[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black

[Modder_Mode]

Whenever (at least during Trump administration) US officials, US ministers, criticise foreign countries on human rights.... the simple answer for officials of that country can be: "I cannot breathe"

I'm not going to disagree with that, its actually a good counter-argument in my opinion. I think minority groups around the world (and I get this feeling mostly from social media comments) feel that their cause also deserves just as much coverage as the BLM movement that the current crisis gets, they feel short changed, and feel as though they are just as important as the next person, but that's the problem when everyone wants a piece of the pie...

 

[JPetroski]

I don't see how more guns would result in less people getting shot. A mass shooting is a very different kind of tragedy compared to what's going on here - I can't help but feel this is an astoundingly bad faith comparison.

The only comparison I'm making is to how some people's stance on whether or not government entities should be the only ones armed with effective firearms seems to be different in this thread/numerous social media exchanges than in typical mass shooting threads/social media exchanges, so they might want to remember how they felt about the topic after this tragedy the next time the other tragedy happens.

I also never said anything about less people getting shot. You just threw that in there for some reason.

 

[Gorbles]

The only comparison I'm making is to how some people's stance on whether or not government entities should be the only ones armed with effective firearms seems to be different in this thread/numerous social media exchanges than in typical mass shooting threads/social media exchanges, so they might want to remember how they felt about the topic after this tragedy the next time the other tragedy happens.

I also never said anything about less people getting shot. You just threw that in there for some reason.

The existence and amount of guns in circulation in general have a directly proportional impact on people getting shot for any reason, at any time, ever. This isn't a guns rights thread, though, so I'm kinda wondering what your attempted gotcha has to do with the topic. You appear to be trying to infer posters in the thread are hypocrites for something unrelated to the general talk in the thread.

Mass shootings are not the same thing as dealing with violent police forces in the US. They're different problems that require different solutions (though tackling discrimination in general may lead to improvements in both cases, but discrimination wasn't the argument you were making). You haven't clarified your very vague gotcha in any way that could lead to a better discussion, either, which makes it difficult to even try and relate it to this topic. Can you confirm with a simple yes or no: are you attempting to criticise people who are normally in favour of stricter gun controls because of discussions made in this thread?

 

[AmazonQueen]

The only comparison I'm making is to how some people's stance on whether or not government entities should be the only ones armed with effective firearms seems to be different in this thread/numerous social media exchanges than in typical mass shooting threads/social media exchanges, so they might want to remember how they felt about the topic after this tragedy the next time the other tragedy happens.

I also never said anything about less people getting shot. You just threw that in there for some reason.

If the US had effective gun control the police wouldn't need to be routinely armed. Unfortunately with so many guns in circulation it would be hard to achieve.
Still, I see no need for what I can only view as the effective paramilitarism of the police in the US or their excessive use of deadly force as a first resort rather than a last.

 

[Hrothbern]

I'm not going to disagree with that, its actually a good counter-argument in my opinion. I think minority groups around the world (and I get this feeling mostly from social media comments) feel that their cause also deserves just as much coverage as the BLM movement that the current crisis gets, they feel short changed, and feel as though they are just as important as the next person, but that's the problem when everyone wants a piece of the pie...

yes
The trick is to do much more than just protect the formal rights of (as such acceptable) minority groups in general.
Social Darwinism between individuals extending to competition between minority groups and sharp pencilled theological divisions within minority groups are the perfect setting for the powers who do not want change (except the minimal necessary to stay in power).
one issue thinking... political parties doing catch all of one-issue points without processing that into root values in political programs.... that all keeps fragmentation alive.

If the powers in charge favor (social) fragmentation... the answer is (social) cohesion.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

LOL that's because the photo Cloud_Strife posted is of everything the Left accuses or thinks of Donald Trump of doing

yes it was pretty obvious that this list was coined for Trump specifically. It is pretty telling that you say "The Left" (TM) accuses Trump of this, which is your personal partisan take. Conservatists, rightists and christians have critisized Trump for much the same. you make it sounds as if the criticisms themselves were unfounded, which they aren't, my point is simply that they're not all specifically fascist. Those criticisms remain just as troubling, even with the historical/political inaccuracy.

 

[JPetroski]

Can you confirm with a simple yes or no: are you attempting to criticise people who are normally in favour of stricter gun controls because of discussions made in this thread?

No, I am not attempting to criticize them. If we're going to criticize people for changing their minds, we'll never change anything, to paraphrase Churchill. Also, changing your mind doesn't make you a hypocrite. I'm quite in favor of this apparent mindset shift among some, and hope it lasts is all.

 

[Moriarte]

This list is totally bollocks, sorry.

That may well be, but it’s main purpose is not to educate but to agitate, make you angry and willing to do what cloud wants you to.

 

[H4run]

That may well be, but it’s main purpose is not to educate but to agitate, make you angry and willing to do what cloud wants you to.

As criticism it stands, and perhaps the criteria list is still arguably fit, if it seen as a whole not partially, to contemporary neo-Nazi ultimate concept of government. I think Jung not making a jab on Cloud he just disagree with Cloud's list to defined Fascism in historical context.

 

[JohannaK]

That may well be, but it’s main purpose is not to educate but to agitate, make you angry and willing to do what cloud wants you to.

That's funny.

 

[Modder_Mode]

yes it was pretty obvious that this list was coined for Trump specifically. It is pretty telling that you say "The Left" (TM) accuses Trump of this, which is your personal partisan take. Conservatists, rightists and christians have critisized Trump for much the same. you make it sounds as if the criticisms themselves were unfounded, which they aren't, my point is simply that they're not all specifically fascist. Those criticisms remain just as troubling, even with the historical/political inaccuracy.

