Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods
Wolvenbear wrote:The past year has shown we are a nation of hypocrites. One side excuses the violent Floyd riots, because they're black while the other side objects. Then the objectors riot over an election, and the defenders of the original riots object.
The people who objected to both are a very tiny minority indeed.
In general, for Hegel, morality requires that a person seek to further the good of the community, having a care for unforeseeable consequences of their action and to participate in the life of the community, having regard to rights and duties which are not of their own personal creation, but are products of the community. The law, as Hegel sees it, has developed historically, and on the whole is a repository of objective wisdom that is beyond what is available to the individual, subjective judgment. But there are two exceptions to Hegel’s conservatism.
Hegel does not see law and custom as standing still, but on the contrary constantly changing in response to the changing practices of the community and external pressures. How does this change take place? Even though Hegel sees the educated elite as having responsibility for social reform, “philosophy cannot teach the state what it should be” and nor can social reformers. Law changes in response to disasters which expose weaknesses in existing law. So for example, restrictions on the supply of untested drugs were introduced in response to the thalidomide tragedy. This observation does not take away from the fact that such responses are mediated by social movements. But laws also change in response to crime. When there is a bad law, or a bad government, people break the law as part of challenging the status quo. Does the martyr do good if for example a bad law is repealed or a bad government falls as a result of their criminal action? History will answer that, but Hegel does insist that in breaking the law, the criminal must recognize that the punishment they receive is part of their own action, and as such is just. That is the price of civil disobedience.
Hegel goes further than this. He was an ardent admirer of Napoleon and he introduced the category of ‘hero’ into his social theory having Napoleon in mind. He recognized that sweeping changes like the abolition of the feudal relics in Germany and the introduction of the Code napoleon could only be made by heroes — individuals who acted as instruments of the Idea, History if you like — with a ‘higher right’, to sweep away old institutions and create new ones, and these heroes would necessarily, by lights of their own community, do wrong, even evil and what is more would generally not be thanked by posterity either. Hegel talks about the role of heroes in founding new states out of a state of nature, but also (PR §351) that the same considerations apply where, for example, ‘civilized’ nations trample on the rights of ‘barbarians’, and pastoral people treat hunters and gatherers in the same way. In other words, where an historic leap in state form, such as that posed between hunter-gathers and pastoral peoples or between pastoral peoples and ‘civilized’ states, and so presumably between capitalism and socialism, then this can only be achieved by ‘rightful’ coercion and sweeping aside the old laws.
Steve_American wrote:Yeah exactly, like isn't it obviuos that the 2 cases are close to the same?
If I see a 5 year old playing in the street, and I run out into the street, grap his arm, and dislocate his shoulder; that sounds really bad. Unitl you review the video and see the Mach truck speed by a fraction of a seconf later.
The context matters. One group of riots was in response to true facts over many decades. The other was in response to a big lie. In my analogy, it is like the video showed a 9" long radio controlled car was going to collide with the child.
tomskunk wrote:Love Dave Chappelle's take on the rioters who stormed the capital. I agree with Don Lemon's view of Dave Chappelle's take too.
Racism is a factor in many police murders and accounts for the fact that blacks and Native Americans are killed at a rate disproportionate to their share of the national population. However, a previous analysis of police violence data by the World Socialist Web Site found that when the economic and social demographics of the cities and counties where people are killed by police are taken into account, the glaring racial disparities that are the focus of the media and the Democrats largely disappear.
Overwhelmingly, it is workers and young people—of every skin color, gender, sexuality and national origin—who are the victims of the police. This phenomenon is an outgrowth of the social and economic conditions in the United States.
The police, as Frederick Engels noted, are “special bodies of armed men” created to defend the capitalist system and the inequality it creates. Many officers are veterans of the last three decades of imperialist war in the Middle East, and police departments have been equipped and trained to use the weapons of war. With experience in counterinsurgency, they are conditioned to kill. The police are the first line of defense against the working class, deployed by the capitalists to police discontent in impoverished neighborhoods, suppress protests and break strikes.
Ending police violence requires putting an end to the capitalist order which the police defend. The protest against police violence and racism must be infused with a class consciousness. The killing will only end when the working class takes power for itself on the basis of a socialist program, reorganizing society to meet its needs, not those of the capitalist elite that dominates society.
