It's asinine for me to accept fingerwagging about justified violence from someone who has either directly or indirectly benefited from white people justifying violence against minorities. Whether that be preferential treatment at work, taking for granted that you will never have to wonder if your race played a part in a negative interaction, or getting off with a warning at a traffic stop instead of becoming another George Floyd. I'd be willing to bet my house that you have never had to worry about the things minorities worry about get killed over every day. My last few posts have been example after example of cops escalating peaceful protests into riots. If a small number of shitty people grab stuff out of a Walmart, I'm sure the Walton family can just use some of the government subsidies they get to cover the cost of the toxic shit they buy from sweatshops. Castigating me for not giving a fuck about these greedy corporate behemoths because I'd rather direct my energy towards caring about to racial equality is yet another example of white privilege. You get to do that because you don't know what it's like to be afraid of people in authority who can legally kill you without any real consequences. They will actually get a nice long taxpayer-funded vacation, until they are ultimately given a slap on the wrist and allowed to brutalize or shoot another minority a couple years. Until people realize that all lives can't matter until black lives do, it will continue to be that way.
I think that he is a minority, has (from what he's said) experienced social injustices, stereotyping, and I would assume some level of police injustices as well, that his frustration comes from that place and is manifest in anger and a want for violence, or at least a passive allowance of it. I don't agree with it, I don't accept it as the right course of action, but I do understand where it comes from. People are frustrated right now. They want change. They've been wanting it. And when they tried peacefully and it didn't work, they're looking at everyone like idiots when they say "try again, and peacefully again this time too please." When asking nicely doesn't work you take. I get it. But there is a place you have to draw the line at. Violence against those who were not in charge of the oppression, of the social and racial injustices does no good. The people who created this environment are not the ones being punished, and the ones being punished aren't the ones at fault. Where's the mass voter registration drives? Where's the political calls to action? The demands of your representatives? Do what we elected you to do, or get out.
black lives matter is a bullshit slogan. All lives matter. Equally. Everyone should be on the same playing field. Ok, black lives matter, but what about hispanics? Asians? Europeans? If you're all about promoting one group you're going to piss off the other ones. There shouldn't even be a "group." We're Americans. We're Canadians. If we're all, in some way, part of the problem, then we all need to be included in the solution. Forget "black lives matter" as a slogan -- it should be about elevating everyone, together.
I don’t know, I just kind of say “don’t anybody do shit that is wrong”. Cops, protesters, looters... doesn’t matter who or what the perceived justification is, just don’t. You saying that looting from Walmart is OK because they’re rich and greedy completely ignores the fact that it’s the wrong thing to do. It’s like you’re somehow slut shaming Walmart because they were asking for it. No... the shit-ton of people that shop at Walmart are the ones who enabled them to be rich and “greedy”. Go pick a beef with them.
Congrats on winning an argument against a point literally no one here is making. Then again, we’re not the ones that have to rationalize it. You had said you were scared to leave your house over “Chinese Virus” retaliations against Asians, I don’t see how you can then go and make a justification for violence against other people based on arbitrary circumstances. What criteria do you want to use here? Executive comp? Market cap? Current stock price? Should we be reviewing Board minutes or a company prospectus? If you think I’m defending corporate malfeasance, corruption or exploitation of workers, I’m not, but that’s also not the point. The point is, you can’t justify violence against a group and then expect wholesale, societal reform of violence against another. It jeopardizes the credibility of the entire concept. ...What? You’re even cannibalizing your own previous two previous paragraphs. I agree that the whole, “ALL LIVES MATTER” knee-jerk response is idiotic and unproductive, but whew lad.
