1 1
Phil1111

The 2020 Election trump v. Biden

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Keyword there is government.

The police represent the government. But you know that. They are public servants. But you know that. They have been used to suppress poor people. But you know that. The protests are about people objecting to the government killing them. But you know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I agree, but I think you lose an opportunity to find much needed common ground when you don't just condemn the rioting outright and use the reasoning behind peaceful protests to bring about that understanding, especially when discussing it with people who by default automatically think like that.

How can we support protests while condemning riots? Is there a well-defined line besides the already-stated “looting and burning are unacceptable?” Or do the protests have to stop until the “leaders” can control every.last.protester? 
Because if so, then the right (that completely monolithic entity with no internal differences) owns every single racist, and they define it, just as so many on the right insist that the looters define the left. 
Each of us has a responsibility; not to wait for the other side to be our definition of perfect, but to help to define what we want for our country. 
Wendy P. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Coreece said:

I agree, but I think you lose an opportunity to find much needed common ground when you don't just condemn the rioting outright and use the reasoning behind peaceful protests to bring about that understanding, especially when discussing it with people who by default automatically think like that.

Because peaceful protests usually don't work.  All the peaceful, lawful protests in the world didn't stop segregated buses in the south, for example.  It took a criminal (Rosa Parks) to bring about that change.  

Same with riots.  The US would not have gotten an 8 hour workday without the Haymarket Riot.  The Birmingham Riot of 1963 led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The Stonewall Riots led to the first LGBT rights groups, and that in turn led to the first legal protections for gay people.  The Cincinnati Riots of 2001, started by the police killing of an unarmed black teenager, led to massive police reforms there.

Would any of that happened without those riots?  Not in the same time frame, and potentially never.  There are a lot of people who are so comfortable with the status quo that they won't change, ever, unless they are forced to.  Unless police are forced to change by a Chamber of Commerce that doesn't want to see any more businesses damaged.  Unless the government is forced to address inequalities lest riots erode a politician's popularity.

Does that suck?  You bet it does.  But it happens.

Rioting sucks, and there's no excuse for violence in protests.  But for people who have no other voice, it is their only way to be heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

By election time, it is likely that the rioting and looting will have mostly stopped.

How many people's lives and livelihoods will have been destroyed because of these people?

Why is it wrong to protect against that?

Because innocent people will inevitably end up dead. Why don't you care about their lives?

7 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

You saw this coming and decided to protect your business.

Which path do you choose?

You chose the path of shooting innocent people. Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

You are misguided.

I actually agree with a lot of the demands that came out of the list.

Then why did you say they didn't exist? Why lie?

Quote

The segregative parts, not so much.

What made those the most significant ones? What made those few lines from a few people in Seattle the main demands of the entire national protest movement, overriding all others? What made them the most significant demands of the Kenosha protests, which are a response to events that occerued long after the CHAZ ceased to exist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, Coreece said:

Those two replies lack distinguishing more than anything that I've ever said on the subject.

I think looting and rioting is wrong and very counter-productive to the peaceful protests demanding justice.

 

 

I *really* didn't think I had to say that as I've never said anything to support the rioting and destruction. My comments were aimed at keeping the topic on the main reasons for the protests in the first place and not the destruction done by a minority.

It's quite a contrast - you take my lack of comments on it as support for rioting, while Turtle actually praises the killer and all it implies is he's "anti-looting and anti-rioting".

As I've said, Biden has condemned the rioting repeatedly, and unlike Trump he doesn't feed the flames. Trump stokes it and points to the riots as "what's already happening (on my watch) will happen if Biden wins".

Edited by olofscience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 hours ago, billvon said:

Because peaceful protests usually don't work.  All the peaceful, lawful protests in the world didn't stop segregated buses in the south, for example.  It took a criminal (Rosa Parks) to bring about that change.  

Same with riots.  The US would not have gotten an 8 hour workday without the Haymarket Riot.  The Birmingham Riot of 1963 led to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The Stonewall Riots led to the first LGBT rights groups, and that in turn led to the first legal protections for gay people.  The Cincinnati Riots of 2001, started by the police killing of an unarmed black teenager, led to massive police reforms there.