Wolvenbear wrote:What a surprise, You apologize for criminal scumbags looting and burning down black businesses and properties to screw whitie. These people did what they did because they are human filth who look for any excuse to prey on their neighbors. But who cares that almost 100% of the victims were blacks. Who cares that tens of thousands of jobs were lost, livelihoods ruined, and neighborhoods destroyed. We were speaking truth to power.
That you argue we should ignore the very real human consequences to the George Floyd riots because the rioters had good motives (none of them did) shows how very little character you have.
Your inane comparison to driving couldn't be farther off, as the ACTUAL consequences of the George Floyd riot were worse. You have the guy who goes out for angry driving, and runs over a group of kids playing soccer because he's mad at his boss and doesn't care about the rules of the road, versus a drunk who drives into a tree and kills himself. Both parties meant to break the law. Both parties didn't care about the effects of their actions. But because you deem one motive worse than the other, it excuses the fact that the "better" motive has worse results.
Leftists really are terrible people.
Steve_American wrote:He and I just live in different realities.
In his reality the Jan. 6th "demonstratio" was not violent even though 1 cop was killed and we all saw the violence. OTOH, in his reality 100% (he said 100% above) of the George Floyd "rioters" were there to destroy property and/or kill people.
In my reality the Jan 6th riot had 2 groups of people. Those who entered the Capitol and those who didn't. IMO those who entered the Capitol were violent and intended to change the result of a fair election that Trump lost with violence. Those who didn't enter the Capitol were almost all non-violent. OTOH, of all the George Floyd demonstrations 97% had no poperty distruction to speak of. AFAIK, 99.9% of the demonstrators in the other 3% of the cases were non-violent and didn't loot of burn buildings. They were often a mile or more away from the burning buidings.
. . . Also, as I have said the most celebrated example of a demonstration in American history included the dumping of 1.5M dollars worth of tea into Boston harbor. And this was more like 25M worth if adjusted for inflation or the size of the economy of the time. The Founding Fathers dumped tea to make their point. The problem now is that the peaceful "take a knee protests" gained nothing and were attacked resulting in players losing their jobs. There is little or no evidence that the organizers or leaders of the BLM protests planned the violence, looting, or arson. There is a ton of evidence that the Jan. 6th leaders did plan the violence, and they came prpared with non-gun weapons, and some may have had guns if they had been arrested (searched) instead of allowed to go home. I would bet my life that at least one guy did carry a gun into the Capitol. But, this is just my opinon as we likely will never know for sure, although someone may be 'turned' and say that he knows that some did carry a gun in.
In my reality the Trump supporters who are firm racists are terrible people who don't grok the key element of the Founding of America. As George Will said decades ago, 'all one has to do to become an American is to come here and subscribe to the words in the Decelarstion of Independence'. That, "All men [and now women] are create equal", period.
. . . Just like the Nazis, they are fine with ranking some people as less equal (or even subhuman) AS LONG AS THEY, THEMSELVES, ARE AT THE TOP. They don't grok that souls are sent at random from whereever souls come from and it is just an accident that they are 'white'. [end metaphor]
Wolvenbear wrote:What a fascinating rebuttal of nothing ever said. In fact, I actually said the contrary, but whatever.
In reality, you have defended riots that killed dozens of poor innocent black people because...you're a racist I guess. In rebuttal you point to a rioter being killed, which is actually a net postive. Ashli Babbit was a terrible human being and her death during the commission of a violent crime is a good thing.
That you equate the death of a criminal to the losses of innocent people shows again you're a [redacted] person.
NathanJenkins wrote:Leave it to Dave to point out the glaring hypocrisy in how cultures are treated in the US.
It still amazes me that people are calling insurrectionists who murdered a police officer "peaceful protestors".
That amazes me too. Especially by people who claim to "love the police" and "support our law enforcement." One cop remarked about Trump supporters that surrounded him to protect him from other rioters during the riot after shouting "I have kids!" and he said "Thank you...but fuck you for being there" during his interview that started around the 2:00 mark of the video. I guess that's one way of putting it.
...snip the link...
Steve_American wrote:I am not a 'bad' person.
Also, can he read? I didn't refer to the death of Ashli Babbit at all.
I was corrected by someone, that the one cop's death (that I did refer to) was ruled to be from 'natural causes' and maybe that his injuries recieved during the riot did *not* contribute to the blood clots that killed him with 2 strokes. It is early, so we will have to see the final word, so 'maybe' it really was just a coincidence.
