calumnus said:

---

---

SF City, your post is too filled with misinformation, cherry-picked anecdotes, misleading statistics and implicit and explicit racism for me to address it all.

Let me just say, that our rights as citizens to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are meaningless if agents of the government can take your life without due process or consequence. The issue of police brutality and abuse of power/force overlaps police racism to a large degree. For 400-500 years the police have been an enforcer of slavery, segregation and oppression. Moreover, poverty did not begin with the few inadequate and flawed programs meant to address it that were implemented in the late 1960s and largely dismantled in the 1980s and then replaced in 1996. There have been demonstrations and riots against police brutality and racism for over 100 years with little change. You bring up the racist red herring of "blacks killing blacks" but the system does a pretty good job of arresting and convicting African Americans for crimes committed and even crimes many are later exonerated from. We imprison more people than any other country and even kill quite a few. How many police officers have ever been charged, let alone convicted of murder? Even wrongful death? Even brutality? Served more than a token amount of time? Barred from police work? That is where it is "state sanctioned."

As a citizen how would you feel if your tax dollars went to the erection of statues in public spaces of people who enslaved and brutalized your family and fought a war against the United States to continue to do so? Statues erected largely for the purpose of intimating you? So that you would accept less than equal rights? Including taking away your right to vote? All enforced by a police department paid for with your tax dollars?

Instead of arguing against the proposition that Black Lives Matter and bringing up Fox News "what aboutism" just agree that our government "of the people, by the people and for the people" needs to be for our lives and human rights above all else. What is your right to property if you can be killed without consequence? The young founders of BLM are not going "take over the country" that is just another racist Fox News/Breitbart/Putin trope meant to scare you into accepting police brutality against what is overwhelmingly peaceful protest. In fact, much of the property damage and even many of the attacks on, even killings of, police have been perpetrated by white racist "accelerationists" (Boogaloo Bois) trying to provoke a second civil war.

Do you not see how a statement like "Even Blacks don't support Black Lives Matter" is racist and offensive (as well as being demonstrably incorrect)?
Undoubtedly some African Americans (the 4% who support Trump most likely) do not support Black Lives Matter. But polls show that a majority of Americans do. Even Senate Republicans from the South like Lindsay Graham are repudiating the Confederate Flag and telling Trump he needs to acknowledge that the vast majority of the BLM protests and protesters are peaceful.

Golden One said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

What scares you about answering THIS question? Because you might set a limit that ends up on the "wrong side?" Because you cant see things getting out of hand as we capitulate to the mob? Because you are with something that group did today? What is the limit to righting injustice? Murdering each other for the next 3000 years? "Troubles" for a decade maybe?

Is renaming innocuous things like the civil war OK? Is "autonomous zones?" Is defunding police 50%? Is defunding police 100%? Shooting federal security guards? Shooting Local law enforcement?


It is extremely telling when a simple question of "what is too far" gets this type of push back. Everyone should be asking themselves all the time what is too far, but it implies that incrementalism exists. I guess that is offensive.

You dont have to answer, you just have to think about it. Being offended by it is asinine.

To be transparent: My limits are:
1. The government should not be able to search property because of a minor ordnance violation contact. Hell, NYC went a step beyond and said they didnt even need a minor violation. That is the line they cant cross and maintain my support. Anything on the other side is unsupportable.
2. Wealth inequality is more nuanced, because that just happens. My line is at exporting the need for labor but doing it to increase margins. I support exporting capital to exploit low wage labor. It is a critical component to how capitalism makes the world better. But what happens is that the wealth of that company goes to a few people in the host country, and is spread back in the form of capital to the target country. The losers are the labor in the host country. My limit is when median "income" (as a proxy) stagnates or retreats while GDP grows. That started a long time ago.
3. With these protests, my limit is autonomous zones. Broad identity based statements of who owes who what. Tearing down monuments to historical figures of our country (ie Missionaries, Columbus, Confederates, etc I dont care about). Taking down those statues is fine with me. Mobs tearing them down is not.
4. Ping >150 in FPS gaming.

---

Thanks for taking the time to respond. First, to be clear, I'm not offended and have never said or implied that I am. I don't think it's "asinine" to question why this has been singled out.

To more fully flesh out my point, there are only so many meaningful conversations that can be had so each one you pursue is a choice to the exclusion of others. We all choose to engage in conversations we believe are worthwhile and avoid those that aren't.

Many people decry the culture wars and consider them a distraction to progress on more meaningful issues.

While I appreciate your responses at the end, I was not implying that you had to go on record about the points I raised or that anyone is required to go on record on any topic, if they have a good faith basis to do so.

As to your particular question to me, to be honest I haven't thought much about where the line is or whether it's even a meaningful formulation of a potential slippery slope. There may not be any connection between the current petty vandalism and the future injustice that you seek to avoid. Occupy Wall Street didn't lead to a parade of horribles and, to the contrary, arguably motivated people to achieve there goals through proper channels.

I am far more concerned with state sponsored violence and the consequences of state actions on our society and would rather not have that discussion hijacked.

