|
Spun Dog posted:You're right, that is a dumb question. We all know that they will not face any consequences. Matey, I'm not your enemy. I'm just saying that you might not want to waste you bullshit on me because you literally have the state military called up by and crawling about a major city under curfew because your white cops like killing black guys.
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Spacman posted:Matey, I'm not your enemy. I'm just saying that you might not want to waste you bullshit on me because you literally have the state military called up by and crawling about a major city under curfew because your white cops like killing black guys. What bullshit are you talking about exactly? I asked you a question.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
States that use the martial force to quell dissent brought up by the disproportionate application of martial force are filth and the people who defend that, or worse glibly mock from afar those standing up to that state or even the prospect of doing so, are excrement. They are garbage what belongs in the trashcan. If that hurts your feelings: good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Spacman posted:Matey, I'm not your enemy. I'm just saying that you might not want to waste you bullshit on me because you literally have the state military called up by and crawling about a major city under curfew because your white cops like killing black guys. i don't think anyone itt is your mate tbh well, maybe shrike88 which, if anything, should by itself cause you to reevaluate your posting
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:What bullshit are you talking about exactly? I asked you a question. You are not my wife. You are not my Mother. So I feel confident telling you to shove your head up your own arse and choke on your own poo poo before demanding anything of me (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
If you don't like being compared to Assad, stop talking like a loving Ba'athist lionizing military order against citizens and giggling at the violence. Its a problem with its own solution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Spacman posted:You are not my wife. You are not my Mother. OK, I've got you figured out now, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Spun Dog posted:OK, I've got you figured out now, thanks. Please, explain it. Since I am so dense... You can help me. Whoops, you were just talking poo poo, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
I love that picture that shows all the boarded up poo poo and trashed blocks from years ago. The thing a lot of people don't understand about poverty and having an underclass of people that live in it, is that protests like this aren't just because some dude got shot, but because of pressure that is built up over the course of generations. This is the police thread, but since we're talking about protests in Ferguson and Baltimore I think its important to recognize that lots of the people protesting right now are people who grew up watching their parents and grandparents live like this. It is pretty stupid to completely ignore that and just go "well they are a bunch of black people looting stores because some dude was snapped in half by a cop who thinks he's he-man". These types of riots will only become more common as the perception of the poor is that they are becoming poorer and rich people are becoming richer. Someone dying is just the catalyst for a whole bunch of steam to be let off that has to be at some point. Anyone who cares about the business owners or the cops in these situations is an idiot who doesn't realize just how much worse off a lot of people in poverty are and no one is doing anything to help them regardless of whether or not they are breaking poo poo or sitting on their asses downing a 40.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Well said. I think it's easy for the left to ignore this long-term issue while attempting to tie the riots to the police.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Well said. I think it's easy for the left to ignore this long-term issue while attempting to tie the riots to the police. Truly, it is the Far Right who care about the poor and ending poverty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Well said. I think it's easy for the left to ignore this long-term issue while attempting to tie the riots to the police. Do you not think that the police are one of the long term issues for some reason?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
It's unfortunate how the Baltimore city council is 100% dem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:It's unfortunate how the Baltimore city council is 100% dem. i agree. it should be 100% socialist
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
It's too bad the socialist movement in the States has historically had such poor relations with blacks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Spacman posted:No, I believe that the police should be thoroughly condemned because of 'the few bad apples', likewise I think the rioters should be thoroughly condemned because of 'a few bad apples'. Lot o' name calling going around, but I'll engage this earnestly. I understand your position. If we condemn the police for the actions of a few police officers then we should condemn the protest for the actions of a few protestors. You ask, in light of this strong parallel, why would we condemn one but not the other? This parallel breaks down when we look closely at the blame placed on the police. There are two distinct, but interconnected, condemnations. There is the condemning of the particular officer, and the condemning of the system. The system of violence that preceded that specific officer's actions and the system that fails to hold officer's accountable. Now let's form the parallel to protestors. We do condemn the actions of the particular protestors that set fire to buildings, but the system of violence that allowed for, and preceded, the protest is the same system of police violence that allowed the officer to commit his act. Both specific acts are condemned. The police are not being condemned for the action of that particular officer, they are being condemned for the systemic violence, which the specific act was a part of, and the failure to hold officers accountable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Hey, you never responded after I showed you why it was dumb to talk about what the 'alternatives' are to rioting. Do you understand, yet, why that's a silly question? You don't appear to, given this incredibly weak troll of a post. Hey you're the one who fundamentally didn't understand my post either! Congratulations on our mutual weak trolling. Willie Tomg posted:States that use the martial force to quell dissent brought up by the disproportionate application of martial force are filth and the people who defend that, or worse glibly mock from afar those standing up to that state or even the prospect of doing so, are excrement. They are garbage what belongs in the trashcan. If that hurts your feelings: good. See here: Destroying other oppressed people's property and businesses is somehow standing up to the state: good. Knifegrab fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:It's unfortunate how the Baltimore city council is 100% dem. Party affiliation is nearly meaningless at the city level.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
Lame Devil posted:Lot o' name calling going around, but I'll engage this earnestly. This is a good post, though I don't agree with you that both specific acts are being condemned (they should be), so far I've seen mostly defense of the rioting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
