|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but they dont have yet the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government.
When decades of complaints fall on deaf ears there comes a time where simply talking is no longer enough.
I'm not condoning the violence and destruction from these protests but I can certainly see why they have no faith in peaceful public discourse.
There is more then enough evidence to conclude there is a systematic problem with police use of deadly force but there is practically no effort being made to address it.
|
Yeah I'm definitely starting to side with the "burn it all down" mentality after the Baltimore stuff came out. It may not be pretty, but rioting has historically done a good job at getting stuff like this to change. What a sad reality that nothing else is effective when people are dying.
|
It'd certainly be nice to setup a better system to address these things. One of the things to work on if I ever have the misfortune of getting into Congress.
|
I bet those police officers would love to leave a city with that high of a crime rate too.
|
On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but, at the moment, they dont seem to have the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government.
Doesn't look like the government is putting a thing on the table.
Why aren't all those cops (and George Zimmerman since we are at it) in jail for a start? In France a cop kills someone and it's straight to cour d'assise unless there are some really clear evidence he was in imminent danger. Which makes perfect sense. A cop killing a citizen who wasn't immediately life-threatening has just committed a murder; the job of the police is not to execute bad (or simply black) guys in the street.
BLM's fight is about changing the REALLY fucked up relationship of Americans to violence, not about a couple of compromises.. That will take some time.
|
On August 15 2016 00:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but, at the moment, they dont seem to have the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government. Doesn't look like the government is putting a thing on the table. Why aren't all those cops (and George Zimmerman since we are at it) in jail for a start? In France a cop kills someone and it's straight to cour d'assise unless there are some really clear evidence he was in imminent danger. Which makes perfect sense. BLM's fight is about changing the REALLY fucked up relationship of Americans to violence, not about a couple of compromises.. That will take some time.
George Zimmerman was not a policeman. Injustices are everywhere, social movements should have the maturity to understand what is nothing but a sad event, and what is the result of a systemic problem. In this regard, the US police is not controlled enough, too militarized, too violent, use what should be entirely illegal methodes (racial profiling), it's relationship to the public is bad and so is its legitimacy. You can find solutions to that.
In France we have the same kind of arguments too : a few weeks ago, the new york times wrote an article titled "Black lives matter in France too". Of course, the situation is entirely different, but the fact that some people, such as the new york times, believe it is somewhat similar, shows us that all those problems are not only about fact and rationality ; it also relates to the way political matters are made and understood by the public. And in the US, political matters are all racialized, which is a good way to actually let the same situation reproduce itself without doing anything.
|
On August 15 2016 00:29 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 00:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but, at the moment, they dont seem to have the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government. Doesn't look like the government is putting a thing on the table. Why aren't all those cops (and George Zimmerman since we are at it) in jail for a start? In France a cop kills someone and it's straight to cour d'assise unless there are some really clear evidence he was in imminent danger. Which makes perfect sense. BLM's fight is about changing the REALLY fucked up relationship of Americans to violence, not about a couple of compromises.. That will take some time. George Zimmerman was not a policeman. Injustices are everywhere, social movement should have the maturity to understand what is nothing but a sad event, and what is the result of a systemic problem. In this regard, the US police is not controlled enough, too militarized, too violent, use what should be entirely illegal methodes (racial profiling), it's relationship to the public is bad and so is its legitimacy. You can find solutions to that. In France we have the same kind of arguments too : a few weeks ago, the new york times wrote an article titled "Black lives matter in France too". Of course, the situation is entirely different, but the fact that some people, such as the new york times, believe it is somewhat similar, shows us that all those problems are not only about fact and rationality ; it also relates to the way political matter and made. And in the US, political matters are all racialized, which is a good way to do actually let the same situation reproduce itself.
I perfectly agree but don't you think the role of BLM is the change mentalities rather than bargaining something?
The real problem is that a cop killing someone is apparently not seen as a problem, especially is that person happens to be black and poor. That's a much bigger problem than fixing a couple of rules..
|
On August 15 2016 00:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but, at the moment, they dont seem to have the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government. Doesn't look like the government is putting a thing on the table. Why aren't all those cops (and George Zimmerman since we are at it) in jail for a start? In France a cop kills someone and it's straight to cour d'assise unless there are some really clear evidence he was in imminent danger. Which makes perfect sense. A cop killing a citizen who wasn't immediately life-threatening has just committed a murder; the job of the police is not to execute bad (or simply black) guys in the street. BLM's fight is about changing the REALLY fucked up relationship of Americans to violence, not about a couple of compromises.. That will take some time.
