I do. Seems like you are particularly concerned by black people's racism, while never condemned racism of white people.
Which one is a bigger issue in American society? Enlighten me.
[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black
- Thread starter Estebonrober
- Start date
- Status
Which one is a bigger issue in American society? Enlighten me.
Berzerker
Deity
Do you have evidence camera footage has been used to go after protesters as opposed to rioters?
It remains to be seen if it was murder, I think cops can legally shoot people who are running away with a deadly weapon, especially if they turn to fire at them.
BLM has a conspicuous habit of going after white people, hence the storefront window messages identifying black owned businesses. Thats partly why BLM protests are starting to draw armed 'counter protesters'.
Last edited:
Can you please provide evidence that Black racists are as
Preferrably of recent events ?
And looking at this info below of Crezth.... I understand from other sources that the police "thinks" they committed "suicide".
Do you think that these people committed suicide ?
Or do you think they were lynched ?
Last edited:
So much the worse if what they did was legal by US laws.
Berzerker
Deity
thats true in the Brooks case since he wasn't really a threat to anyone had he escaped with a taser, but he turned and fired at the cop and thats why he got shot
Bugfatty300
Buddha Squirrel
Typical mindset found in the US is that if cops do it a lot then it must be legal and normal. All of a sudden people who don't agree with "shoot first, ask questions later" are the ones with extreme ideas.
I think it would a very different delve into sociology if we wanted to discuss whether black racists do more harm than white ones. Now, I suspect that Anysense means "black racism hurting non-black people", so that's a topic that doesn't really deserve much attention.
Some people want to talk about racism as institutional power structures, but they can also treat it as merely as the exercise of authority. Of course, because all power structures evolve out of and feed into each other, unpacking who is 'worse' is mostly an exercise in futility. If I mug someone specifically chosen because I don't think that the crime will be investigated honestly, unpacking 'who' is doing the harm is mainly an argument of proximate and distal causes. And that's just a one-off example. If I mock a younger sibling for 'doing well in school', but you can tie that into my pessimism as to whether effort is rewarded ... again, proximate and distal causes.
The protests are about top down institutional influences causing harm. And given that I have a direct say in those institutions, that's where I think some of everyone's energy should go.
Some people want to talk about racism as institutional power structures, but they can also treat it as merely as the exercise of authority. Of course, because all power structures evolve out of and feed into each other, unpacking who is 'worse' is mostly an exercise in futility. If I mug someone specifically chosen because I don't think that the crime will be investigated honestly, unpacking 'who' is doing the harm is mainly an argument of proximate and distal causes. And that's just a one-off example. If I mock a younger sibling for 'doing well in school', but you can tie that into my pessimism as to whether effort is rewarded ... again, proximate and distal causes.
The protests are about top down institutional influences causing harm. And given that I have a direct say in those institutions, that's where I think some of everyone's energy should go.
Last edited:
Some good news from the Netherlands.
Our most popular football talkshow is now boycotted by the national football team
(in terms of mass popularity football is here by far the most important sport... this boycot will really cut wood)
It started with one of the key presentators playing down racism here with insulting remarks on one of the protesters.
The commercial broadcasting company was put under pressure by social media to fire him but refused with the argument of "free speech"
Some major companies announced as reaction to stop advertisments on which that presentator reacted with "who cares ?" and "it is all a storm in a teakettle".
And then this boycot came.
I hope good riddance to that guy and happy that especially this broadcaster gets a blow, them being a continuous pest regarding all kinds of "casual discrimination".
I hope other sports people will join the boycot
Here the tweet of Virgil van Dijk, the captain of the Dutch team, "enough is enough".
(BTW now playing for Liverpool and in 2019 chosen as the best UK First League player, and also the best UEFA (Europe) player of the year)
Our most popular football talkshow is now boycotted by the national football team
(in terms of mass popularity football is here by far the most important sport... this boycot will really cut wood)
It started with one of the key presentators playing down racism here with insulting remarks on one of the protesters.
The commercial broadcasting company was put under pressure by social media to fire him but refused with the argument of "free speech"
Some major companies announced as reaction to stop advertisments on which that presentator reacted with "who cares ?" and "it is all a storm in a teakettle".
And then this boycot came.
I hope good riddance to that guy and happy that especially this broadcaster gets a blow, them being a continuous pest regarding all kinds of "casual discrimination".
I hope other sports people will join the boycot
Here the tweet of Virgil van Dijk, the captain of the Dutch team, "enough is enough".