---

"Current petty vandalism"? What planet are you describing, Unit2?

Nationally, there have been 27 deaths so far, the latest being Secoriea Turner, an 8-year old little girl, riding in a car with her mother in Atlanta on July 4 when shooters manning a protest barricade opened fire on the car. At least one policeman, David Dorn, was shot and killed when he went to a friend's pawn shop in St Louis to help him deal with looters. Officer Shay Mikalonis was shot in the head during a George Floyd protest in Las Vegas, and the prognosis is that he will be paralyzed and on a ventilator for the rest of his life. An estimated 700 police officers have been injured in these protests, 292 in New York City alone.

In Minneapolis-St. Paul, the site of the early protests, 1500 businesses have been damaged or destroyed, wrecking the livelihood of thousands of employees alone. 150 buildings were set on fire, and dozens burned down. The estimated damage is $500 million.

That little excursion for protestors in Seattle to take over several blocks of that city, do some "petty vandalism," and protect it the area with armed security of their own, resulted in those guards shooting two young black boys, a 16 year old who died, and a 14 year old. In all, 4 protesters have been shot, one girl allegedly raped, and many businesses and buildings damaged.

Another result of the protests is the police are pulled away from their usual responsibilities of trying to respond to 911 calls and managing crime, especially in inner cities, creating more opportunities for criminal to do their thing. About 67 people were shot over the weekend in Chicago, leaving 13 dead, including a 14 year old black boy out in the street celebrating July 4th.

None of this was "Petty Vandalism". So you are more concerned about state-sponsored violence than this "petty vandalism"? Where is this state-sponsored violence of which you speak? Do you honestly think the officer who killed George Floyd was doing this under orders or with the approval of any supervisor or public official of the state above him?

What has happened here was a tragic incident, an incident of extreme individual brutality, inexcusable. We do not know the motives or thoughts of this policeman, whether they involve racial prejudice or not, and hopefully the case will go to trial, and the facts will be revealed. But rather than wait for judgment, one group, Black Lives Matter, jumped to the conclusion that the killing was racially motivated. BLM is an organization founded by Marxists. They are Communists, in the true sense of the word. They hijacked the clear-cut issue of police brutality to push their own agenda, which is the dismantling and destruction of the United States, its government, its economic system, its culture and way of life. They could care less about black lives. If they really cared about black lives, they would go into the inner cities and lay their lives on the line there to try and destroy the drug culture there, try and end the black on black violence, which is the real problem. Do you realize that last year, about twice as many blacks were killed by other blacks (about 6000) than were killed by the Ku Klux Klan in 50 years? 1000 persons of all colors were killed by police, likely mostly justified, and some not justified. 235 blacks were killed by police last year, compared to 6000 blacks killed by other blacks, so I would say even though blacks killed by police is terrible, black on black crime is the greater problem. 48 officers were killed by perpetrators.

Over the last 50 years, the welfare system imposed on the poor has resulted in more black children born out of wedlock, and being raised by a single parent, the mother. Rates of delinquency have skyrocketed, and drugs and guns have infested the black population in the cities. The father has been replaced by the monthly government welfare check, and the incentive to go to work and earn a living is fast disappearing. BLM will take advantage of this situation to gain control over this country, and many of us have become willing dupes in this effort. Even blacks don't support BLM. Only one out of 7 BLM protestors is black. Most are white, mostly women, and more affluent. The news cycle is very short now, and George Floyd will soon be a distant memory. BLM will be looking for another martyr for the cause. The trouble is they apparently killed little Secoriea Turner themselves, so she won't do.

---

Amen! Very well said.

Liberalism is a mental illness.

---

No, sorry can't find it anywhere in the DSM. However, projection and lack of empathy for others as demonstrated by the Right, are both major signs of mental illness.

SFCityBear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

What scares you about answering THIS question? Because you might set a limit that ends up on the "wrong side?" Because you cant see things getting out of hand as we capitulate to the mob? Because you are with something that group did today? What is the limit to righting injustice? Murdering each other for the next 3000 years? "Troubles" for a decade maybe?

Is renaming innocuous things like the civil war OK? Is "autonomous zones?" Is defunding police 50%? Is defunding police 100%? Shooting federal security guards? Shooting Local law enforcement?


It is extremely telling when a simple question of "what is too far" gets this type of push back. Everyone should be asking themselves all the time what is too far, but it implies that incrementalism exists. I guess that is offensive.

You dont have to answer, you just have to think about it. Being offended by it is asinine.

To be transparent: My limits are:
1. The government should not be able to search property because of a minor ordnance violation contact. Hell, NYC went a step beyond and said they didnt even need a minor violation. That is the line they cant cross and maintain my support. Anything on the other side is unsupportable.
2. Wealth inequality is more nuanced, because that just happens. My line is at exporting the need for labor but doing it to increase margins. I support exporting capital to exploit low wage labor. It is a critical component to how capitalism makes the world better. But what happens is that the wealth of that company goes to a few people in the host country, and is spread back in the form of capital to the target country. The losers are the labor in the host country. My limit is when median "income" (as a proxy) stagnates or retreats while GDP grows. That started a long time ago.
3. With these protests, my limit is autonomous zones. Broad identity based statements of who owes who what. Tearing down monuments to historical figures of our country (ie Missionaries, Columbus, Confederates, etc I dont care about). Taking down those statues is fine with me. Mobs tearing them down is not.
4. Ping >150 in FPS gaming.