Steve_American wrote: The context matters. One group of riots was in response to true facts over many decades. The other was in response to a big lie. In my analogy, it is like the video showed a 9" long radio controlled car was going to collide with the child.
PNAS(Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA) wrote:
Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups. Black women and men and American Indian and Alaska Native women and men are significantly more likely than white women and men to be killed by police. Latino men are also more likely to be killed by police than are white men.
The Drug War, Mass Incarceration and Race wrote:People of color experience discrimination at every stage of the judicial system and are more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, convicted, harshly sentenced, and saddled with a lifelong criminal record. This is particularly the case for drug law violations. Black people comprise 13 percent of the U.S. population and are consistently documented by the U.S. government to use drugs at similar rates to people of other races. But Black people comprise 29 percent of those arrested for drug law violations and nearly 40 percent of those incarcerated in state or federal prison for drug law violations.
Similarly, Latinos make up 18 percent of the U.S. population but comprise 38 percent of people incarcerated in federal prisons for drug offenses.14 In 2013, Latinos comprised almost half (47 percent) of all cases in federal courts for drug offenses. National-level data on arrests of people of Latino ethnicity are incomplete. Yet among drug arrest incidents in 2015 in which ethnicity was reported, more than 20 percent of those arrested were Latino. State and local level data show that Latinos are disproportionately arrested and incarcerated for drug possession violations.
noemon wrote:I would use the term protests not riots and you are absolutely correct.
Trumpists were protesting in favour of sedition which is not a good enough reason for anything.
BLM is protesting for the human rights of Black people in the US.
Racist trolls trying to equate the 2 while at the same time accusing you of racism is quite hilarious but transparent.
Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police in the US.
Black people 40% of those arrested for drug violations.
Local protests in the Minneapolis–Saint Paul metropolitan area quickly spread nationwide in more than 2,000 cities and towns, as well as over 60 countries internationally in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. In Minneapolis, destruction of property began on May 26, 2020, with the protests involving vandalism and arson. "Demonstrations in many other cities also descended into riots and widespread looting. There was significant police brutality against protesters and journalists.
The majority of the George Floyd protests, a series of protests and unrest which began in Minneapolis, Minnesota in the United States on May 26, 2020, in response to the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis Police Department officer Derek Chauvin, were peaceful; an estimated 93%–96.3% of demonstrations were peaceful and nondestructive, involving no injuries or no property damage. However, police made arrests in about 5% of protest events (deploying chemical irritants in 2.5% of events); 3.7% of protest events were associated with property damage or vandalism (including damages by persons not involved in the actual demonstration); and protesters or bystanders were injured or killed in 1.6% of events. Clashes and other forms of violence were at various times initiated by protestors, by counterprotestors, and by police, and were usually driven by opportunistic criminals rather than organized extremist groups."
Steve_American wrote:Thank you for the support.
Some of the BLM protests did become riots in some parts of the city. Not the entire group of protestors.
(Middle edited for space, and because not relevant)
In summary, scale matters.
Wolvenbear wrote:There is no definition of scale which helps you. The BLM riots were worse by any metric than the Capitol riots. Only by dishonestly lumping in the criminal actions with the peaceful protests can you hope to make a case.
If, after George Floyd's death, rioters had stormed police stations and attacked cops, I would be unable to argue your point about fighting oppression. There would be an obvious connection between Floyd's criminal murder and the response. Instead looters robbed black businesses, destroyed black property, and injured black people. You fight oppression by fighting the oppressors, not by killing the oppressed. "I will protest the murder of a black man by murdering another black man" is preposterous. Shall I protest child molestation by killing a child? Perhaps I shall protest rape by raping someone?
When you openly state what happened the liberal narrative is lunacy. Look at it from the other side. Pretend you are a racist white who wants all blacks dead. One of yours kills a black person....and they respond by killing 19 of THEIR OWN (not yours). Retalation is attacking the enemy in response to an attack on yourself. Killing one of your own in response to an attack....is an incentive for the enemy to attack again. There's a reason that racist cops ran out in force once the protests became peaceful and started beating blacks in large numbers. They were hoping for a repeat.
No matter how we look at it, your position is indefensible. You are justifying the victimization of innocent black people, no matter how you wish to label it.
The West has lost dynamism. It has become a museum[…]
Do you have a link for this? https://www.politi[…]
So what *HAS* Israel actually done to this end? A[…]
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled unanimously for[…]