, by the way, so don't take this as some sort of passive aggressive comment. But I've seen someone who wants the 2A in case the government decides to come after him and his community, but then decry these riots as violence that won't do anything.

Good twitter thread: 

 

[Shoblongoo]

18 minutes ago, Lord Raven said:

But I've seen someone who wants the 2A in case the government decides to come after him and his community, but then decry these riots as violence that won't do anything.

There is something almost comical about the same people who say they need unregulated access to assault rifles, in case they ever need to threaten a government that attacks their life and liberty with enough violence to change public policy, acting like the rioters did something completely beyond-the-pale here. 

 

[Lord Raven]

It's entirely gun ownership as culture vs gun ownership as a necessity.

The ones who defend the 2A as the former (unknowingly) view the latter as abstract in spite of the Patriot Act, PRISM, and many many many race riots.

[eclipse]

Talking about the implications of the case (in this case, the ensuing rioting) - fine.  Since there's now murder charges on the table.

Still, Trump quoting racist things shouldn't surprise me.  Twitter Doing Something about it is refreshing.  Freedom of speech includes people telling you that they're tired of listening to your shit.

[Lord Raven]

40 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Still, Trump quoting racist things shouldn't surprise me. 

We shouldn't have to be surprised to continue harping on how fucked up it is.

[Corrobin]

Okay, in response to the Minneapolis riot, there are now riots in such varied places as Houston, Atlanta, Detroit, Oakland, Washington DC...

[eclipse]

44 minutes ago, Corrobin said:

Okay, in response to the Minneapolis riot, there are now riots in such varied places as Houston, Atlanta, Detroit, Oakland, Washington DC...

Actual Riots, or protests?  One was held in Hawaii.  I'm not linking the news article, because the comments section looks like the fallout of a riot.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

Are these officers getting their job at a paintball shooting range parking lot? Is that where they find these guys?

 

[Dai]

Saw a video from a dude over in Dallas looking at a protest going on down there. Weirdly enough, I could swear I recognize that voice as a customer that goes through my store. Regardless, sounds like gas grenades were being used in a more peaceful section...yikes.

Also, are people actually protesting/rioting at the White House? I keep hearing they are, but I've also been told it was apparently a riot at a building in Ohio.

[Excellen Browning]

The white house protest is very much real. There's been skirmishes between protesters and law enforcement in front of the white house, as well. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-05-30/crowds-protest-floyd-killing-and-trump-outside-white-house

[JubileePhoenix]

This has been a real eye opener. 

[Lord Raven]

For the record;

- lots and lots and lots of astroturfing and false flag operations. Lots of police and counter-protesters trying to set fires to lessen the message. There's some looting that is real (and targeted for good reason) and shit to that effect.

- Lots of police provoking attacks; these people are actually defending themselves, the police need to be set to a significantly higher standard.

- Lots and lots and lots of different colors in the crowd.

- Chain riots/protests everywhere. 

- They got this tweet out of Donald. Donald's provoking people lmfao

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1266724553620930561?s=20

[XRay]

I do not think rioting and looting is a good look. Shutting down traffic and occupying building entrances are fine, but destroying property seems a little extreme. If they were limiting their targets to just setting fires and destroying law enforcement property, that is understandable, but also targeting businesses who have no relation to law enforcement crosses the line in my opinion.

[Corrobin]

1 hour ago, XRay said:

I do not think rioting and looting is a good look. Shutting down traffic and occupying building entrances are fine, but destroying property seems a little extreme. If they were limiting their targets to just setting fires and destroying law enforcement property, that is understandable, but also targeting businesses who have no relation to law enforcement crosses the line in my opinion.

The first Target they attacked/looted/arson'd was chosen because it was basically R&D for how to screw over black people to improve profit margins, plus Target headquarters are in Minneapolis

[eclipse]

Spoiler

TIL that the "Radical Left" are not considered citizens of America.

[Shrimpica]

https://apnews.com/1f15681c4597ec9f8073c9edfd41baef?utm_source=The+Marshall+Project+Newsletter&utm_campaign=6067627ad0-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_05_30_11_27&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5e02cdad9d-6067627ad0-174463521

Nice Timing

 

[Slumber]

Real glad I got to be ground zero for the LA riots 2.0. Definitely really happy about it.

Totally not worried about friends and family who live further into the cities.

[Lewyn]

On 5/15/2020 at 9:27 AM, Shoblongoo said:

Oh I imagine they'll be no shortage of writings on the subject in journals of political science over the next several decades. 

Although I don't think they'll be independently designated "The Trump Effect." 

I think it'll just meld into the preexisting studies on Hitler and Mussolini. Because there's already voluminous writings around those two examining the psychological and sociological phenomenons of how they were able to rise to power. Build broad-based social movements around the things they were saying + the ideas they were putting out. And get large populations of people to legitimately believe that anything they said was true + motivated by the interests of national greatness, while detractors of any renown or level or expertise were just subversive traitors supporting the interests of the globalist elite.  

Its less the case that Trump stumbled upon anything new here. And more the case that this model for subservience and loyalty has existed since the 1930s. But:

(1)  A sufficient amount of time needed to pass for the prior use of that model to fade from national memory; for people to forget that this is how the fascists came to power, and to not immediately associate the kind of speeches he was giving and psychology he was tapping into with the negative connotations of fascism

(2) A political figure sufficiently shameless, immoral, and ambitious to attempt that play (and sufficiently charismatic to do it effectively) had to come to the forefront of the political scene.
________

Illustrative Blurbs from TheAtlatnic that was published back in 2016: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/american-authoritarianism-under-donald-trump/495263/
 

 

I read that Atlantic article a long time ago.  However I think Trump is cut from a different cloth than Hitler and Mussolini.  Those guys were visionaries, driven, wanted to mold the country and perhaps the world into their vision.  They were also highly intelligent.  