(BTW now playing for Liverpool and in 2019 chosen as the best UK First League player, and also the best UEFA (Europe) player of the year)
Last edited:
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,659
Well sure you can have that underlying concern if you want. Does anything about that story feed into that concern though? Does anything in the post talking about it reference that concern? "Police use technology to track down arsonist" is what the story is about, and the comment with the link to it just seems to be saying "be careful about your identity", with if you're going to do something similar being implied.
Identifiable at protest = about to be on the piggy hitlist, doesn't matter what your behavior was. I mean, have you seen the protests? They can't do anything without being charged for some crime or other. Throwing back a tear canister is apparently lethal assault (what does that say when the pigs do it?).
Posting a story about an arsonist being tracked down is probably the worst way of making that point though isn't it? "I have a concern about the police tracking down and harassing innocent people, so I'll find a story about them tracking down a criminal to illustrate that". Okay.
There's no point doubling down, Manfred. You're only noticing half of what's being communicated, and I'm clarifying for you. And it's why your observation of what the post was missing wasn't really inspirational, 'cuz we're factoring in something you weren't.
Everyone is hearing different things, even from the same message. And part of that is because we're only attending half of what's being said.
You're focused on protestor misstep, the protests are about police misstep. Until you can internalize what the protests are about, you're missing half the conversation.
bernie14
Filter Manipulator
Robert Fuller, initially ruled suicide, investigation ongoing. Family said he was not suicidal.
Dominique Alexander, initially ruled suicide, investigation ongoing. No comments regarding cause of death by family.
Malcolm Harsch, initially ruled suicide, investigation ongoing. 911 call from female, saying her boyfriend hanged himself. Family says he was not suicidal.
Black teen in Houston, according to cops, “based on security video, witnesses and other evidence, preliminary indications are the male hanged himself"
The other case in Houston is a latino, who's family confirmed was suicidal
Cloud_Strife
Deity
But what is it that you are really wanting to say?
bernie14
Filter Manipulator
The facts so far?
I think it was an effort to find the five people lynched. The statement, that 5 people were lynched recently, is either horrifying or fear-mongering. There's no middle ground on that one. And because both of those are extremes, finding out what really happened is pretty important
The canary in the coal mine is a role that's too important. It can't become something that discredits itself
inb4 Patine
I haven't condemned black racism either. I see no point in condemning anything or anyone, expressing hatred in any way never helps, neither can it achieve anything good.
Why do you have to ask a question to which there is no clear answer?
Brooks fighting and using potentially lethal weapon on a cop just because - and only because - the latter was white. And then they set Wendy's on fire. Guess what face was on their sign? White of course. Then routine blocking, looting etc. followed.
I put Crezth on ignore list some time ago, she is raving all the time; worse even that bloke who is always up to nothing, burning his life bullying people on forums
I don't care for what people like them say. Anyway, hanging != lynching. As to whether they commited suicide or were murdered I have no idea. Would you question it if those people were white?
Moderator Action: It's a forum rule that you don't advertise your ignore list. It's considered trolling. Don't do this again. --LM
Last edited by a moderator:
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Questions without clear answers are always better than questions with easy answers.
On the other hand, the question you refer to belonga to the latter category.
On the other hand, the question you refer to belonga to the latter category.
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,659
I've heard of reading between the lines, but there's literally nothing in the original post (which consisted of one post I believe) that says anything like what you're claiming it was saying. It's literally a link to a story about the police tracking down an arsonist, with the comment "the police are going to great lengths to track down arsonists, so watch out".
Not sure in what way you think my post was intended to be inspirational either, that was an odd criticism.
Everyone is hearing different things, even from the same message. And part of that is because we're only attending half of what's being said.
I'm focusing on the post as written, which has an incredibly narrow scope. And like I said in my reply to cardgame, if your ultimate point and concern is "bad police being bad against innocent people", then why would you link to a story that completely undermines that? It's like you're saying I can't see the wood for the trees. Well okay, but in this case someone's hitting you in the face with a tree, in the middle of a clearing, and you're claiming like they're allowing you some great vision of the wood. Seems to me like you're so focused on the wood that you can't even see someone clearly waving a tree around.
Your signature is not about black racists?
It was a simple question actually. I suspected you'll try to evade it.
Well, thats your opinion - or rather your bias - which, probably, has nothing to do with the truth. Are you gnorant enough not to realise it or are arrogant or self-righteous enough to usurp the right to define what the truth is, as ultra left are so prone to?
It is about all kinds of reverse bigotry, not just black vs white. Where did you spot condemnation, though? It's just a statement, summarizing my observations over last few years.
If it is such a simple question, then you can answer it, preferably with some argumentation.
- Status
Similar threads