The barrier for use of deadly force is super low in the US. So long as they feel threatened, regardless of the situation or circumstances, they are allowed to use deadly force.
Zimmerman did not actually break the law, tho one can (and I would) argue that then your law is shit and should be changed.
|
On August 15 2016 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 00:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but, at the moment, they dont seem to have the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government. Doesn't look like the government is putting a thing on the table. Why aren't all those cops (and George Zimmerman since we are at it) in jail for a start? In France a cop kills someone and it's straight to cour d'assise unless there are some really clear evidence he was in imminent danger. Which makes perfect sense. A cop killing a citizen who wasn't immediately life-threatening has just committed a murder; the job of the police is not to execute bad (or simply black) guys in the street. BLM's fight is about changing the REALLY fucked up relationship of Americans to violence, not about a couple of compromises.. That will take some time. The barrier for use of deadly force is super low in the US. So long as they feel threatened, regardless of the situation or circumstances, they are allowed to use deadly force. Zimmerman did not actually break the law, tho one can (and I would) argue that then your law is shit and should be changed.
the specific barrier to use of force varies a fair bit by state. Though it would have to be life-threatening not just generally threatening in any case.
and I'd rather avoid the zimmerman case because otherwise we end up relitigating the whole case, and i've done that too many times already.
|
Noone is talking about what happened in New York?
|
In this thread, not much, i've seen others talk about it some elsewhere. But it's not like murders are rare. And it's too soon to say what the motive was in that case.
|
On August 15 2016 00:40 SoSexy wrote:
Noone is talking about what happened in New York?
You mean the shot Imam? What is there to talk about. there is 0 info from what I have seen.
It has the potential to be a hate crime. Which would surprise no one, stoke up hate for long enough and at some point some nut job will act on it.
|
Days after the Obama administration approved a major arms sale agreement to Saudi Arabia, Republican senator Rand Paul of Kentucky is considering blocking the move, citing objections to the country’s human rights record and a possible regional arms race.
“I will work with a bipartisan coalition to explore forcing a vote on blocking this sale,” said Paul, according to a statement provided to Foreign Policy magazine. “Saudi Arabia is an unreliable ally with a poor human rights record. We should not rush to sell them advanced arms and promote an arms race in the Middle East.”
Paul’s statement comes amid a deteriorating situation in Yemen, Saudi Arabia’s neighbor to its its east, where Riyadh has been involved in a US-supported intervention for more than a year.
Peace talks being brokered by the United Nations and held in Kuwait fell apart last week and fighting resumed on Tuesday, as airstrikes from the Saudi-led coalition struck a food facility, killing more than a dozen people.
Though a nominal truce was agreed to by the warring Yemeni factions in April, the fighting never significantly abated, with 272 civilian deaths reported from April until the collapse of talks, according to the spokesperson for the UN high commissioner for human rights.
Paul, and his colleague on the Senate foreign relations committee, Democratic senator Chris Murphy, have been critics of US policy in Yemen and of providing Saudi Arabia with the logistical and military support it has asked for.
“If you talk to Yemeni Americans, they will tell you in Yemen this isn’t a Saudi bombing campaign, it’s a US bombing campaign,” Murphy said, speaking on Capitol Hill in June, according to a report by Defense News. “Every single civilian death inside Yemen is attributable to the United States. We accept that as a consequence of our participation,” he said.
The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the agency responsible for carrying out arms sales to foreign countries, said in a statement on Tuesday that the proposed $1.15bn sale “conveys US commitment to Saudi Arabia’s security and armed forces modernization”.
While US legislators have 30 days after the arms sale was agreed to try and block the sale, they rarely try to intervene.
Source
|
BLM is only helping Trump win so I'm all for them.
|
On August 14 2016 16:13 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2016 14:46 oBlade wrote:On August 14 2016 12:39 Toadesstern wrote:On August 14 2016 12:12 oBlade wrote:So Hillary didn't release her taxes until August, yet in a year of campaigning I've never heard anyone complain that she hadn't, only that Trump hasn't. Meanwhile people are forgetting that she'll never release her speeches, which is what people actually wanted from her. http://hillarytranscriptclock.com/ funny that Trump is criticized for things he said that go against what people expect of him while Clinton isn't criticized for things she didn't say, right? What do you expect there to change? Clinton would be getting heat had she said she refuses to release her tax releases just like she would have been criticized had she said that maybe NATO isn't that good a thing. As it stands she never said those things though. And I'm fairly sure had Trump not said them either the media would not be criticizing him for it either I have no idea why you're bringing up NATO. Clinton is never going to release transcripts of the private speeches she gave (the majority of her income is speaking fees from her status as a politician). because your entire point basicly boils down to "omg, people criticize Trump for what he said (refusal with taxes and all). Unfair media. Noone gave a fuck about Clinton not having it done until very recently".The reason noone made a fuss about Clintons reports is because she never publicly refused to do that. Hence I brought up another thing Clinton never said to show why the media isn't harping about that either. As a hypothetical example because really, if she's done it for 31 years [assuming what Plansix said is correct] then there's really not a whole lot of reason for anyone to doubt her on that regard unless she openly refuses to do so, is there? Hell, for all I care she could secretly have the same stance as Trump on NATO, plan to take over the world for her lizardpeople friends and if that's the case she's playing it smarter than him by not mentioning it is all I'm saying.
