paragon1 posted:

Black Lives Matter do have goals/a list of demands, and one of them is the cessation of the War on Drugs and the repeal of the 1996 crime bill, just FYI.

paragon1 posted:

Black Lives Matter do have goals/a list of demands, and one of them is the cessation of the War on Drugs and the repeal of the 1996 crime bill, just FYI.

quote:

Ending "broken windows" policing, which aggressively polices minor crimes in an attempt to stop larger ones
using community oversight for misconduct rather than having police decide what consequences officers face
making standards for reporting police use of deadly force
independently investigating and prosecuting police misconduct
having the racial makeup of police departments reflect the communities they serve
requiring officers to wear body cameras
providing more training for police officers
ending for-profit policing practices
ending the police use of military equipment
implementing police union contracts that hold officers accountable for misconduct

8-Bit Scholar posted:

8-Bit Scholar posted:

nah

http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

buncha safe space nonsense

BBC says this: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34023751


But that's not on the blm website somebody ought to add that, maybe stick it after "Black Villages" because that's...not a call for segregation. I dunno, herstorically speaking you'd think you'd wanna avoid that kinda thing

Nevvy Z posted:

saying dumb things and being called dumb over and over isn't a very good strategy for trolling.

stepfather posted:

Charity ? After careful consideration I have decided that the liberals win. Yes it's true. I now feel it's best to be charitable with other people's money just like they do. In fact, I am feel so strongly about it that I want to start giving away other people's money right away starting with the liberals first. So please contact me if you are one of those people who feels we should all do more to bring awareness to whatever cause. I am not feeling so good about my recent lack of charity and letting me give away your liberal money will not only help others but make me feel GREAT. chirp, chirp - crickets will be out as I'm sure no liberals will be sending me checks to help others.

Black Villages posted:

We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

nah

http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

buncha safe space nonsense

BBC says this: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34023751


But that's not on the blm website somebody ought to add that, maybe stick it after "Black Villages" because that's...not a call for segregation. I dunno, herstorically speaking you'd think you'd wanna avoid that kinda thing

Twerkteam Pizza posted:

http://www.blacklivesmattersyllabus.com/michelle-alexander-on-the-war-of-drugs/

Again, decentralized movement. This is the second result if you google "Black Lives Matter War on Drugs"

archangelwar posted:

Yeah so even the site you linked has several sections about reforming the criminal justice system scattered

paragon1 posted:

I'll bet it's the stuff where they are pro-trans.

Stinky_Pete posted:

I like this Black Villages idea because it challenges the isolation of the individual brought about by our capitalist ways.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

Oh okay so the first google site that says it is the official BLM website isn't to be taken as the official stance of the organization, so when bringing up evidence that the movement is badly organized and doesn't have a clear goal to achieve, the counter argument is that it totally does, just on another completely different website, under a different search heading.


gently caress, what a clear-cut objective, god drat these realistic attainable goals are so concrete and clear, goddamn my dick and balls


Nah, it was the stuff where they talk about black women where they want to make a safe space for them that affirms them

there's a lot of affirmation going on, these guys are pretty big on affirmative action I guess

Also do any of you guys have any thoughts on the Loving Engagement section I think perhaps you may not have, I feel as though the message there has been lost.

Y'know personally I think affirmation is kind of a pointless goal to advocate for and if you want to organize and make actual political change maybe have a concrete goal in mind, that list I linked to had a bunch maybe do those instead of blocking off roads or voting for Hillary "super predator" Clinton.


Yes yes, a collectivist utopia is truly just a sunrise away. We'll pave the way to the future with a road of metaphors.

paragon1 posted:

That's all I really have to say about that post, the rest speaks for itself.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

All tuckered out after a long day.

Loving Engagement posted:

We are committed to embodying and practicing justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another.

Stinky_Pete posted:

Seems good to me

Literally The Worst posted:

he's real bad at it

he literally just dropped all lives matter

8-Bit Scholar posted:

I'm literally the worst

8-Bit Scholar posted:

gently caress, what a clear-cut objective, god drat these realistic attainable goals are so concrete and clear, goddamn my dick and balls

8-Bit Scholar posted:

Oh okay so the first google site that says it is the official BLM website isn't to be taken as the official stance of the organization, so when bringing up evidence that the movement is badly organized and doesn't have a clear goal to achieve, the counter argument is that it totally does, just on another completely different website, under a different search heading.


gently caress, what a clear-cut objective, god drat these realistic attainable goals are so concrete and clear, goddamn my dick and balls


Nah, it was the stuff where they talk about black women where they want to make a safe space for them that affirms them

there's a lot of affirmation going on, these guys are pretty big on affirmative action I guess

Also do any of you guys have any thoughts on the Loving Engagement section I think perhaps you may not have, I feel as though the message there has been lost.

Y'know personally I think affirmation is kind of a pointless goal to advocate for and if you want to organize and make actual political change maybe have a concrete goal in mind, that list I linked to had a bunch maybe do those instead of blocking off roads or voting for Hillary "super predator" Clinton.


