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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 29, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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
Oct 30, 2020, 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.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 08:52 AM
 
[set curmudgeon_mode=1]
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 05:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
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.
Maybe a touch of straw man going on here, no?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 05:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Right, and usually the stronger side, i. e. the police has more cards to play here
In the US, citizens outnumber the police by over 400:1.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 05:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
In the US, citizens outnumber the police by over 400:1.
I think that phrase perfectly illustrates one of the things probably fundamentally wrong with the US, and from what I’ve read, it sets the tone for police training: that they are “outnumbered”.

It implies that they confront an “enemy”.

The idea of a police force in peacefully civilised democracies is one of a service, representing the state monopoly on violence on behalf of and by mandate of the people. They aren’t “outnumbered” by the people the same way an ice cream salesman isn’t “outnumbered” by his customers, a teacher isn’t “outnumbered” by students, or a pilot isn’t “outnumbered” by his passengers.

That one could even phrase it that way indicates an expectation of conflict, and a tendency to see any interaction on those terms.

That’s a basic misunderstanding of what police *is*.

Obviously, there are situations where this is in fact the case, but the default assumption is a different one.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 06:01 PM
 
The claim was the police are the stronger side.

My response is it isn’t that simple.


Edit: to give an example of what happened here, while the police were assigned to protesters, poor neighborhoods were decimated. All the retail got looted, and there were no cops left to stop it.

It will take those neighborhoods decades to recover. The aldermen in those neighborhoods literally begged for military intervention.
( Last edited by subego; Oct 31, 2020 at 06:22 PM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 07:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
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;
This can be boiled down into two questions.

Has the minority been oppressed enough they are morally justified to riot?
Does the riot help fix the problem?


For the first question, I place the bar for the first higher than everyone here, but let’s say for the sake of argument they do.

With the second, for here, my analysis is it made everything a whole lot worse, which affected my reaction. I’m sure there were other places which fared better.


To quickly address the democracy question, I argue things aren’t anywhere near as bad as is being claimed. To take a few examples...

If gerrymandering is so bad, why do the Democrats control the House?
If by interfering with the Post Office is what was meant by interfering with the election, that was total bullshit. I posted receipts in the relevant thread.
We’ve had the Electoral College system for centuries.
( Last edited by subego; Oct 31, 2020 at 07:25 PM. )
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 07:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If gerrymandering is so bad, why do the Democrats control the House?
Gerrymandering affects:
• State legislature seats
• US House seats
• State judge seats when states elect judges from districts

Gerrymandering does not affect:
• Presidential voting
• Senate voting
• Governors
• Any state seats elected by state-wide majority vote

To answer subego's question, there are typically fewer House seats than state legislative seats. So House seats are coarser. Harder to dial in.

Note that gerrymandering loses impact with demographic changes. People move around, people change opinion. Gerrymandering is most effective right after a Census, and least effective right before the next census.

Trump's curtailing of the census before all the hard-to-reach people are counted will have the unintended effect of diluting gerrymandering attempts next year. The scoundrels will have incomplete population data to work from.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 08:05 PM
 
At the least, does not the Democrats controlling the House show that we still have a functioning democracy on the federal level?

AFAIK, the Census Bureau fills in the gaps.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 10:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
At the least, does not the Democrats controlling the House show that we still have a functioning democracy on the federal level?
No, not really. Gerrymandering does give the GOP an advantage in the House, too, so the Democrats have less seats in the House than state-by-state popular votes would suggest. This effect is weaker in the House than the Senate, where the median state is Georgia. That's why losing women is so dangerous for the GOP: you can't gerrymander your way out of it.

Moreover, my criteria for whether democracy is functioning are not as narrow. The US political system has become increasingly dysfunctional. Regular budgets (as opposed to continuing resolutions) are rare. Proper big laws are rare. There have been no constitutional amendments in decades. And the people who are in government now are the C-Team.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
AFAIK, the Census Bureau fills in the gaps.
And the GOP put its finger on the scale there, too. House seats are apportioned by population (i. e. independent of citizenship), and their recent census shenanigans were designed to lower those numbers.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If gerrymandering is so bad, why do the Democrats control the House?
If by interfering with the Post Office is what was meant by interfering with the election, that was total bullshit. I posted receipts in the relevant thread.
Election interference by the GOP isn't a single measure, it isn't just the post office. It is a concerted effort that includes gerrymandering, makes people stand in line for hours on end to vote*, suppress true population numbers in the census, onerous voter id laws (which in some places excludes student ids but includes hunting licenses, wonder why), … 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
We’ve had the Electoral College system for centuries.
The Electoral College is a product of the political realities, technology and values at the time of its invention. The large gap between the election and the inauguration is a direct consequence that the fastest way to travel at the time was on horseback. The people were not trusted to vote for the President directly, and electors were seen as a safety valve to prevent the election of an unqualified person to the offices of President and Vice President. And importantly, when the US was founded, 95 % of the population was rural, so the voter distribution was quite different than it is now where as of the 2010 census only roughly 20 % are living in rural areas. When there was talk that some faithful electors shall prevent the election of Donald Trump in 2016, this was rebuked as undemocratic — and for good reason. And the issue of slavery had an impact, too.