---

Thanks for taking the time to respond. First, to be clear, I'm not offended and have never said or implied that I am. I don't think it's "asinine" to question why this has been singled out.

To more fully flesh out my point, there are only so many meaningful conversations that can be had so each one you pursue is a choice to the exclusion of others. We all choose to engage in conversations we believe are worthwhile and avoid those that aren't.

Many people decry the culture wars and consider them a distraction to progress on more meaningful issues.

While I appreciate your responses at the end, I was not implying that you had to go on record about the points I raised or that anyone is required to go on record on any topic, if they have a good faith basis to do so.

As to your particular question to me, to be honest I haven't thought much about where the line is or whether it's even a meaningful formulation of a potential slippery slope. There may not be any connection between the current petty vandalism and the future injustice that you seek to avoid. Occupy Wall Street didn't lead to a parade of horribles and, to the contrary, arguably motivated people to achieve there goals through proper channels.

I am far more concerned with state sponsored violence and the consequences of state actions on our society and would rather not have that discussion hijacked.

---

"Current petty vandalism"? What planet are you describing, Unit2?

Nationally, during the current protest, there have been 27 deaths so far, the latest being Secoriea Turner, an 8-year old little girl, riding in a car with her mother in Atlanta on July 4 when shooters manning a protest barricade opened fire on the car. At least one policeman, David Dorn, was shot and killed when he went to a friend's pawn shop in St Louis to help him deal with looters. Officer Shay Mikalonis was shot in the head during a George Floyd protest in Las Vegas, and the prognosis is that he will be paralyzed and on a ventilator for the rest of his life. An estimated 700 police officers have been injured in these protests, 292 in New York City alone.

In Minneapolis-St. Paul, the site of the early protests, 1500 businesses have been damaged or destroyed, wrecking the livelihood of thousands of employees alone. 150 buildings were set on fire, and dozens burned down to the ground. The estimated damage is $500 million.

That little excursion for protestors in Seattle to take over several blocks of that city, do some "petty vandalism," and protect the area with armed security of their own, resulted in those guards shooting two young black boys, a 16 year old who died, and a 14 year old. In all, 4 protesters have been shot, one girl allegedly raped, and many businesses and buildings damaged. And the police were blocked from entering the zone to help by the same security and protestors.

Another result of the protests is the police are pulled away from their usual responsibilities of trying to respond to 911 calls and managing crime, especially in inner cities, creating more opportunities for criminal to do their thing. About 67 people were shot over the weekend in Chicago, leaving 13 dead, including a 14 year old black boy out in the street celebrating July 4th.

None of this was "Petty Vandalism". So you are more concerned about state-sponsored violence than this "petty vandalism"? Where is this state-sponsored violence of which you speak? Do you honestly think the officer who killed George Floyd was doing this under orders or with the approval of any supervisor or public official of the state above him?

What has happened here was a tragic incident, an incident of extreme individual brutality, inexcusable. We do not know the motives or thoughts of this policeman, whether they involve racial prejudice or not, and hopefully the case will go to trial, and the facts will be revealed. But rather than wait for judgment, one group, Black Lives Matter, jumped to the conclusion that the killing was racially motivated. BLM is an organization founded by Marxists. They are Communists, in the true sense of the word. They hijacked the clear-cut issue of police brutality to push their own agenda, which is the dismantling and destruction of the United States, its government, its economic system, its culture and way of life. They could care less about black lives. If they really cared about black lives, they would go into the inner cities and lay their lives on the line there to try and destroy the drug culture there, try and end the black on black violence, which is the real problem. Do you realize that last year, about twice as many blacks were killed by other blacks (about 6000) than were killed by the Ku Klux Klan in 50 years? 1000 persons of all colors were killed by police, likely mostly justified, and some not justified. 235 blacks were killed by police last year, compared to 6000 blacks killed by other blacks, so I would say even though blacks killed by police is terrible, black on black crime is the greater problem. 48 officers were killed by perpetrators.

Over the last 50 years, the welfare system imposed on the poor has resulted in more black children born out of wedlock, and being raised by a single parent, the mother. Rates of delinquency have skyrocketed, and drugs and guns have infested the black population in the cities. The father has been replaced by the monthly government welfare check, and the incentive to go to work and earn a living is fast disappearing. BLM will take advantage of this situation to gain control over this country, and many of us have become willing dupes in this effort. Even blacks don't support BLM. Only one out of 7 BLM protestors is black. Most are white, mostly women, and more affluent. The news cycle is very short now, and George Floyd will soon be a distant memory. BLM will be looking for another martyr for the cause. The trouble is they apparently killed little Secoriea Turner themselves, so she won't do.

---

Ok mods, time to move this racist screed to OT.