The list in the photo/poster does actually contain some fascist attributes, but it's the deceiving factor of adding the other "attributes" to link fascism to Donald Trump.

I did post that he probably is guilty of some of it, that I made pretty obvious. My guess is that this photo/poster comes from some left leaning group or individual other than some rightist movement as you put it.

 

[Modder_Mode]

yes
The trick is to do much more than just protect the formal rights of (as such acceptable) minority groups in general.
Social Darwinism between individuals extending to competition between minority groups and sharp pencilled theological divisions within minority groups are the perfect setting for the powers who do not want change (except the minimal necessary to stay in power).
one issue thinking... political parties doing catch all of one-issue points without processing that into root values in political programs.... that all keeps fragmentation alive.

If the powers in charge favor (social) fragmentation... the answer is (social) cohesion.

Are you involved in sociology by any chance? I've seen a few of your posts and you seem very well versed. Or a hobby of yours?

 

[Modder_Mode]

As criticism it stands, and perhaps the criteria list is still arguably fit, if it seen as a whole not partially, to contemporary neo-Nazi ultimate concept of government. I think Jung not making a jab on Cloud he just disagree with Cloud's list to defined Fascism in historical context.

It really isn't that much different to the Clinton/Bush/Obama administrations then is it, they certainly qualify for at least some of those fascist "attributes" listed, there isn't a hell of a lot in differeence between any of those administrations, there all guilty in some way, but we will paint Donald Trump as a cartoon villain because it's easier that way.

 

[Gorbles]

No, I am not attempting to criticize them. If we're going to criticize people for changing their minds, we'll never change anything, to paraphrase Churchill. Also, changing your mind doesn't make you a hypocrite. I'm quite in favor of this apparent mindset shift among some, and hope it lasts is all.

I think you'll be disappointed, but fair enough - I appreciate the clarifications. A discussion for another thread, when that happens.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

yes it was pretty obvious that this list was coined for Trump specifically. It is pretty telling that you say "The Left" (TM) accuses Trump of this, which is your personal partisan take. Conservatists, rightists and christians have critisized Trump for much the same. you make it sounds as if the criticisms themselves were unfounded, which they aren't, my point is simply that they're not all specifically fascist. Those criticisms remain just as troubling, even with the historical/political inaccuracy.

It comes from the US Holocaust musuem, now i could be wrong here but im sure it predates trump's presidency.

 

[aelf]

Why the hell are you guys still bothering to talk to hardcore conservatives?

 

[Samson]

538 has a article about "Why It’s Still So Rare For Police Officers To Face Legal Consequences For Misconduct". A couple of points that together seems to sum up the problem:

around 1,000 people are fatally shot by police annually
only 110 law enforcement officers nationwide have been charged with murder or manslaughter in an on-duty shooting
only five of these officers were convicted of murder

New York Police Department misconduct settlements cost the city $630 million between the fiscal years of 2011 and 2017
Los Angeles, they totaled more than $139 million in that same time period
In Philadelphia, that number is nearly $90 million​

So there are loads of civil cases that go against the police, but hardly any criminal cases. I understand the difference in proof requirements, but this magnitude of difference is hard to explain other than they are not being appropriately pursued.

 

[Bamspeedy]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/holocaust-museum-warning-signs-fascism/

The poster was created in 2003. Not on display in the museum, but sold in gift shop.

 

[AmazonQueen]

538 has a article about "Why It’s Still So Rare For Police Officers To Face Legal Consequences For Misconduct". A couple of points that together seems to sum up the problem:

around 1,000 people are fatally shot by police annually
only 110 law enforcement officers nationwide have been charged with murder or manslaughter in an on-duty shooting
only five of these officers were convicted of murder

New York Police Department misconduct settlements cost the city $630 million between the fiscal years of 2011 and 2017
Los Angeles, they totaled more than $139 million in that same time period
In Philadelphia, that number is nearly $90 million​

So there are loads of civil cases that go against the police, but hardly any criminal cases. I understand the difference in proof requirements, but this magnitude of difference is hard to explain other than they are not being appropriately pursued.

How much of those settlements were for out-of-court settlements that allowed the police officers involved to continue serving and police departments to avoid admitting what had happened?

 

[Hrothbern]

Are you involved in sociology by any chance? I've seen a few of your posts and you seem very well versed. Or a hobby of yours?

I did study chemistry... so not really close to sociology.
And not really a hobby as well I think (between my many hobbies)... although I am very much a generalist omnivore.

I think much of what I learned came from my time as active community volunteer in the early 80ies where many of the other volunteers were students of the social academies and soft sciences. Many employed people involved having similar backgrounds.
And many were happy to not only discuss things with me but also to "educate" me. Besides the late evening pub social life, I got from many seasoned people almost like trainings.
My main and very practical focus was simply to contribute to a rather big and strong community organisation with in my time around 30 subgroups for a 35,000 people traditional workers neighborhood in Amsterdam with at that time 70% allochtones of everywhere. My approach at that time very much down to earth and towards processes from HR-like for ingroup and processes for outgroup to stay connected to the base, the people in that neighborhood.
Meanwhile I maintained at 4 hours a day my income from a small computer company I had set up with two schoolfriends.

Later on in life, as manager in an international company, I always kept up reading on layman's articles and being in so many countries spend many evenings with talking to local managers on cultural-societal differences of regions influencing how to manage people (how they prefer to be managed !) and how to approach customers. Immersing. And yes that included thinking on how peoples are and behave.

In that sense perhaps indeed a hobby in understanding the deeper roots of what I gathered.

And retired 4 years ago... ruminating as well my indigested past... even more standard part of my interests together with cultural-philosophical roaming.