Dude, come on. If I said that I didn't give a fuck if someone burned down one of Jeff Bezos's mansions, that doesn't mean I approve of arson. It means that on my list of things I give a fuck about, a crime against someone who would treat that loss like one of us might treat the loss of a $20 bill, is way the fuck down at the bottom. Not caring a crime is being committed and actively advocating that more crimes be committed are two very different things. See, this is where you're not getting it. Right now, people in positions of authority think black lives don't fucking matter. If black lives did matter, people wouldn't be rioting in the streets because the cops killed yet another unarmed, non-resisting black person for no good reason. If we take this to it's logical conclusion, all lives can't matter until the people in authority believe black lives do. The only way you can change the people in authority is to change the minds of the people who vote them into office. Until people recognize that black lives really don't matter to the people in charge, logically, all lives can't matter. This is a load of horseshit. A bunch of black people boycotted buses in Montgomery, Alabama in the 1950's after the death of Emmett Till and the arrest of Rosa Parks. This boycott essentially forced the bus lines into such an economic state that they were forced to allow black people to sit wherever they wanted. If we use your logic, Ms. Parks should have gotten up off her tired ass so a white person could sit down. Then when she got home, she'd write a sternly worded letter to the bus line about the indignity of being forced to give up your seat because of your skin color. And after receiving this letter, the bus line could exclaim how sorry they were, and racism on buses in Montgomery would be over, but still happening everywhere else, for some reason. Instead, after getting the right to desegregated buses, someone fired a shotgun through the front door of Martin Luther King's home. A day later, on Christmas Eve, white men attacked a black teenager as she exited a bus. Four days after that, two buses were fired upon, and a pregnant woman was hit in both legs. A couple of weeks later, bombs destroyed five black churches and the home of one of the few white Montgomerians who had publicly sided with the boycott. All this, just to sit wherever you wanted on a goddamn bus. Knowing that all of these types of events were required for the eventual passing of the Civil Rights Act, would this count as justified violence to you? The goal is to put laws in place that reform policing and drastically curb or completely end systemic racism in the criminal justice system. Is the price of a few looted stores (most of which are insured, by the way) too high to pay to meet that goal?
Maybe the reason you have such a hard time getting along with white people is that instead of addressing them as individuals you constantly approach them as 'white people' with your bullshit preloaded rage induced apoplectic nonsense. There is a word for that. Gee, if only I could think of it. Kind of like how you think white people are afraid to shop in asian stores because they're so racist while you're afraid to shop at stores with white people because they're so racist.
This tweet ( twit ) pisses me off to no end. “Overwhelming force. Domination” Dude, get Putin’s cock out of your mouth. You’re a little, narcissistic pathetic excuse of a human and a disgrace to the office of the Presidency. *In full disclosure I’ve had a couple celebratory cocktails and meant to respond to this earlier.
It's as if I've seen white people treat minorities as singular groups of people instead of as individually. I'm sure Sikhs appreciate being lumped in with Arabs as they're getting the shit kicked out of them by white people. If you're angry because you feel like I'm lumping you in with racist white people, maybe it's because white people have a long long history of ruining the lives and cultures of non-white people since they landed here. Maybe instead of blaming the victims of racism at the hands of white people for calling it out, try telling other white people to stop being racist. Not only is it offensive that you assume I would hate an entire race of human beings, but this idiotic supposition is a false equivalency. There is absolutely zero reason to hate someone based on race. You can absolutely hate a business because they buy blood diamonds or employ 8 year olds to make their shoes. Jesus Christ.
Honestly, what the are you talking about? What does the history of the Civil Rights Movement have to do with firebombing and looting stores by white people co-opting the BLM protests as a means to ostensibly punish corporate greed? That aside, the Rosa Parks example quite literally proves the opposite of the point you’re trying to make. I understand this is a highly emotional issue for everyone, so I’m going to drop it here, but I think there is real reform to make without the idea being hijacked by irrational/violent pseudo-anarchists.
Just look at all this protecting AND serving going on everywhere from your oath-sworn public servants:
Boy your cheese has slid off your cracker. The Montgomery bus boycott was the very definition of peaceful economic protest. To label it violence because it suits your argument, is well, ridiculous. It's a good example too of the stark difference between a focused peaceful protest that had a specific plan to address a specific racist law and this random anger and destruction playing out now. I can get rioting is an expression of frustration and I think up to a certain point understandable to get the over all message out loud and clear. Beyond that with no concrete plans or leaders to articulate a way forward peacefully, violence as a means to an end politically, is the very definition of terrorism.