I thought it has often been the case that the Dems are happy to pay lip service to dealing with police brutality and race inequality but when push comes to shove often back off on the issue. No examples off the top of my head but hey, Baltimore is still Baltimore.shrike82 posted:It's unfortunate how the Baltimore city council is 100% dem. And? Democrats can be shitheads. They often are. This is not the zinger you thought it was. What point were you trying to make? Spacman posted:I dunno matey, you have the local military locking down one of your cities. You should ask them this dumb question. Maybe they will shoot you in the scone with a rubber bullet. Spacman posted:You are not my wife. You are not my Mother. I know being compared to an Assad-supporter is lovely and must be really annoying (e: and is unnecessarily confrontational, I grant you this), but I find it darkly ironic that people like to claim that the lefty loonies are all bloodthirsty riot-lovers who just loooooove dead cops ITT, and then seeing this kind of acrimony from someone sympathetic to the police* *not sure if you are sympathetic to the police but you haven't really made your stance very clear from what I've seen so far. murphyslaw fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:See here: Destroying other oppressed people's property and businesses is somehow standing up to the state: good. Yes. When white people riot and destroy property over a losing a loving basketball game I'm sure you are just as outraged.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
White people riot over losing a basketball game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Yes. When white people riot and destroy property over a losing a loving basketball game I'm sure you are just as outraged. No, you don't get it. Those are just crazy kids getting a little too rambunctious and inebriated for their own good. They were just temporarily swayed by mob mentality and emotional high of the moment. Blacks rioting because of accumulated injustice and bullshit for years set off by a recent acute abuse? Those thugs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
You can't really compare sports fan reveling with thugs burning down buildings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:Yes. When white people riot and destroy property over a losing a loving basketball game I'm sure you are just as outraged. I am actually more pissed off because its doing dumb poo poo for an even dumber reason. The current riots are actually over something that matters and while I don't agree with the violence, it has purpose. But Muuhhhhh team lost a SPORTS GAME is the dumbest loving reason ever in the history of all riots. But please get all angry at me again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Berk Berkly posted:No, you don't get it. Those are just crazy kids getting a little too rambunctious and inebriated for their own good. They were just temporarily swayed by mob mentality and emotional high of the moment. Berk Berkly posted:Riots don't happen because people are safe, secure, and well off. They happen because poo poo's hosed up and bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Were those crazy kids part of the underclass, too? White people riot because they feel let down by their team after a sporting event. Black people riot because they keep being murdered and blamed for their own murder among other bullshit. Guess who makes out better in the news? VVV: When "we lost the game" is your standard for "hosed up and bullshit" for a riot, things might not quite be, you know, equivalent. Berk Berkly fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Apr 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Berk Berkly posted:White people riot because they feel let down by their team after a sporting event.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:What does that have to do with your assertion about who riots and why? I'm not going to defend the media's coverage here. People riot for a number of different reasons, though, which is patently obvious. There is no common factor driving riots after a sports team win and riots because of systemic racial oppression. The result is a riot, the causes are totally different.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
"This guy doesn't like the baltimore riots!? Well clearly he must be a racist who absolutely LOVES white riots!" - An idiot. Also Obdicut, I totally recognize that a riot is the end cause of systemic oppression. I understand that a riot is going to happen and it must be dealt with by dealing with the underlying issues. My whole point about discussing alternatives to a riot, in terms of effectiveness of message conveyance, was just as a discussion point, as the name of this subforum describes as debate AND discussion. I am saying, should we be put in a similar situation in future, would there be a valid alternative to rioting that COULD occur. Yes, right now, a riot WILL occur because of the underlying issues, but my question is, SHOULD a riot always occur, is a riot the most effective means at conveying a groups grievances.? Obviously if the group is oppressed, they likely have no other resources to display these grievances, but I am curious is there absolutely no other route? My guess would be no, but all I was trying to do was discuss that point, not argue that these "minorities shouldn't riot, there are better ways!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Berk Berkly posted:VVV: When "we lost the game" is your standard for "hosed up and bullshit" for a riot, things might not quite be, you know, equivalent. Obdicut posted:People riot for a number of different reasons, though, which is patently obvious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
getting angry about riots is complete idiocy riots are spontaneous, reactive phenomena. nobody plans a riot, nobody organises a riot, they just happen when the rule of law breaks down for whatever reason. the presence of a riot is not something to be supported or opposed, it is simply something that must be analysed in the baltimore case that analysis is really easy, though, so basically the only reason one wouldn't get it is because of a staunch refusal to admit that there is deep-seated racism within police forces across america
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:I am actually more pissed off because its doing dumb poo poo for an even dumber reason. The current riots are actually over something that matters and while I don't agree with the violence, it has purpose. But Muuhhhhh team lost a SPORTS GAME is the dumbest loving reason ever in the history of all riots. It's about ethics in NCAA basketball officiating
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Spacman posted:You are not my wife. You are not my Mother. "No, gently caress you, female!" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:You can't really compare sports fan reveling with thugs burning down buildings. Hmmm.... I wonder what makes you think that the kentucky fans were just sports fans reveling and the people in baltimore were thugs... This is truly a mystery to me it's almost as if there's some superficial difference between the two groups....
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:"This guy doesn't like the baltimore riots!? Well clearly he must be a racist who absolutely LOVES white riots!" - An idiot. Nobody in the thread likes riots. You are being the idiot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
LorrdErnie posted:Hmmm.... I wonder what makes you think that the kentucky fans were just sports fans reveling and the people in baltimore were thugs... It's because shrike is trolling, that post makes it pretty clear he's not in this discussion in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Waco Panty Raid posted:Were they also not "safe, secure, and well off?" No, they were angry, dissapointed, and likely inebriated in the case of the sporting riots. No one goes home after a relaxing day and says after dinner. "You know honey, I could really go for a RIOT right now." The CONTEXT and the rioting groups will different significantly in their respective places, but the above is always going to be the case. Riots are not academic exercises.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Nobody in the thread likes riots. Nah, there're definitely people here and leftists in general abetting the riots as a precursor to revolution. Another strain of accelerationism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:"No, gently caress you, female!" Dude gets really upset when you ask him to think about what he posted. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2015 18:05
|
|