Yes yes, a collectivist utopia is truly just a sunrise away. We'll pave the way to the future with a road of metaphors.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

And no, I'm not advocating a return to the era of the Triangle Hat fire and loving child workers. Again, I'm of the apparently astonishing position that perhaps there's a middle ground to be found.

Liquid Communism posted:

Here, go read their goddamn party platform so you know what base you're arguing from: https://www.lp.org/platform

Curvature of Earth posted:

The official Libertarian Party website looks exactly like a lovely WordPress template from 2008. Like, I'm actually embarrassed for them. You'd think after the Ron Paul Revolution they could afford to hire a real web designer.

say no to scurvy posted:

Heh, this guy is even stupider than the common true believer. I wait for the inevitable, "Laugh at my dancing, puppets!"

Some of these latest posts are especially dumb, like https://www.johnsonweld.com/issues doesn't specificly mention any position things like cucurbit relations or contemporary lanatus drilling so does that mean I can automatically assume Johnson/all of his supporters are for/against?

Checkmate lolbertarian!

Gary Johnson posted:

In a healthy economy that allows the market to function unimpeded, consumers, innovators, and personal choices will do more to bring about environmental protection and restoration than will government regulations driven by special interests. Too often, when Washington, D.C. gets involved, the winners are those with the political clout to write the rules of the game, and the losers are the people and businesses actually trying to innovate.

When it comes to global climate change, Johnson and Weld believe that the politicians in Washington, D.C. are having the wrong debate.

...the critical question is whether the politicians’ efforts to regulate, tax and manipulate the private sector are cost-effective – or effective at all. The debate should be about how we can protect our resources and environment for future generations. Governors Johnson and Weld strongly believe that the federal government should prevent future harm by focusing on regulations that protect us from real harm, rather than needlessly costing American jobs and freedom in order to pursue a political agenda.

Protect the Environment. Promote Competition. Incentivize Innovation.

quote:

In a preemptive move last year, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) passed an order that gave cities the power to build their own broadband networks. The order was part of the agency’s larger plan to extend public internet access to primarily rural communities, often out of reach of major, privately-owned networks.

But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled against the FCC’s municipal broadband order this week, determining that it went beyond the agency’s abilities set forth by Congress. The problem was the order preempted two state laws in Wilson, N.C. and Chattanooga, Tennessee that banned local governments from building public internet networks that competed with major broadband providers, such as Verizon and AT&T.

“Rural communities want to build the networks themselves…It’s a political fight at this moment.”

Approximately 20 states have similar laws on the books that restrict cities from expanding or building public internet networks. With help from industry trade group USTelecom, the states sued the FCC to preserve the laws.

The all-Republican, three-judge panel ruled almost unanimously against FCC’s order with Judge Helene White concurring and dissenting in part. White sided with the FCC regarding its broadband regulation in North Carolina, saying the law directly conflicts with the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Republican FCC commissioners Michael O’Rielly and Ajit Pai, who also voted against net neutrality in 2015, said celebrated the court’s decision as a win for states’ rights and against government overreach.

The FCC could appeal the ruling to the full appellate court or to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“ Although this saga may not end here, I am heartened by Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ decision,” O’Rielly said in a statement. “Unless Congress specifically authorizes FCC intervention, States rightly can limit government-operated broadband networks in order to protect their citizens’ pocketbooks and good senses. Contrary to some beliefs, municipal networks are not panaceas to solving any lack of ubiquitous broadband, but instead unfairly distort the marketplace.”

Pai concurred, saying that he warned in his original dissent against the order that the FCC was overstepping it’s statute-given powers.

“I warned that the FCC lacked the power to preempt these Tennessee and North Carolina laws and that doing so would usurp fundamental aspects of state sovereignty,” Pai said in a statement. “Rather than wasting its time on illegal efforts to intrude on the prerogatives of state governments, the FCC should focus on implementing a broadband deployment agenda to eliminate regulatory barriers that discourage those in the private sector from deploying and upgrading next-generation networks.”

But supporters of public internet say that despite this week’s legal loss, progress has still been made against laws that restrict cities and states from building their own broadband networks.

“The passing of these laws have been stalled,” said Josh Stager, lead policy counsel for Washington, D.C.-based think tank New America. “Rural communities want to build the networks themselves. The FCC preempting the laws wasn’t the only avenue of attack. A big repeal effort is underway. It’s a political fight at this moment.”

8-Bit Scholar posted:

I know more about his platform than half of the posters here, since you seem to be equating States Rights as 1:1 to pro-discrimination laws, which hardly seems fair.

Goon Danton posted:

Guys, the DNC platform is just a bunch of words, the only thing that matters is successful actions. That's why I support the Libertarian Party, which

VitalSigns posted:

From "gee, I just want to end the wars" to "who needs evidence that Clinton is a serial killer when I can take the word of crazy people that she is" to "hey guys I have opinions about black people not knowing their place" in four pages. Even for a libertarian that's quick.

E: If black people really wanted to help themselves out they'd vote for states' rights.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

The Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare", a slang moniker embraced by the Obama administration that now refers to the system, which creates a health insurance marketplace. This marketplace sucks rear end in a top hat and everybody hates it except for the insurance companies.

Goon Danton posted: