|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 24 2020 04:32 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 03:02 ShoCkeyy wrote:On July 24 2020 02:18 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 02:00 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 01:21 Danglars wrote:On July 23 2020 15:01 Broetchenholer wrote:On July 23 2020 11:13 Danglars wrote:
The problem is that federal officers do not expect left wing activists to own their Second Amendment rights. All the Antifa apologists on this forum should go spread the word. No, the problem is that the republican party is not rebelling against a president creating constitutional crisis after crisis. If you believe that a significant portion of Republicans has done enough to stop it, I would like to hear examples. Is this mad libs? I was talking about the second amendment as it applies here, and secondly whether states rights people actually agreed with the actions taken (aka are they totally fine with feds doing this in this way, contrary to states rights, and thus hypocrites). This line of seductive logic concludes that Germans love Uighur genocide, because they haven’t done enough to stop it. Comparing German involvement in China to GOP leadership involvement in a program being led by a republican president is very silly. Don't pretend they are remotely the same thing, it comes across as bad faith. McConnell and other big name republicans doing anything other than screaming about what is happening with these federal officers is a giant failure. This is totally their kinda thing they are supposed to be really against. In your eyes, why are they not speaking against the occupation happening in Portland? Can you separate personal opposition to something that’s happening, and third person evaluation of whether or not he/she has done enough to stop it, or can’t you? I really don’t care how this “comes across,” if it’s by people that don’t read then respond. I can play your game. The big thing people on the left should also be doing nonstop is decrying violent rioters in Portland for day 50 something. The extent that this is not happening shows an acceptance of violence from approved individuals, and a whitewashing of dangerous blocking of exits while raining fireworks and molotovs outside. Did not one of them think to bring any tools, maybe a hammer or a crowbar?" asks my friend. While one imagines what kind of trouble this might bring from the cops, there's no reason to worry about the Portland police, not one of whom I've seen in three-plus hours. There is zero police presence, the mayor having years ago instructed the police that protesters are not to be arrested, the definition of protestor apparently being fungible. And so the battering, the rave-like mania, carries on.
"What will we do if we do get inside?" a young woman asks her friend. I tell her that I don't think people have thought that far ahead; that it's about the show out here, not about carrying forth any particular plan. Reason Have you ever stopped and think that maybe the feds instigate violence and the protesters respond back to the violence with violence? Cause as a Portlander I’ve seen more violence from the feds and the police. How many days straight has it been? Was day 1-39 in response to police, and 40-50 response to feds? Sustained riots, and even early it was not confined to graffiti, put a lie to this approach. It isn’t a conditional justification of violence just because you think the balance favors rioters over policemen. “They started it” works for like a week. The rest makes them lack agency.
Bro, I live in downtown Portland literally 5-10mins from where these “riots” happen, and they’re not riots. It’s literally people just protesting non stop, they’re standing in front of a building essentially partying. The police don’t like it and become extremely violent. I’ve watched it with my own eyes from my balcony how they chase people in trucks and cars while shooting tear gas and rubber bullets right from my balcony. The protests are always peaceful until the cops decide to make it violent.
|
On July 24 2020 04:43 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 04:32 Gahlo wrote:
If only there was a way to protect federal buildings without committing unconstitutional acts. It wouldn’t make much sense to criticize the response, if there was no legal options on behalf of the feds. Once starting fires and launching fireworks into the building starts, or barricading doors or forcing entry through other doors, then tear gas and arrest/detention is justified. Federal courthouses are not just target dummies for whatever societal angst you need to let out. It’s only a matter of time before a federal officer or rioter gets seriously hurt in this destruction, and I suppose that’s an actual aim if you look hard enough into the media coverage. Are you saying there was no other option for the feds to protect their property other then kidnapping people with officers in civilian clothing from unmarked vans?
|
|
|
On July 24 2020 05:02 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 04:43 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 04:32 Gahlo wrote:
If only there was a way to protect federal buildings without committing unconstitutional acts. It wouldn’t make much sense to criticize the response, if there was no legal options on behalf of the feds. Once starting fires and launching fireworks into the building starts, or barricading doors or forcing entry through other doors, then tear gas and arrest/detention is justified. Federal courthouses are not just target dummies for whatever societal angst you need to let out. It’s only a matter of time before a federal officer or rioter gets seriously hurt in this destruction, and I suppose that’s an actual aim if you look hard enough into the media coverage. Are you saying there was no other option for the feds to protect their property other then kidnapping people with officers in civilian clothing from unmarked vans?
Lol I forgot to put the disclaimer of “no I don’t approve of what happened” on one post, and that’s the one quoted.
|
I was on /r conservative today.
American conservatives are basically pure facists at this point while deciding for themselves that they are "moderate". It's really quite staggering.... Well.. Chances are it all burns down.
Edit: I also frequent Breadtube.. And.. Aside from not being generally on the side of the bad side of history, they are just as dumb and moronic.
|
On July 24 2020 05:35 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 05:02 Gorsameth wrote:On July 24 2020 04:43 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 04:32 Gahlo wrote:
If only there was a way to protect federal buildings without committing unconstitutional acts. It wouldn’t make much sense to criticize the response, if there was no legal options on behalf of the feds. Once starting fires and launching fireworks into the building starts, or barricading doors or forcing entry through other doors, then tear gas and arrest/detention is justified. Federal courthouses are not just target dummies for whatever societal angst you need to let out. It’s only a matter of time before a federal officer or rioter gets seriously hurt in this destruction, and I suppose that’s an actual aim if you look hard enough into the media coverage. Are you saying there was no other option for the feds to protect their property other then kidnapping people with officers in civilian clothing from unmarked vans? Lol I forgot to put the disclaimer of “no I don’t approve of what happened” on one post, and that’s the one quoted. Then don't start off a post lamenting how the fed had no legal options open to them. That sure reads a whole lot like you think they had to do what they did.
|
I love how the Republicans are supposedly against governmental overreach, and then simply nod in approval as federal troops teargas and kidnap US citizens off the streets. Such a colossal disgrace the GOP has become.
|
On July 24 2020 04:27 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 03:01 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 02:49 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 02:31 StalkerTL wrote:
The protests in Portland were actually ratcheting down because the protestors and police eventually got to some degree of an understanding.
The fed involvement is actually just sparking tensions again. Which is why their involvement is one that only exists to provoke a reaction, not one to actually maintain law and order. The states were already dealing with the issue but the feds then bust through the door and scream that the opposition called your mom a whore and dad a bastard. Like, there’s no reason to send feds to Ohio right now to maintain law and order because everything’s relatively calm, but guess what? Fed involvement is just going to encourage disorder.
It’s the whole self-fulling prophecy again. We believe lockdowns are not effective so we’re going to do everything possible to make sure the lockdown won’t work so we’re proven right about lockdowns being ineffective. Same deal here, protestors are all Antifa who only want to burn things down, let’s send in unmarked feds to provoke them into retaliating and use that as proof that they’re only here to be violent. The beauty of this way of thinking is that you’re never wrong and never have to admit to being wrong. Major citation needed. The feds were not deployed to a nightly riot losing steam. If it was getting more dangerous to those inside, I’d expect equal evidence. As a Portland resident, who knows many other Portland residents, the protests were massively dying down and significantly less rowdy. They were just not really an issue anymore. I understand that you do not live in Portland, but I think you should wonder why Portland as a whole, including government leadership, seems totally against the feds doing what they are doing. What if you are being deceived by media sources? What if the situation really is as Portland residents and government leadership says? I have not met someone who wants the feds there, but I am sure 1 or 2 exist. You should be wondering why such an overwhelming majority of Portland leadership is against the feds being there. You link to Tweets, but if that is really what your understanding is based on, you should be significantly more open to other interpretations. It feels like the idea that the Portland situation was just really not nearly bad enough to warrant federal violence just isn't an option to you. I encourage you to listen to Portland residents, we aren't silent. The critical point to me is if you and friends personally observed the violence after dark on multiple days to make comparisons. Portland residents aren’t required to observe the section of the city containing the federal courthouse late at night. The feds have a responsibility to protect it from attack, and like I pointed out earlier, it doesn’t extend to chasing down fleeing rioters in rental vans to snatch them. Clearly identified, non-camo federal officers making arrests for federal crimes is clearly called for. See the videos in times past where fireworks were thrown, barricades on doors were erected, and rioters attempted to gain entry. If it was declining and would disperse naturally, then sure, delay what would be justified actions (again for the cheap seats: not what actually happened). If decline means 500 becomes 150 becomes 30, but it still involves lighting fires and throwing fireworks, this is absolutely the case for federal involvement. Also, see article for absence of Portland police. My previous post questioned your ability to separate distinct issues and attitudes, and I still await an answer, to make sure this is even worth an argument.
Yes. I can confirm multiple days where police and federal presence substantially increased violence. Without the federal presence, there were occasional weirdos who would try to light stuff on fire and were legitimately bad, but the vast majority of people were peaceful. There are a lot of very angry people who are not being violent.
I agree that feds trying to arrest people for burning down federal buildings is sensible. But the extent to which they are being terrible goes past the point of where outcry from party leadership is not just a good thing but a moral imperative. Different levels of moral failings require different levels of response. This is a level to which McConnell and others should be publicly calling for a complete stop to the entire federal presence in Portland. I feel like someone needs to not fully grasp how bad that is to be anything less than outraged.
On July 24 2020 02:18 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 02:00 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 01:21 Danglars wrote:On July 23 2020 15:01 Broetchenholer wrote:On July 23 2020 11:13 Danglars wrote:
The problem is that federal officers do not expect left wing activists to own their Second Amendment rights. All the Antifa apologists on this forum should go spread the word. No, the problem is that the republican party is not rebelling against a president creating constitutional crisis after crisis. If you believe that a significant portion of Republicans has done enough to stop it, I would like to hear examples. Is this mad libs? I was talking about the second amendment as it applies here, and secondly whether states rights people actually agreed with the actions taken (aka are they totally fine with feds doing this in this way, contrary to states rights, and thus hypocrites). This line of seductive logic concludes that Germans love Uighur genocide, because they haven’t done enough to stop it. Comparing German involvement in China to GOP leadership involvement in a program being led by a republican president is very silly. Don't pretend they are remotely the same thing, it comes across as bad faith. McConnell and other big name republicans doing anything other than screaming about what is happening with these federal officers is a giant failure. This is totally their kinda thing they are supposed to be really against. In your eyes, why are they not speaking against the occupation happening in Portland? Can you separate personal opposition to something that’s happening, and third person evaluation of whether or not he/she has done enough to stop it, or can’t you?
You can, but being able to see something as wrong isn't the minimum requirement for an ethical existence in this situation. Someone can see something is wrong but still being morally deficient by not doing enough to stop it. Watching someone being dragged into a van by a supposed federal officer requires more of a person than the ability to determine "hm, that looks to be a bad thing".
|
On July 24 2020 06:26 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 04:27 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 03:01 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 02:49 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 02:31 StalkerTL wrote:
The protests in Portland were actually ratcheting down because the protestors and police eventually got to some degree of an understanding.
The fed involvement is actually just sparking tensions again. Which is why their involvement is one that only exists to provoke a reaction, not one to actually maintain law and order. The states were already dealing with the issue but the feds then bust through the door and scream that the opposition called your mom a whore and dad a bastard. Like, there’s no reason to send feds to Ohio right now to maintain law and order because everything’s relatively calm, but guess what? Fed involvement is just going to encourage disorder.
It’s the whole self-fulling prophecy again. We believe lockdowns are not effective so we’re going to do everything possible to make sure the lockdown won’t work so we’re proven right about lockdowns being ineffective. Same deal here, protestors are all Antifa who only want to burn things down, let’s send in unmarked feds to provoke them into retaliating and use that as proof that they’re only here to be violent. The beauty of this way of thinking is that you’re never wrong and never have to admit to being wrong. Major citation needed. The feds were not deployed to a nightly riot losing steam. If it was getting more dangerous to those inside, I’d expect equal evidence. As a Portland resident, who knows many other Portland residents, the protests were massively dying down and significantly less rowdy. They were just not really an issue anymore. I understand that you do not live in Portland, but I think you should wonder why Portland as a whole, including government leadership, seems totally against the feds doing what they are doing. What if you are being deceived by media sources? What if the situation really is as Portland residents and government leadership says? I have not met someone who wants the feds there, but I am sure 1 or 2 exist. You should be wondering why such an overwhelming majority of Portland leadership is against the feds being there. You link to Tweets, but if that is really what your understanding is based on, you should be significantly more open to other interpretations. It feels like the idea that the Portland situation was just really not nearly bad enough to warrant federal violence just isn't an option to you. I encourage you to listen to Portland residents, we aren't silent. The critical point to me is if you and friends personally observed the violence after dark on multiple days to make comparisons. Portland residents aren’t required to observe the section of the city containing the federal courthouse late at night. The feds have a responsibility to protect it from attack, and like I pointed out earlier, it doesn’t extend to chasing down fleeing rioters in rental vans to snatch them. Clearly identified, non-camo federal officers making arrests for federal crimes is clearly called for. See the videos in times past where fireworks were thrown, barricades on doors were erected, and rioters attempted to gain entry. If it was declining and would disperse naturally, then sure, delay what would be justified actions (again for the cheap seats: not what actually happened). If decline means 500 becomes 150 becomes 30, but it still involves lighting fires and throwing fireworks, this is absolutely the case for federal involvement. Also, see article for absence of Portland police. My previous post questioned your ability to separate distinct issues and attitudes, and I still await an answer, to make sure this is even worth an argument. Yes. I can confirm multiple days where police and federal presence substantially increased violence. Without the federal presence, there were occasional weirdos who would try to light stuff on fire and were legitimately bad, but the vast majority of people were peaceful. There are a lot of very angry people who are not being violent. I agree that feds trying to arrest people for burning down federal buildings is sensible. But the extent to which they are being terrible goes past the point of where outcry from party leadership is not just a good thing but a moral imperative. Different levels of moral failings require different levels of response. This is a level to which McConnell and others should be publicly calling for a complete stop to the entire federal presence in Portland. I feel like someone needs to not fully grasp how bad that is to be anything less than outraged. Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 02:18 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 02:00 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 01:21 Danglars wrote:On July 23 2020 15:01 Broetchenholer wrote:On July 23 2020 11:13 Danglars wrote:
The problem is that federal officers do not expect left wing activists to own their Second Amendment rights. All the Antifa apologists on this forum should go spread the word. No, the problem is that the republican party is not rebelling against a president creating constitutional crisis after crisis. If you believe that a significant portion of Republicans has done enough to stop it, I would like to hear examples. Is this mad libs? I was talking about the second amendment as it applies here, and secondly whether states rights people actually agreed with the actions taken (aka are they totally fine with feds doing this in this way, contrary to states rights, and thus hypocrites). This line of seductive logic concludes that Germans love Uighur genocide, because they haven’t done enough to stop it. Comparing German involvement in China to GOP leadership involvement in a program being led by a republican president is very silly. Don't pretend they are remotely the same thing, it comes across as bad faith. McConnell and other big name republicans doing anything other than screaming about what is happening with these federal officers is a giant failure. This is totally their kinda thing they are supposed to be really against. In your eyes, why are they not speaking against the occupation happening in Portland? Can you separate personal opposition to something that’s happening, and third person evaluation of whether or not he/she has done enough to stop it, or can’t you? You can, but being able to see something as wrong isn't the minimum requirement for an ethical existence in this situation. Someone can see something is wrong but still being morally deficient by not doing enough to stop it. Watching someone being dragged into a van by a supposed federal officer requires more of a person than the ability to determine "hm, that looks to be a bad thing".
I would like to add to the last thing that we are not even asking for that much. Sure, it would be nice if they could start doing something against the abuses. But i would already happy if they stopped supporting the government and the people who are doing it. And if even that is asking too much, they could AT LEAST stop voting for those people.
|
lol the citation needed are actual eyewitness, the police force not really wanting anything to do with the feds and even the state not wanting anything to do with the feds. Portland residents don’t even want the feds there and it isn’t because they’re all dirty liberals. The wider media hasn’t even bothered to cover the protests in great detail because there isn’t anything to see, it’s incredibly boring. The Oregonian actually had to write an article about how little the protests are effecting Portland life because everyone supportive of the fed response is trying to claim that it’s burning down at the hands of the Antifa.
If the Antifa was actually burning the entirety of Portland’s federal buildings down and the police couldn’t handle it at all, Portland be OK with help. Unless we’re into believing that Portland is 90% Antifa supporters now.
Everyone is telling the feds to get the fuck out because the crowds only got larger again when they responded with violence. This is well documented. People are standing in solidarity with the protestors still remaining. A situation that was 99% peaceful protestors and 1% asshole who wants to start trouble has turned into a powder keg situation.
Come on man, we know you’re smarter than this.
|
On July 24 2020 06:26 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 04:27 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 03:01 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 02:49 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 02:31 StalkerTL wrote:
The protests in Portland were actually ratcheting down because the protestors and police eventually got to some degree of an understanding.
The fed involvement is actually just sparking tensions again. Which is why their involvement is one that only exists to provoke a reaction, not one to actually maintain law and order. The states were already dealing with the issue but the feds then bust through the door and scream that the opposition called your mom a whore and dad a bastard. Like, there’s no reason to send feds to Ohio right now to maintain law and order because everything’s relatively calm, but guess what? Fed involvement is just going to encourage disorder.
It’s the whole self-fulling prophecy again. We believe lockdowns are not effective so we’re going to do everything possible to make sure the lockdown won’t work so we’re proven right about lockdowns being ineffective. Same deal here, protestors are all Antifa who only want to burn things down, let’s send in unmarked feds to provoke them into retaliating and use that as proof that they’re only here to be violent. The beauty of this way of thinking is that you’re never wrong and never have to admit to being wrong. Major citation needed. The feds were not deployed to a nightly riot losing steam. If it was getting more dangerous to those inside, I’d expect equal evidence. As a Portland resident, who knows many other Portland residents, the protests were massively dying down and significantly less rowdy. They were just not really an issue anymore. I understand that you do not live in Portland, but I think you should wonder why Portland as a whole, including government leadership, seems totally against the feds doing what they are doing. What if you are being deceived by media sources? What if the situation really is as Portland residents and government leadership says? I have not met someone who wants the feds there, but I am sure 1 or 2 exist. You should be wondering why such an overwhelming majority of Portland leadership is against the feds being there. You link to Tweets, but if that is really what your understanding is based on, you should be significantly more open to other interpretations. It feels like the idea that the Portland situation was just really not nearly bad enough to warrant federal violence just isn't an option to you. I encourage you to listen to Portland residents, we aren't silent. The critical point to me is if you and friends personally observed the violence after dark on multiple days to make comparisons. Portland residents aren’t required to observe the section of the city containing the federal courthouse late at night. The feds have a responsibility to protect it from attack, and like I pointed out earlier, it doesn’t extend to chasing down fleeing rioters in rental vans to snatch them. Clearly identified, non-camo federal officers making arrests for federal crimes is clearly called for. See the videos in times past where fireworks were thrown, barricades on doors were erected, and rioters attempted to gain entry. If it was declining and would disperse naturally, then sure, delay what would be justified actions (again for the cheap seats: not what actually happened). If decline means 500 becomes 150 becomes 30, but it still involves lighting fires and throwing fireworks, this is absolutely the case for federal involvement. Also, see article for absence of Portland police. My previous post questioned your ability to separate distinct issues and attitudes, and I still await an answer, to make sure this is even worth an argument. Yes. I can confirm multiple days where police and federal presence substantially increased violence. Without the federal presence, there were occasional weirdos who would try to light stuff on fire and were legitimately bad, but the vast majority of people were peaceful. There are a lot of very angry people who are not being violent. I agree that feds trying to arrest people for burning down federal buildings is sensible. But the extent to which they are being terrible goes past the point of where outcry from party leadership is not just a good thing but a moral imperative. Different levels of moral failings require different levels of response. This is a level to which McConnell and others should be publicly calling for a complete stop to the entire federal presence in Portland. I feel like someone needs to not fully grasp how bad that is to be anything less than outraged. Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 02:18 Danglars wrote:On July 24 2020 02:00 Mohdoo wrote:On July 24 2020 01:21 Danglars wrote:On July 23 2020 15:01 Broetchenholer wrote:On July 23 2020 11:13 Danglars wrote:
The problem is that federal officers do not expect left wing activists to own their Second Amendment rights. All the Antifa apologists on this forum should go spread the word. No, the problem is that the republican party is not rebelling against a president creating constitutional crisis after crisis. If you believe that a significant portion of Republicans has done enough to stop it, I would like to hear examples. Is this mad libs? I was talking about the second amendment as it applies here, and secondly whether states rights people actually agreed with the actions taken (aka are they totally fine with feds doing this in this way, contrary to states rights, and thus hypocrites). This line of seductive logic concludes that Germans love Uighur genocide, because they haven’t done enough to stop it. Comparing German involvement in China to GOP leadership involvement in a program being led by a republican president is very silly. Don't pretend they are remotely the same thing, it comes across as bad faith. McConnell and other big name republicans doing anything other than screaming about what is happening with these federal officers is a giant failure. This is totally their kinda thing they are supposed to be really against. In your eyes, why are they not speaking against the occupation happening in Portland? Can you separate personal opposition to something that’s happening, and third person evaluation of whether or not he/she has done enough to stop it, or can’t you? You can, but being able to see something as wrong isn't the minimum requirement for an ethical existence in this situation. Someone can see something is wrong but still being morally deficient by not doing enough to stop it. Watching someone being dragged into a van by a supposed federal officer requires more of a person than the ability to determine "hm, that looks to be a bad thing".
It’s a sad thing how few violent rioters need to be present in a group mostly into chanting and pounding, before there is actual risk to the people inside and the continued functioning of the building. I have sympathy for the peaceful protester side of the equation.
As you’ve been reporting, it looks like the correct course would have been to hold off legitimate defensive actions in hopes of seeing the violent contingent fade to oblivion.
|
On July 24 2020 05:40 Velr wrote:
I was on /r conservative today.
American conservatives are basically pure facists at this point while deciding for themselves that they are "moderate". It's really quite staggering.... Well.. Chances are it all burns down.
Edit: I also frequent Breadtube.. And.. Aside from not being generally on the side of the bad side of history, they are just as dumb and moronic.
It wont burn down,if you look at all the media then it looks as if the usa is desintegrating and on the verge of collapse but thats the media and the bipartizan nature of the whole game (which is indeed quiet shocking to see).
In the end the differences are pretty small,they are all christian democratic liberals.
They fight over the most trivial things and everything gets blown out of proportion which makes it look like they are on the brink of civil war or falling apart into different states but its all "show".
The people on social media and the subreddits you mention they are not representative for the average american. No sane person even goes on reddit to make posts there,sane people they work in an office or whatever and they go home to spend the evening with their wife and kids. Its a small minority which represents the extremes and they are very vocal on social media but its not mainstream.
I do realize common sense is declining every day and i do fear for the future with the current young generation who is growing up with all these social media bubbles which become more and more extreme,i think they will be the ones who will push it over the edge eventually but thats still many many years from now. For now its still a minority.
|
On July 24 2020 07:30 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 05:40 Velr wrote:
I was on /r conservative today.
American conservatives are basically pure facists at this point while deciding for themselves that they are "moderate". It's really quite staggering.... Well.. Chances are it all burns down.
Edit: I also frequent Breadtube.. And.. Aside from not being generally on the side of the bad side of history, they are just as dumb and moronic. It wont burn down,if you look at all the media then it looks as if the usa is desintegrating and on the verge of collapse but thats the media and the bipartizan nature of the whole game (which is indeed quiet shocking to see). In the end the differences are pretty small,they are all christian democratic liberals. They fight over the most trivial things and everything gets blown out of proportion which makes it look like they are on the brink of civil war or falling apart into different states but its all "show". The people on social media and the subreddits you mention they are not representative for the average american. No sane person even goes on reddit to make posts there,sane people they work in an office or whatever and they go home to spend the evening with their wife and kids. Its a small minority which represents the extremes and they are very vocal on social media but its not mainstream. I do realize common sense is declining every day and i do fear for the future with the current young generation who is growing up with all these social media bubbles which become more and more extreme,i think they will be the ones who will push it over the edge eventually but thats still many many years from now. For now its still a minority.
That's what you call being in denial. And btw, it's already burning (less these days than it did at the start of the BLM protests, but still).
|
So in response to closing Houston consulate China orders US consulate in Chengdu to be closed: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53522640 I doubt this is the end of it. I expect more action from US, however it is not clear to me if this escalation can lead to achiving their goal (stopping industrial espionage),
On a side note i was in Chengdu once, nice city, great food.
|
On July 24 2020 05:40 Velr wrote:
I was on /r conservative today.
American conservatives are basically pure facists at this point while deciding for themselves that they are "moderate". It's really quite staggering.... Well.. Chances are it all burns down.
Edit: I also frequent Breadtube.. And.. Aside from not being generally on the side of the bad side of history, they are just as dumb and moronic.
Well it's reddit. Those are the most toxic echo chamber you will find on the internet. I think it tells you more about reddit than about conservatives really.
|
Oh, I just realised they closed the Trump subbreddit... That explains why Conservative is now SOO bad.
On July 24 2020 07:30 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 05:40 Velr wrote:
I was on /r conservative today.
American conservatives are basically pure facists at this point while deciding for themselves that they are "moderate". It's really quite staggering.... Well.. Chances are it all burns down.
Edit: I also frequent Breadtube.. And.. Aside from not being generally on the side of the bad side of history, they are just as dumb and moronic. It wont burn down,if you look at all the media then it looks as if the usa is desintegrating and on the verge of collapse but thats the media and the bipartizan nature of the whole game (which is indeed quiet shocking to see). In the end the differences are pretty small,they are all christian democratic liberals. They fight over the most trivial things and everything gets blown out of proportion which makes it look like they are on the brink of civil war or falling apart into different states but its all "show". The people on social media and the subreddits you mention they are not representative for the average american. No sane person even goes on reddit to make posts there,sane people they work in an office or whatever and they go home to spend the evening with their wife and kids. Its a small minority which represents the extremes and they are very vocal on social media but its not mainstream. I do realize common sense is declining every day and i do fear for the future with the current young generation who is growing up with all these social media bubbles which become more and more extreme,i think they will be the ones who will push it over the edge eventually but thats still many many years from now. For now its still a minority.
Out of interest, what exactly would need to happen for you to get really worried?
Younger Millenials and Gen Z allready grew up with Social Media, I don't know why you think this will be a problem for a future generation. The generation that grew up in social media bubbles is now entering the workforce (well, it would, if it could).
|
On July 24 2020 04:35 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 04:35 Erasme wrote:On July 24 2020 04:30 JimmiC wrote:
Can you cite where the people of portland called for the Feds to be sent in? The federal gov is in its right to defend federal buildings. The question is more like does snatching protesters in the streets fall into that ? Did that not happen after the feds showed up not before?
Yes, the feds started to snatch people off the street to protect the federals buildings of Portland. Unless they're targeting specific people that were indeed involved with destructing/damaging federal property, it's not justifiable.
|
On July 24 2020 21:21 Erasme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 04:35 JimmiC wrote:On July 24 2020 04:35 Erasme wrote:On July 24 2020 04:30 JimmiC wrote:
Can you cite where the people of portland called for the Feds to be sent in? The federal gov is in its right to defend federal buildings. The question is more like does snatching protesters in the streets fall into that ? Did that not happen after the feds showed up not before? Yes, the feds started to snatch people off the street to protect the federals buildings of Portland. Unless they're targeting specific people that were indeed involved with destructing/damaging federal property, it's not justifiable. Even if they are arresting specific people that are involved in destruction of property there is no reason to do so with unmarked officers in unmarked vans.
|
|
|
On July 24 2020 22:16 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2020 21:21 Erasme wrote:On July 24 2020 04:35 JimmiC wrote:On July 24 2020 04:35 Erasme wrote:On July 24 2020 04:30 JimmiC wrote:
Can you cite where the people of portland called for the Feds to be sent in? The federal gov is in its right to defend federal buildings. The question is more like does snatching protesters in the streets fall into that ? Did that not happen after the feds showed up not before? Yes, the feds started to snatch people off the street to protect the federals buildings of Portland. Unless they're targeting specific people that were indeed involved with destructing/damaging federal property, it's not justifiable. Even if they are arresting specific people that are involved in destruction of property there is no reason to do so with unmarked officers in unmarked vans.
Are they even arresting people? My understanding of the situation is that they are "detaining" people by throwing them into unmarked vans and then releasing them without charges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
