|
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 August 28 2020 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 01:59 farvacola wrote:On August 28 2020 01:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:53 farvacola wrote:On August 28 2020 01:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:22 IgnE wrote:On August 28 2020 01:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:15 IgnE wrote:On August 28 2020 00:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
When people use the "Million Uyghurs put in concentration camp" I always wonder whether it's supposed to be the same million from a couple years ago or those ones are all dead in some mass graves somewhere and it's a new million or what?
I also wonder if people have seen a US prison (or the rubble where some Palestinian's home used to be) lately when they look at the conditions afforded Uyghurs in so called concentration camps facilitating genocide.
But the biggest red flag has got to be how invested the right wing is in selling the idea that they give a damn about Muslims, let alone Muslims that aren't even US citizens or able to act as a vassal oil/resource regime. I don't know why you are taking this position. + Show Spoiler +What the Chinese are doing is very bad. Orders of magnitude worse than anything the US government is doing to its citizens. Short answer is I'm not a fan of western chauvinism. I'm not a fan of mob craziness, but sometimes you have to stand in solidarity with oppressed peoples. I mean there's a discussion to be had about the radical violence that came out of part of the Uyghur population in China, how their response compares to ours post 9-11 (they've managed not to invade the wrong country and kill somewhere between 100,000 and 1,000,000 civilians halfway across the planet, so that's a point for China) and so forth. Just not for here. I've implored the people that want to constantly reference China to make a relevant thread but they've thus refused. Western chauvinism is how readily people dismiss the millions the US kills around the globe directly and indirectly and millions it incarcerates, sterilizes, forces/coerces to labor, etc in deplorable conditions as notably less significant than whatever they think China is doing to Uyghurs. Before any substantive comparisons can be made/analyzed, people have to have a solid grip on what we currently know about both. That's pretty much impossible with the western left/center. How is it that you’ve decided that the framework you’ve outlined is “non-Western?” Your insistence that interlocutors adhere to a set of assumptions before they are able to opine on certain topics is as chauvinistic as anything you’re responding to. There's some comedy in this coming after the preceding post from falling but I'm referring to an internationalist framework through a Marxist/historical materialism lens. Not anything of my own creation. There’s no such thing as an expression that exists divorced from the circumstances of its utterance. If you say it, it’s yours, so own it. You and I both know there are all sorts of glosses on the sentiments your offering that separate them from whatever theoretical orthodoxy you’re borrowing from. I should have added: They don't have to agree with it, just understand it enough to be able to carry on a substantive discussion. People can share whatever thoughts they want on racism in the US, communism, or whatever else though, the whole Show nested quote +It's very important to be informed about a discussion before posting your thoughts. part of the TL commandments doesn't apply here as far as I can tell.
Right, but the problem you’re referring to is much bigger than whether TL enforces soft rules of posting, Left Materialists have been struggling with translating shifting and gooey theory into persuasive, consumable ideas since Marx first started spreading his thoughts, there’s nothing new about your frustration that many people with strong ideas about the ways of the world have not done the reading.
|
On August 28 2020 01:52 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 00:30 Jockmcplop wrote:On August 28 2020 00:22 JimmiC wrote:On August 27 2020 23:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 27 2020 23:33 maybenexttime wrote:
What genocide in Palestine? Do you even know what a genocide is? I know there's absolutely no possible coherent reasoning for referring to an Uighur genocide but refusing to identify Israel's treatment of Palestinians as such. If we want to be lazy we can at minimum agree to classify them both as either genocide or not together. Now only one has the full-throated support of the US government and was part of the RNC convention location theater though (so an appropriate topic for this thread). You do know that the Uighur's are being sent to "re-education camps" where they often never come back and that the all powerful Chinese government is forcefully sterilizing them right? That the far right of Israel who barely won the last election is taking sacred and agreed upon land is certainly awful and that Trump is supporting the corrupt Netenyahu is also terrible. But it is not in the same ball park as what is happening in China to its own citizens. You do realise that millions of Palestinians have lived their entire lives in an open air prison, right?Its not just taking land. Palestinians are deprived of basic freedoms for their entire lives with no hope of change. Wait, wait, wait. Those open air prisons aren't even in Israel are they? (Or am I missing something?) You are talking about the permanent refugee camps in the surrounding Muslim countries. Because it is the surrounding Muslim countries that refuse to allow the refugees to integrate (though an equal number of Jews fled Muslim countries and were integrated.) You cannot conflate like that as though Israel is keeping the Palestinians boxed in when they are maintained (by not allowing maintenance) by the authority of other countries.
All ports of entry and exit into Palestine are being controlled by Israel and imports are restricted, exports were also restricted.
An example of a full blockade :
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israel-blocks-west-bank-exports-as-trade-tensions-rise-along-with-towers-of-unsold-produce/2020/02/17/4a3550c2-4e6f-11ea-967b-e074d302c7d4_story.html
And then the import restrictions :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_imports
List number 2 is particularly awful, these items are ONLY authorized for approved projects *by the international community*. Palestinians themselves ? Can't build anything, can't even import concrete.
This list includes:
Portland cement and lime (in bulk, bags or barrels)
Natural and Quarry aggregates and all varieties of gravel
Ready concrete
Precast concrete elements and products
Steel elements and/or construction products
Iron for foundations and columns, at any diameter (including wielded steel nets)
Steel cables of any width
Forms for construction elements (plastics or galvanized iron)
Industrialized forms for casting concrete
Plastic or composite beams more than 4 mm thick
Thermal isolation materials and products
Blocs (at any width) - Concrete; Silicate; Ytong or its equivalent; or gypsum
Materials and products for sealing structures
Asphalt and its components (Bitumen, emulsion) in aggregate or packaged
Steel elements or framing products for construction
Cast concrete elements and products for drainage over 1 m in diameter
Precast units and sea-borne containers
Vehicles, excluding private cars and including 4X4 vehicles and other categories of motor vehicles liable to be used in terror activities
Lumber beams and boards more than 2 cm thick, (liable to be used in "offensive" tunneling aimed at penetrating Israeli territory), unless incorporated in finished products
Specific procedures, on a case by case basis, will be established so as to permit the transfer of such lumber for other purposes in Gaza.
He is talking about basic freedoms. No trade without heavy delays and restrictions, they are just mostly left to rot and at the mercy of international projects. The country is an open-air prison where they can't really do anything by themselves freely.
And before 2010 it was even worse :
Cement, wood, iron, cattle, animal medicine, musical instruments, and notebooks were among the items banned before June 2010.
According to the Haaretz the following items were banned in 2009: books, candles, crayons, clothing, cups, cutlery, crockery, electric appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines, glasses, light bulbs, matches, musical instruments, needles, sheets, blankets, shoes, mattresses, spare machine and car parts, and thread.
Reactions
In February 2009, then American Senator John Kerry (D-MA) visited Gaza and expressed his "astonishment" at the ban of items. Importation of pasta was allowed after that.
Woohooo. Pasta. Known bomb-making item.
|
On August 28 2020 01:18 Broetchenholer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 00:54 Sadist wrote:On August 28 2020 00:44 Nevuk wrote:
The only requirement for a cop to get away with murder is that they be willing to testify under oath that they felt afraid, in the US. This is a principle known as qualified immunity - the idea being that a person can't be charged for executing their job's duties (it applies to other professions though it's nowhere near as prevalant). It's slowly started having some pushback from a few courts due to just how rampant the abuse is, and even Danglars thinks it has gone way too far (I think he wanted to eliminate it instead of other police reforms).
If you watch the video, even if he were going for a knife IN his car, there was no reason to shoot him. The cop grabs him to hold him still so he could shoot him 7 times. Grabbing him to throw him to the ground would be well, not QUITE as easy, but not that much harder than holding him to immobilize.
It wasnt a knife in his car it was allegedly a knife in his hand already as he went to his car. The theory is he could have had a gun in uis car, used his vehicle as a weapon, or escaped and harmed someone. I say allegedly because its hard to find a reputible source on it. None of that justifies shooting someone. He was not shot using his car as a weapon, he was not threatening anybody with a gun. Just think about what you are writing here. You say the police might be allowed to kill you, not because you are a threat to them and others, but because you might get away otherwise and become a threat. That is ridiculous. So we are even further then just the police was fearing for his life, now we are at the police was thinking they might get into a situation where they could fear for their life later, so better shoot the man in the back now.