Many of these assumptions no longer hold true. The Ford Model T, as revolutionary as it was at the time it was built, is no longer a match for a Tesla Model 3.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Oct 31, 2020 at 10:31 PM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 10:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
In the US, citizens outnumber the police by over 400:1.
Police has the government monopoly on violence, which puts them in a different position. It is literally their job to protect demonstrators who are protesting against them.

The police could have done a lot to prevent a lot of rioting and violence, there are clear proven methods to deescalate the situation. And there are proven methods to escalate.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 10:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Gerrymandering affects: […] Trump's curtailing of the census before all the hard-to-reach people are counted will have the unintended effect of diluting gerrymandering attempts next year. The scoundrels will have incomplete population data to work from.
Very good and accurate summary.
And I would add that it is not only gerrymandering, but a concerted effort of a whole host of measures. I find it shocking how long it takes to vote in the US, how many people can afford to spend 5+ hours in a queue just to vote. You have to be really motivated. Voting should be easy.
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Note that gerrymandering loses impact with demographic changes. People move around, people change opinion. Gerrymandering is most effective right after a Census, and least effective right before the next census.
Not just that, the loss of support amongst women is very dangerous as there is no way for the GOP to gerrymander against that. I really don't get it.

Conservatives in some other countries are changing — slowly. In Germany, one of the early contenders to replace Merkel was a very conservative gay politician, who is currently heading the efforts to fight the Covid-19 pandemic. His sexual orientation is no longer an issue (for the most part, one of the front runners can't imagine having a gay chancellor, which really hurt him). If conservatives realized that many recent immigrants-turned-German-citizens had very conservative social views, they'd have another pool of voters on their hands. I see similar trends in the US.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 11:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Police has the government monopoly on violence, which puts them in a different position. It is literally their job to protect demonstrators who are protesting against them.

The police could have done a lot to prevent a lot of rioting and violence, there are clear proven methods to deescalate the situation. And there are proven methods to escalate.
The question is who wields more power.

When the protesters outnumber the police by an order of magnitude, the protesters wield more power.

The protesters wield even more power if they’re armed. Rather ironic those most worried about government oppression hate the idea.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 11:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
No, not really.
Just so we’re clear, your claim is the US is not a functioning democracy?
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 11:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Just so we’re clear, your claim is the US is not a functioning democracy?
If I were cheeky (and conflate system of governance with system of government), I’d reply that the US is a republic and not a democracy.

But yes, I don’t think the US is a healthy, fully functional democracy. This isn’t exactly new and based on my feelings and impressions, studies of political scientists came to the same conclusion years earlier.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 31, 2020, 11:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The question is who wields more power.

When the protesters outnumber the police by an order of magnitude, the protesters wield more power.
During protests, perhaps, although I would say most protestors don’t intend to get into violent contact with the police in the first place. Once the protests stop, the power balance tips very much in favor of the police and prosecutors.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The protesters wield even more power if they’re armed. Rather ironic those most worried about government oppression hate the idea.
That completely ignores that armed PoC are treated very differently from armed white people in the US. Imagine if armed BLM activists were to occupy Kentucky’s legislature. That’d lead to a blood bath.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 12:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
If I were cheeky (and conflate system of governance with system of government), I’d reply that the US is a republic and not a democracy.

But yes, I don’t think the US is a healthy, fully functional democracy. This isn’t exactly new and based on my feelings and impressions, studies of political scientists came to the same conclusion years earlier.
The cutoff for full democracy is above 8.0. The US is at 7.96 as of 2019. So, we’re splitting five-hundredths of a hair. I feel safe calling our democracy ”functioning”, which was my claim.

For those keeping track at home, Japan is 7.99.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 12:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
During protests, perhaps
How the police behave during protests is what’s being discussed.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 12:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
That completely ignores that armed PoC are treated very differently from armed white people in the US. Imagine if armed BLM activists were to occupy Kentucky’s legislature. That’d lead to a blood bath.
If we’re talking about the same event, that was the “occupy” equivalent of a shitpost. BLM wouldn’t even be remotely equivalent.

If PoC want to have their own 2A lovefest at the Kentucky capitol, no one’s getting killed.