I've been thinking about the whole black lives matter vs all lives matter idea and I agree with JJ. Individual people are for the most part not racist, or at least not racist in a way where they are openly treating other races in a discriminatory way. The big problem is institutions/representatives haven't caught up to individuals. Until things change, either with individuals pushing institutions to change, or enough institutions deciding to make changes, black lives won't matter. To most people all lives do matter, but to the institutions/people in positions of power, there are lives that are not equal to another. This goes back throughout human history so it's not something unique to America or to black people, but in our country, at this time, it should be the focus. As to the whole protesting/rioting/looting thing, I'm fully in favor of protesting. I personally don't think marching with signs or putting black squares on your social media page is of much value, but to each their own. I think there are more efficient means of protest/boycott which have a greater impact on what is trying to be accomplished. Rioting, I understand. When they over took the police station in MN and burned it to the ground, yeah, I get it. They were striking against an oppressive force at its heart and it felt good to destroy something those people care about. Granted, its tax payer funded and they are obviously going to spend money to rebuild it and outfit it again, but again, I get it. What I don't agree with, but I don't believe there is a good solution for, is going to Herald Square in NYC, looting a Macy's and trying to burn it to the ground. I guess you could make the huge leap people are striking against "The Man", but realistically it's just destruction of property and robbery for no particular reason. The problem with trying to control rioting and looting, to combat it, we are sending in the same police who we've already established under the best of circumstances can barely function in a responsible manner regarding policies and race relations, and we are turning to them to help keep the peace....In what world is this a good solution to the problems we are facing? I'm not in favor of sending in the military either as they are even less equipped to deal with keeping the peace in a way where eliminating the threat isn't the first option. I honestly don't know how you try and quell rioting and looting without force, but what I am sure of is our current course of action isn't cutting it.
Fine. The American Revolution. Can't get anymore justifiably violent than fighting a war against unjust taxation, am I right, fellow Americans? Jesus.
anyone else think it's cool and/or funny how the protesters are policing themselves? They're calling out violent members and in some cases even directly handing them over to police.
And how did they respond to this peaceful economic protest? They: Fined black cab drivers who lowered their prices to match the bus fare. Pressured local insurance companies to cancel the policies on any driver who participated in the carpool. Indicted nearly 90 of the boycott's organizers, and imprisoned King. Firebombed King's house. Burned churches. Even after the city caved, the reprisal did not stop, those opposed to the boycott: Fired a shotgun at King's front door Attacked a teenage girl as she got off a bus Fired shots at a pair of buses with rifles Bombed churches When you say it was "peaceful" what you mean is that the violence was unidirectional.
Not even remotely condoning the looting and destruction of property, but I mean, I get it. Let's be honest - Nothing will change. Have you seen photos/videos of the police? They're not scared. They're having the time of their lives. They get to play with military grade hardware, probably getting paid overtime (or some sort of hazard/extra pay), and get light people up with impunity and with no accountability whatsoever. The looters figure they may as well get some free shit since abso-fucking-lutely nothing will change with the police. Again, I don't agree with it. But what, realistically, is going to change?
Two things: 1. I think the escalation and the riots are to some degree deliberately planned by bad actors to rob the actual movement that has a legitimate bitch. 2. The problem with the protests themselves is that I don’t see a clear, cohesive list of actionable demands. What laws do they want changed or specifically implemented? What civic policies? Who are the people in government they want out? It’s sad that for one of the first times EVERYONE agrees that the movement is legitimate, but there’s no specificities to follow through with. The answer can’t be “listen and learn,” nor can it be “our colonial guilt demands we give you everything you demand because you’re completely right.” Change won’t happen because this outpouring of long felt anger is too vague in its demands.