He is trying to create a dictatorship but to feed his ego, his politics has changed wildly over the years.  He has no grand vision for the country or the world.  He wants everyone to praise and love him and no one able to criticize him without suffering consequences.  Other than that he would be happy with a bucket of chicken laying in his big belly, lying down watching Fox and then Tweeting whatever is on his mind.  Golfing during the daytime, perhaps a few statues built in his honor.  Maybe some parades, his birthday becoming a national holiday, a monument or memorial in DC.  Like Hitler and Mussolini I can see why large groups of people supported them, they had a vision that spoke to them.  Supporting Trump seems to be a very different type of person.

Trump firing more inspector generals, Senate asks for explanation he doesn't give any.  They demand a thorough one, more than he doesn't like them, but he ignores it.  Republicans do nothing, they kiss his feet like always.  His lawyers arguing against civil, state, federal subpoenas any case....just say and this to the Supreme court, he has complete immunity from the law.  Some of the conservative justices say they don't like the wording, yeah really?  That is all the rebuke is?  Do they realize that this means Trump could rape and kill anyone he chooses, or order it and not be even investigated?  The justices he's appointed are mostly grossly unqualified, young with little experience, far right Trump loyalists.  

Trump has the gall to try to tell social platforms how they run their businesses.  Twitter has ignored his dumb baby tantrum executive order, and hopefully push against him even more.  

The chokekill was disgusting, and people are fed up.  If police officers who did things like this were convicted and sentenced to prison then there wouldn't be near as much anger.  However many just get paid leave, at worst losing their job and they just relocate to another department.  Few actually go to prison.  So institutions aren't doing anything, peaceful protest hasn't done anything.  Remember the kneeling in NFL?  Yeah Kaep got blackballed, the right wing media twisted the reason of protest to disrespecting the military and flag.  Black lives matter?  Oh it is actually protesting that black lives matter more than other lives, NO that wasn't it at all...but Fox news and all twisted this narrative too.  So these protests get ignored and in fact get many people hating the protesters.  

So peaceful protests do nothing, the supposed justice system which is supposed to be blind does nothing, so what are these people left with?  Making their own justice.  

[Lord Raven]

13 hours ago, XRay said:

I do not think rioting and looting is a good look. Shutting down traffic and occupying building entrances are fine, but destroying property seems a little extreme. If they were limiting their targets to just setting fires and destroying law enforcement property, that is understandable, but also targeting businesses who have no relation to law enforcement crosses the line in my opinion.

Nothing was ever a good look to the powers that be. I'll expound more tomorrow, but I am just saying that to give some food for thought.

EDIT: if anyone wants to talk about Baltimore riots (I followed this far more intently) or anything else in detail, then let me know. The tl;dr is that it was 3 weeks of peaceful protest, a day or two of riots, and then it was done and nobody gave a shit about Freddie Gray again.

Now, what I'm referring to is this:

These are people using their microphone to disrupt and cause something high profile. And in fact, Colin Kaepernick would be forgotten had Trump not brought attention to it... considering Kaepernick did it a year prior and the locker room came out after the season and praised his leadership and work ethic as a teammate, and how inspiring he is.

Nobody really cared that much as a whole until Trump said some shit... and then it went downhill. But nobody cared, everyone just told him to stop using football to kneel.

At this point, the purpose of the riots is to showcase; they paint the picture they want you to, they censor everything. We're going to protest, we're going to record everything they do because they think we're dangerous. We're going to show how brutal and visceral the police force are, and we're going to show how weak they are when we learn to fight back.

They're marketed as riots because of some of the scale...  yeah there's a lot of looting... but the vast majority of what's happening are in self-defense of the police. The police take a lot of bait that otherwise well-trained and less trigger-happy police officers would just move on with their days about. Significantly less impassioned police coming out of the wordwork, who have no commitment to family or community; and the good ones coming out and saying "nope, you guys are 100% correct and i've been complicit in this whole thing, so i will not stand in your way."

You are hearing most of the story through twitter. You see a lot of violence happen, which later has a grander context surrounding it (for instance, a guy who was "defending a store" with a sword gets the shit beat out of him to the point where he hits cement. The context: there was a kid near the store, around 18 years old, and the guy took a swing at him with his sword... and then it got too far. Gruesome, sure, but an example of how the majority of violence is people physically fighting back).

The fact that white people are joining in solidarity, raising blackfist in solidarity, in one case forming a wall in solidarity in front of black people... pretty heartwarming.

I think that's what's been lost a lot. But the thing is, they're even attacking CNN reporters and journalists, they're shooting paint bullets at people hanging out on their front porch during a curfew instead of... calmly addressing them. Or clarifying things. Or any of that shit. They shot a photojournalist in the eye and she's now completely blind in one eye. Another one happened in La Mesa, California.

Hell, even Target said "the employees will be compensated thusly, and the people have a right to express the anger they feel." Powerful shit.

Edited May 31, 2020 by Lord Raven

[Excellen Browning]

18 hours ago, XRay said:

I do not think rioting and looting is a good look. Shutting down traffic and occupying building entrances are fine, but destroying property seems a little extreme. If they were limiting their targets to just setting fires and destroying law enforcement property, that is understandable, but also targeting businesses who have no relation to law enforcement crosses the line in my opinion.

It's not a good look, but non-violent protest in America has always failed, for as long as I've been watching the news(which is getting to two decades soon)