Seriously. A get-together of 500 people with rifles intent on having a good time is like the safest place in the country.
( Last edited by subego; Nov 1, 2020 at 12:56 AM. )
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 01:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The cutoff for full democracy is above 8.0. The US is at 7.96 as of 2019. So, we’re splitting five-hundredths of a hair. I feel safe calling our democracy ”functioning”, which was my claim.
This is not about rounding errors and the US being just barely in the functioning bucket. My point is that the US, as the first modern democracy, should be nowhere near where it is now.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
For those keeping track at home, Japan is 7.99.
And that's about accurate. Japan has been effectively under one-party rule since WW2, and many organs of state have become organ of the LDP, the ruling party. Especially after March 11th, 2011, press freedom has been curtailed significantly, Japan dropped to one of the countries with the freest press (as measured by the press freedom index), placed 11th in 2010, to currently 66th. The previous prime minister was the only first-world country head whose Covid response was less popular than Trump's. The Abe administration had tons of large scandals that also the current prime minister has been involved in (including preventing a pro-Abe journalist from being taken into custody and tried for rape). I can go on, but that'd derail the thread.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 01:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
How the police behave during protests is what’s being discussed.
You realize that the protests have been sparked by excessive police on people of color, and one of the main themes of the protests. So I don't think you can separate the two.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If PoC want to have their own 2A lovefest at the Kentucky capitol, no one’s getting killed.
I don't think this is borne out by the evidence we have.
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
Nov 1, 2020, 07:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
This can be boiled down into two questions.

Has the minority been oppressed enough they are morally justified to riot?
Does the riot help fix the problem?


For the first question, I place the bar for the first higher than everyone here, but let’s say for the sake of argument they do.
What does your bar look like then?

Originally Posted by subego View Post
With the second, for here, my analysis is it made everything a whole lot worse.
Worse for who?


Originally Posted by subego View Post
To quickly address the democracy question, I argue things aren’t anywhere near as bad as is being claimed. To take a few examples...

If gerrymandering is so bad, why do the Democrats control the House?
I'm just speculating, but maybe its because the Republicans are so awful that even severe cheating doesn't guarantee them a win.


Originally Posted by subego View Post
If by interfering with the Post Office is what was meant by interfering with the election, that was total bullshit. I posted receipts in the relevant thread.
We’ve had the Electoral College system for centuries.
The post office, gerrymandering, voter ID laws, spurious legal tactics. I read this morning that Republicans in Harris County, Texas have asked a federal judge to throw out 117,000 legit ballots from a heavily democrat area because they were cast in drive-through polling stations. It sounds like there is a fair to good chance the judge they asked will go for it too.






Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
The Electoral College is a product of the political realities, technology and values at the time of its invention.
Most of your laws were written when lawmakers were sane, rational people who respected science and logic and had a sense of honour and fairness borne out of perceived oppression. Present day Republicans are literally the absolute opposite of all these traits.


Originally Posted by subego View Post
The question is who wields more power.

When the protesters outnumber the police by an order of magnitude, the protesters wield more power.
I don't think this is remotely true.
I read earlier that police in North Carolina basically attacked a peaceful protest/march to vote with pepper spray. A march that included children as young as five. The marchers were prevented from casting their votes close to the end of their march. Some were arrested including a journalist covering the event. This would be unthinkable in the UK and I would argue that our democracy is not functioning. Not functioning well at any rate.


Originally Posted by subego View Post
Just so we’re clear, your claim is the US is not a functioning democracy?
It really doesn't look like one.

Originally Posted by subego View Post
Seriously. A get-together of 500 people with rifles intent on having a good time is like the safest place in the country.
Indisputably true if its 500 white people. Possibly true if its 500 black people but for very different reasons. And we all know the cops would very badly want to do something about it if it were black people. Which is the problem.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
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
Nov 1, 2020, 10:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Maybe a touch of straw man going on here, no?
I'm not saying that's what you believe or have said, but those are 100% arguments used against BLM protests. Of the 40 desks in my office area, 35 of them have literal Trump flags flying on them, and the rest minus literally one guy agree with Trump but just haven't gotten their hands on a flag. There are Trump Troll dolls, campaign paraphernalia, Trump 2020 face masks, and "Union Workers for Trump" signs plastered everywhere. I know for sure I was the only 2012 Obama vote in my immediate family, and only in 2016 did some (but not all) of my wife's immediate family of lifelong Republicans vote D. My little sister and parents are still very ardent Trump supporters, my other sister may vote Biden, but I'm not sure. I don't live in a bubble, I am very familiar with what Trump's base believes and the arguments they use to justify their beliefs.

Originally Posted by subego View Post
The claim was the police are the stronger side.