His stance on NATO is a political position. Why would he not talk about a political position? You're being absurd. Not everyone has to agree with that. This is about actions. Trump hasn't released taxes and Clinton won't release her speeches. But we have a higher chance of seeing the former.
On August 15 2016 01:39 NukeD wrote:
BLM is only helping Trump win so I'm all for them.
In Wisconsin, no less. It's wonderful. They should burn down gas stations all over the rust belt for social justice.
|
On August 15 2016 00:31 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2016 00:29 WhiteDog wrote:On August 15 2016 00:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 15 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Who will have the guts to actually remove all police from the black neighborhoods I wonder ? The BLM and all the people pissed at the police/judiciary system have a legitimate reason to feel this way, but, at the moment, they dont seem to have the necessary nuance to actually find a compromise with the government. Doesn't look like the government is putting a thing on the table. Why aren't all those cops (and George Zimmerman since we are at it) in jail for a start? In France a cop kills someone and it's straight to cour d'assise unless there are some really clear evidence he was in imminent danger. Which makes perfect sense. BLM's fight is about changing the REALLY fucked up relationship of Americans to violence, not about a couple of compromises.. That will take some time. George Zimmerman was not a policeman. Injustices are everywhere, social movement should have the maturity to understand what is nothing but a sad event, and what is the result of a systemic problem. In this regard, the US police is not controlled enough, too militarized, too violent, use what should be entirely illegal methodes (racial profiling), it's relationship to the public is bad and so is its legitimacy. You can find solutions to that. In France we have the same kind of arguments too : a few weeks ago, the new york times wrote an article titled "Black lives matter in France too". Of course, the situation is entirely different, but the fact that some people, such as the new york times, believe it is somewhat similar, shows us that all those problems are not only about fact and rationality ; it also relates to the way political matter and made. And in the US, political matters are all racialized, which is a good way to do actually let the same situation reproduce itself. I perfectly agree but don't you think the role of BLM is the change mentalities rather than bargaining something? The real problem is that a cop killing someone is apparently not seen as a problem, especially is that person happens to be black and poor. That's a much bigger problem than fixing a couple of rules..
I think the BLM is a necessity and a valliant effort to tackle real problems, but I also believe the racialization of every possible political subject in the US (and everywhere else, sadly) is a plague that, while sometime factually correct, can actually prevent progress and comfort people in their racist representations (whatever their skin color is). And, from the information I have, the BLM is often prone to be a victim of this racialization - some political matters are not black vs white in the US, in fact most are. It's just my personal vision tho, but I deeply believe that any kind of non humanist / non inclusive social movement that defend justice is doomed to fail.
When I compare the BLM to the civil right movement or even the black panther party, I don't get the same inclusive discourse. The black panther party, which had members advocating for black supremacy and all that, had people like Bobby Seale who had real inclusive visions, who wanted to go past race. It's that kind of vibe that I don't get from the BLM.
But I'll gladly admit being wrong if it was the case.
|
|
|
I'm not inherently against the BLM movement, to raise awareness and tackle the issues going on, but there's such heterogenity in the movement that it just completely falls flat on its face imo.
This for example: shouting to want dead cops in the middle of a rally is not what you want to send as a message into the public space, right?
A number of points need to be addressed and seriously thought about and fixed before you can go on:
Why is a disproportionate amount of black people involved in crime in the USA? Follow-up: is it wrong for cops to do racial profiling when they have (and knowledge of) these statistics?
Why is there such a lax attitude towards using (potential) deadly force in the police force? How rigorous is the training? How intense are the streets they are patrolling?
|
Hahaha they're shouting "A - Anti - Anticapitalist ! AaaaA! Anti - Anticapitalist !".
My student chant that in manifestations too (I don't, I don't chant at all). It's the International !
|
uldridge -> do you want specific answers to any of those questions, or are you content to pose them as important things to discuss?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
