Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Pol Lounge General News Thread of "This doesn't deserve it's own thread"

Pol Lounge General News Thread of "This doesn't deserve it's own thread" (Page 55)
Thread Tools
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2020, 11:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Is it ever moral to riot?
My off-the-cuff answer:

It can be if we define rioting as the parts directly attacking the state, but I’d place the bar pretty high in a functioning, western democracy.

Looting and lighting random shit on fire? Probably not.
( Last edited by subego; Oct 28, 2020 at 11:22 PM. )
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 28, 2020, 11:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It depends.

I can’t suppress them on any large scale. They’re my morals. Morals are highly resistant to suppression.

I try my best to do it here, if only because when I don’t, you’re all batshit aliens to me. That’s how morals work. Morals in strong opposition to our own appear batshit.
I don't think this is how morals work in most other people I know, including people whose core moral beliefs differ from mine in important places. I don't think I have heard people say that they “have to” “suppress their morals” before, and I do not really know what you mean by that.

Usually, people suppress feelings, not morals. Something that runs counter to your moral values might cause strong feelings, e. g. anger and rage might boil up if you see something that you think is immoral or unjust. And perhaps you can suppress those feelings that arise as a result of your morals and values, but if that is what is going on inside of you, I would not call this suppressing your morals.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 06:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
My off-the-cuff answer:

It can be if we define rioting as the parts directly attacking the state, but I’d place the bar pretty high in a functioning, western democracy.

Looting and lighting random shit on fire? Probably not.
Don't forget looters are opportunists. They were typically never interested in whatever the riot is protesting.
When you protest peacefully and are still either dispersed by the police (despite your right to protest peacefully) or worse attacked by them, what avenues do you have left? When its the police themselves you are protesting against, what other options do you have? When the status quo means you are many-fold more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, beaten and shot because of the colour of your skin? And those discriminating against you in this way are likely to get away scot-free any time you don't riot about it?

When you are being oppressed as a minority and your protests addressing the state are ignored or shut down by the cops (or both - these issues have persisted for many years now) damaging the property of other citizens causes them to apply pressure to the state and to lawmakers to address your concerns. Its scary and inconvenient and disruptive but look at the previous list of complaints they are protesting about and then understand that thats how the tactic can work.

Finally you have one party out of only two who regularly wields absolute power despite getting fewer votes, has stacked/stolen the supreme court, has taken gerrymandering to brazen new levels that would put some dictators to shame (if they actually had to resort to such things), consistently and horrifyingly conspires to put up obstacles to those who would vote against them and has been making noises about stealing the next election for the past few years and you call that a functioning democracy?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 09:38 AM
 
I’m not going to answer 9+ questions delivered in a tone which demonstrates no interest whatsoever in my reply.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 09:43 AM
 
But why are you a bad person?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 10:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
But why are you a bad person?
I’m supposed to have a reason?

Shit.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 10:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Don't forget looters are opportunists. They were typically never interested in whatever the riot is protesting.
When you protest peacefully and are still either dispersed by the police (despite your right to protest peacefully) or worse attacked by them, what avenues do you have left? When its the police themselves you are protesting against, what other options do you have? When the status quo means you are many-fold more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, beaten and shot because of the colour of your skin? And those discriminating against you in this way are likely to get away scot-free any time you don't riot about it?
This exactly.

Looting in general is shit and not a political statement.

And beyond the looting, there are "hobby" rioters — we get them here in Hamburg every May 1st, and their interest isn't in the politics of protest; they're jerks from the suburban belt who just like setting shit on fire. A few years ago, our local left-wing groups once made a point of explicitly leaving Hamburg on May 1st for the demonstrations in Berlin. The police figured that with all the "extremists" out of town, the night would be a quiet one in Hamburg and didn't bother gearing up like they do every year; there was no change in rioting at all that year. Point made.

In an actual political context, rioting is a last refuge of those whose peaceful protest has gone unheard for too long. And as that — a last refuge, I think there is some justification to it.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 11:47 AM
 
One's abhorrence of riots is directly proportionate to who one thinks is causing it, and their motives.

No one likes riots for riotings own sake except anarchists, people looking to score free stuff,
and people with hidden motives (causing blame, instigation, paid).

People are angry, because people are being killed for stupid reasons. If sign holding and chants are no longer effective, where can that anger be channeled? Is anger justified? Do riots help serve the cause?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 04:48 PM
 
I post this Hunter Biden text only to marvel it didn’t crash iMessage.



OMG... just shut up, shut up, SHUT UP.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 04:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
My off-the-cuff answer:

It can be if we define rioting as the parts directly attacking the state, but I’d place the bar pretty high in a functioning, western democracy.

Looting and lighting random shit on fire? Probably not.
This makes sense.