My response is it isn’t that simple.
You're inside of this:



How many protestors have to be outside of it before you're worried?

Edit: to give an example of what happened here, while the police were assigned to protesters, poor neighborhoods were decimated. All the retail got looted, and there were no cops left to stop it.

It will take those neighborhoods decades to recover. The aldermen in those neighborhoods literally begged for military intervention.
I doesn't even take the tiniest stretch of the imagination to believe the police response (or lack thereof) was on purpose. "Let them burn it down."

https://www.aclu-il.org/en/press-rel...ices-south-and
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 03:13 PM
 
Kyle Ritterhouse.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 05:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Kyle Ritterhouse.
I haven’t reviewed the evidence, so I don’t feel I can provide an informed comment.
     
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
Nov 1, 2020, 07:01 PM
 
The day after that happened, a cop on the BMW forums I visit already had a full infographic showing pictures and alleged criminal records of the protestors that were shot and killed, prepared specifically to make sure everyone knew that the people who had just been murdered exercising their constitutional rights deserved it because they were BAD PEOPLE. And that the young Republican hero was doing a good job of serving his country and was the VICTIM of VIOLENT RIOTERS.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 1, 2020, 08:30 PM
 
I’ve heard the BAD PEOPLE part.

There’s an argument it’s irrelevant, but I much prefer more information than less.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 05:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’ve heard the BAD PEOPLE part.

There’s an argument it’s irrelevant, but I much prefer more information than less.

The purpose of information is as important as the information itself. In this case the information is irrelevant as notionally "BAD PEOPLE" have the same rights as GOOD PEOPLE. The purpose of this information is to undermine that, to essentially divide and conquer. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone is a useful in the opposite direction to the traditional usage as is "You only have something to fear if you have done something wrong". Eventually if a government moves too far left or right we have all done something wrong.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 05:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
In the US, citizens outnumber the police by over 400:1.
In the UK it's 211 police per 100,000 people and that's without (generally) guns, which makes it more obvious here that policing works only when it is with the consent of the people.
For a LOT of the time US police look very very far from that concept. In literally a decade you have managed to elevate police officers to a level of equipment that most special forces operatives would be in awe of.
But that still won't help once the poplulation withdraws its consent. I guess its done wonders for the balance sheets of the weapons system supplier however. It's liker a whole second defence budget opened up.

Also, if it were my country I would rather aim for healthy democracy rather than "within a hairs breadth of making it out of the not functioning bracket but marginally better than Japan league.

Fixing the money would fix 90% of your problems it seems
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 05:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
In the UK it's 211 police per 100,000 people and that's without (generally) guns, which makes it more obvious here that policing works only when it is with the consent of the people.
I think small crime policing is a thing that is actually extremely successful in Japan. They have very small police stations literally everywhere, and are part of the community. In touristic areas, police will take care of people when they are lost or so. They call it community policing. While police are generally armed, it is exceedingly rare that they have to use violence. Apart from umbrella theft (yes, really), it is stupefying how careless you can be. People literally leave their smartphones (think $1,000 iPhone) on the table as a reminder that the table is taken. If it is gone, then the staff will likely have kept it for you. A lot of Americans talk about how free it is for you to be able to own guns, but I'd counter they don't know the feeling of freedom that comes from feeling totally safe while being completely unarmed. Of course, no country is perfect, and the Japanese criminal system has a lot of thorns, but when it comes to small crimes, their solution is worth looking into.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 09:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
The purpose of information is as important as the information itself. In this case the information is irrelevant as notionally "BAD PEOPLE" have the same rights as GOOD PEOPLE. The purpose of this information is to undermine that, to essentially divide and conquer.
There's no solution to this other than suppressing information. It should be self evident information suppression comes with its own Pandora’s Box of problems.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 10:52 AM
 
Which information are we suppressing again?

If people who had done past bad things are in a public space and executed by someone, that execution is excused on the assumption that they will have done more bad things... then we have achieved Minority Report levels of future dystopia. Everyone is a precog.
( Last edited by andi*pandi; Nov 2, 2020 at 11:16 AM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 11:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Which information are we suppressing again?

If people who had done past bad things are automatically approved for execution on the assumption that they will do more bad things... then we have achieved Minority Report levels of future dystopia. Everyone is a precog.
I’m confused by this post. Where did automatic approval for execution come from?
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 11:16 AM
 
rephrased.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 2, 2020, 11:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
rephrased.
Thank you!

Maybe I’m missing something, but the primary questions are whether Rittenhouse provoked the attack, and whether he was in fear for his life.

To answer requires judging state of mind. Does not past behavior figure into this?
     
 
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 04:24 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.,