Would any of that happened without those riots?  Not in the same time frame, and potentially never.  There are a lot of people who are so comfortable with the status quo that they won't change, ever, unless they are forced to.  Unless police are forced to change by a Chamber of Commerce that doesn't want to see any more businesses damaged.  Unless the government is forced to address inequalities lest riots erode a politician's popularity.

Does that suck?  You bet it does.  But it happens.

Rioting sucks, and there's no excuse for violence in protests.  But for people who have no other voice, it is their only way to be heard.

Keep in mind that Rosa Parks, and almost all of the Civil Rights protests in the 60s were 'non-violent'.

There's a difference between 'non-violent' and 'civil disobedience'.

The lunch counter sit ins, Rosa Parks on the bus, and many many others were intentionally breaking the law, but not in a violent manner. The protesters fully expected to be arrested. That was part of the plan.
Another part was that they expected to be attacked when they marched. And they didn't fight back. On purpose. First off, because they wouldn't win and it would give their opponents 'ammunition' to use against them (look at how the Alt-RIght wants to make everyone think that 'all protesters are looters and arsonists). Second, because when their peaceful marches and sit ins were met with violent opposition, it brought them widespread sympathy and support. 

But it took a hell of a lot of dedication and discipline to maintain that posture of non-violence. 

But that was the 60s. 

Today, things are a bit different. But not really.

They tried kneeling. That got vilification and a false accusation of 'disrespecting' the flag and the military.

They tried marching, waving signs and singing songs. That got nothing but rubber bullets and teargas.

So we're now to the point that when the cops shoot an unarmed black man, a couple city blocks go up in flames. 
And it still goes on.
When the cops shot Blake in Kenosha, I was appalled. And a bit surprised.

After all the shit that's gone on in the last couple months, the cops still are doing the same thing. And acting surprised and hurt when they come under fire for it.

Are they EVER going to learn to stop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

After all the shit that's gone on in the last couple months, the cops still are doing the same thing. And acting surprised and hurt when they come under fire for it.

Are they EVER going to learn to stop?

There was a cop in the UK who was just suspended because not only was he caught on camera putting a suspect in a prolonged chokehold, he was repeatedly shouting loud enough for everyone in the street to hear, "stop struggling or you're going to sleep".

Since I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to think that was a good idea in the current climate I can only assume he felt he would be immune from any consequences and could do whatever the fuck he wanted. That's what they need to learn, that they will be held accountable. First that has to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2020 at 11:14 PM, wmw999 said:

How can we support protests while condemning riots? Is there a well-defined line besides the already-stated “looting and burning are unacceptable?”

I guess I'll just have to take in on faith that posters here condemn it unequivocally, no ifs ands or but but buts about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, then we’re going to have to take it on faith that all of the posters here mean that the rioters are only the people who are actually looting and burning, and not the protesters who are out that same night. 
Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the Justice Department has decided to defend Trump in the upcoming rape slander suit brought by E. Jean Carroll.  So your tax money will now go to defending an accused rapist.  And if he loses?  Your tax money will pay the court costs and the fine - a fine brought about by Trump's rape of, and subsequent slander of, Carroll.

Can't wait for the "small government republicans" to defend this.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-08/doj-seeks-to-take-over-trump-defense-in-e-jean-carroll-lawsuit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, billvon said:

So the Justice Department has decided to defend Trump in the upcoming rape slander suit brought by E. Jean Carroll.  So your tax money will now go to defending an accused rapist.  And if he loses?  Your tax money will pay the court costs and the fine - a fine brought about by Trump's rape of, and subsequent slander of, Carroll.

Can't wait for the "small government republicans" to defend this.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-08/doj-seeks-to-take-over-trump-defense-in-e-jean-carroll-lawsuit

This belongs in the Banana Republic thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Looting and burning under the excuse of protesting, an American right, just makes people take a blind eye to the issues these protesters are allegedly angry about. A good example are the famous Watts (LA) riots in the 1960's. By the time it was over, the original reason for the riots (a black woman, mother of a man being arrested for DUI, being kicked in the gut) was completely forgotten. All people remember now is burning, looting, and almost forty square miles of LA turned into a war zone for a week. All that really happened afterward was a mass migration of white families OUT of the neighborhoods where the riots occurred. The inequality remained, and the police didn't change their tactics until the Rodney King incident decades later. And even that hasn't stuck very well, because the cops are still doing the same things they were doing back during Watts, and to an extent the Rodney King incident. Only these days they try not to be as obvious about it. Why? Because they want to be seen as somehow more just? Of course not. They just don't want to be the cause of another riot. 