I’d put forth that torching police stations and patrol cars is exactly that and not at all “random”.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 05:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
This makes sense.

I’d put forth that torching police stations and patrol cars is exactly that and not at all “random”.
The police are agents of the state, so police and police property unquestionably fit under the umbrella of directly attacking the state.

The reason I set a high bar are the countless vectors for it to turn into a feedback loop. I know it sounds cliche, but violence really does beget violence.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 06:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’m not going to answer 9+ questions delivered in a tone which demonstrates no interest whatsoever in my reply.
Seems like a bit of a cop-out on the basis you can have a strong opinion and apparently I'm unreasonable or closed-minded if I have one but lets distill it to the key points:

Rioters are made up of
Oppressed minorities rioting as a last resort, Anarchists, Opportunist looters/thieves and Antagonists framing the legitimate rioters for things they aren't doing;

Destruction of property is a tactic to force the un-oppressed majority to apply pressure to fix the oppression being conducted by the state and its agents;

Your democracy isn't functioning because one party (typically the one with higher representation among law enforcement and the aforementioned antagonists) has for decades undermined democracy and cheated to steal elections and their behaviour in that regard has only escalated in recent times and continues to do so.

Now you only have three main points to address and a small number of sub-points regarding the demographics of the rioters. You can probably ignore the one about functional democracy if you really want as that could be a thread in itself.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 08:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
and apparently I'm unreasonable or closed-minded if I have one
Absolutely not! I welcome your strong opinions. I wouldn’t be here if not for them.

The only thing I found unreasonable about the post was the number of heated points I was expected to address all at once. Be opinionated. Be angry even. Just give me a fair shot by pacing it.

I’ll (gladly) answer your compressed set of questions, but I wanted to address this immediately.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 09:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The reason I set a high bar are the countless vectors for it to turn into a feedback loop. I know it sounds cliche, but violence really does beget violence.
Sure, and each side will blame the other for escalation. Cops come out in SWAT gear to stare down and/or pepper spray the peaceful protests. Political leaders deny protestors' constitutional right to assemble and protest and use state violence to enforce it. So protestors, defending their founding-fathers-given-right to assemble, don gas masks and prepare to continue to have the state use violence to deny them their constitutional rights.

I wonder how some of these people complaining about the BLM protests would have reacted to the Boston Tea Party? A bunch of young troublemakers destroying property, inciting violence, causing trouble. $1.7 million in property damage. Why couldn't they just protest peacefully? Why can't they just stay out of my way and not bother me with their nonsense? Protest all you want, just don't inconvenience me or make your voice heard.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 02:24 PM
 
All I needed to see was a bunch of white guys with rifles and handguns storm the Michigan statehouse, yell and spit at police officers, and no shots fired, no arrests made... and compare it to any other protest (seattle especially) involving black people where the slightest transgression can be cause for police brutality. That really spelled out white privilege to me. (And I hate that term but here it applies)
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Today, 09:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The reason I set a high bar are the countless vectors for it to turn into a feedback loop. I know it sounds cliche, but violence really does beget violence.
Right, and usually the stronger side, i. e. the police has more cards to play here. For example, on the morning the situation escalated in Santiago, I took the subway and everything looked perfectly normal — except that there were policemen in full riot gear at every subway stop. The previous days the protests were small and as hippie-dippie peaceful as you can think: students were discussing in the parks of the university, etc. etc. So I didn’t think much of it at the time, even though I should have. By the time I wanted to return to my AirBnB tear gas canisters were flying (one literally missed my head by a meter).

The difference in how police can show restraint when protestors are armed, white militia members who have illegally entered state legislatures compared with how little they seem to display when the protestors are on the streets to fight for a cause that police, on average, does not seem to have a lot of sympathy for. I get the impression, some parts of the police force enjoy letting go of all restraints and make matters worse. To punish people when they can. Even if that is only true of a small sliver of the force, these police officers will have the same impact rioters have: they color an entire organization.

The other point is also expectations: I think the militia members expected they could enter the state legislatures without the situation escalating. So while they “looked” more dangerous, they knew their risk was actually lower. On the other hand, if you expect the situation to escalate, both sides approach it very differently. At least on the side of the BLM protestors I don’t think many want to put themselves in harms way. Especially once panic sets in (because e. g. a car, a truck or even a police car runs into a crowd), crowds get very difficult to control.

The fact that there have been instances of police cars running into crowds, pepper spraying protestors and violence for no discernible reason solidifies the feelings many protestors and members of the police have: they are on opposing sides, the other the is the enemy. Except that this isn’t a war and members of police are supposed to be servants of the people — all people. Police and other parts of government only have power if the people feel that government is legitimate and represents them. (That’s the iceberg the US political system is heading for more broadly …)
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:18 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,