On the other hand...

The March on Washington, Freedom Marches, Freedom Bus Rides, lunch counter sit-ins in Whites Only restaurants etc got an entire government to change the laws. 

If Martin Luther King, Jr were alive today, he would speak out against the violence and the looting, because he knew that only distracts from the real issues. The biggest problem with the BLM and the protests against the police in general is that these people have no MLK Jr to follow. They strike out blindly without an agenda, they are not organized on a national level very well with a high-profile leader, and these are not good things if you are trying for real change. 

Edited by RobertMBlevins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, airdvr said:

As much as I deplore the looting and agree with you that it distracts from the issue I cringe when I see people talk about MLK's technique.  His techniques ended badly for him.

What kind of bullshit victim blaming is that? He was a famous black man murdered by a racist mad man. 
 

What should he have done differently?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, airdvr said:

As much as I deplore the looting and agree with you that it distracts from the issue I cringe when I see people talk about MLK's technique.  His techniques ended badly for him.

Exactly!  Like Lincoln.  Lincoln should have chosen decisions that would have kept him alive, rather than doing foolish things like freeing US slaves.  And all those US soldiers who died fighting overseas - their decisions ended badly for them.  No wonder Trump supporters consider them losers and suckers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jakee said:

What kind of bullshit victim blaming is that? He was a famous black man murdered by a racist mad man. 
 

What should he have done differently?

Not blaming the victim.  Don't get your panties all bunched up.  I'm saying people really should think twice before using MLK as an example.  I think it's why you don't see any strong black leaders stepping up here.  Where is Jessie Jackson?

What should he have done differently is what most leaders are doing today....a better job of protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, billvon said:

Exactly!  Like Lincoln.  Lincoln should have chosen decisions that would have kept him alive, rather than doing foolish things like freeing US slaves.  And all those US soldiers who died fighting overseas - their decisions ended badly for them.  No wonder Trump supporters consider them losers and suckers.

Try not to confuse wars with assassinations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, billvon said:

Exactly!  Like Lincoln.  Lincoln should have chosen decisions that would have kept him alive, rather than doing foolish things like freeing US slaves.  And all those US soldiers who died fighting overseas - their decisions ended badly for them.  No wonder Trump supporters consider them losers and suckers.

Bullshit. It was going to theater that did him in. He did it to himself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, airdvr said:

As much as I deplore the looting and agree with you that it distracts from the issue I cringe when I see people talk about MLK's technique.  His techniques ended badly for him.

Maybe he knew there was a risk, and thought it was worth it. Kind of like skydiving, only a little more selfless.

There is no unassailably good or unassailably bad person or decision. Looking for the problems (or looking only for the good sides) is a self-affirming way to interpret a situation, but unless you have a goal for that situation, then all you're doing is living in the past.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, airdvr said:

As much as I deplore the looting and agree with you that it distracts from the issue I cringe when I see people talk about MLK's technique.  His techniques ended badly for him.

Prime example to show why Trump continues to have a fair bit of support. There are many people who simply cannot grasp that people would do something that isn't solely in their own best interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Try not to confuse wars with assassinations.

You do know that Booth assassinated Lincoln due to the Civil War, right?  And considered himself part of the war effort?

More importantly, you don't seem to realize that people sometimes do the right thing even when that action puts themselves at risk.  You are here in the US because hundreds of thousands of US soldiers made what you consider to be bad decisions.  Perhaps they are owed a bit more than your summary judgment that they were foolish - even if the man you support thinks they are losers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I think it's why you don't see any strong black leaders stepping up here.  Where is Jessie Jackson?

MLK Jr was an extraordinary man in an extraordinary time. There is a reason a National Holiday is named for him. You want to criticize the leaders of the black community at a time when your nation has chosen the p.o.s. POTUS it currently has? Give your head a severe shaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1