If you fight with a police officer and have a knife in hand you are going to lose the benefit of the doubt. You are taking this out of context completely. Its not as if this was a random guy walking to a car knife in hand and a cop drove by and shot him.
There is a difference.
|
On August 28 2020 02:12 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 02:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:59 farvacola wrote:On August 28 2020 01:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:53 farvacola wrote:On August 28 2020 01:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:22 IgnE wrote:On August 28 2020 01:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 28 2020 01:15 IgnE wrote:On August 28 2020 00:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
When people use the "Million Uyghurs put in concentration camp" I always wonder whether it's supposed to be the same million from a couple years ago or those ones are all dead in some mass graves somewhere and it's a new million or what?
I also wonder if people have seen a US prison (or the rubble where some Palestinian's home used to be) lately when they look at the conditions afforded Uyghurs in so called concentration camps facilitating genocide.
But the biggest red flag has got to be how invested the right wing is in selling the idea that they give a damn about Muslims, let alone Muslims that aren't even US citizens or able to act as a vassal oil/resource regime. I don't know why you are taking this position. + Show Spoiler +What the Chinese are doing is very bad. Orders of magnitude worse than anything the US government is doing to its citizens. Short answer is I'm not a fan of western chauvinism. I'm not a fan of mob craziness, but sometimes you have to stand in solidarity with oppressed peoples. I mean there's a discussion to be had about the radical violence that came out of part of the Uyghur population in China, how their response compares to ours post 9-11 (they've managed not to invade the wrong country and kill somewhere between 100,000 and 1,000,000 civilians halfway across the planet, so that's a point for China) and so forth. Just not for here. I've implored the people that want to constantly reference China to make a relevant thread but they've thus refused. Western chauvinism is how readily people dismiss the millions the US kills around the globe directly and indirectly and millions it incarcerates, sterilizes, forces/coerces to labor, etc in deplorable conditions as notably less significant than whatever they think China is doing to Uyghurs. Before any substantive comparisons can be made/analyzed, people have to have a solid grip on what we currently know about both. That's pretty much impossible with the western left/center. How is it that you’ve decided that the framework you’ve outlined is “non-Western?” Your insistence that interlocutors adhere to a set of assumptions before they are able to opine on certain topics is as chauvinistic as anything you’re responding to. There's some comedy in this coming after the preceding post from falling but I'm referring to an internationalist framework through a Marxist/historical materialism lens. Not anything of my own creation. There’s no such thing as an expression that exists divorced from the circumstances of its utterance. If you say it, it’s yours, so own it. You and I both know there are all sorts of glosses on the sentiments your offering that separate them from whatever theoretical orthodoxy you’re borrowing from. I should have added: They don't have to agree with it, just understand it enough to be able to carry on a substantive discussion. People can share whatever thoughts they want on racism in the US, communism, or whatever else though, the whole It's very important to be informed about a discussion before posting your thoughts. part of the TL commandments doesn't apply here as far as I can tell. Right, but the problem you’re referring to is much bigger than whether TL enforces soft rules of posting, Left Materialists have been struggling with translating shifting and gooey theory into persuasive, consumable ideas since Marx first started spreading his thoughts, there’s nothing new about your frustration that many people with strong ideas about the ways of the world have not done the reading.
Fair enough. I've accepted I'm not going to gain any valuable insights from them on most of this stuff. They just get upset that I don't give their musings the typical gold star they've come accustomed to in our society.
If you're speaking about folks like you or Igne, I just don't think this an appropriate thread for most of that stuff (I've got the complaint chorus for it several times for not being rudimentary enough).
|
On August 28 2020 01:06 Broetchenholer wrote:
Can we stop comparing Palestine to China? It has nothing to do with the discussion. The problems the US face are the problems of the US and it does not matter that other countries are worse in area xyz. Capitalism is not the reason that african americans are shot in the back, nor is a government form that is not capitalist a solution for the issue. The US needs to chnage their attitude towards social justice from commodity for those that can afford it to everyone gets it. The fact that everything you want in the US has a pricetag, keeps those without means out. The police is just a symptom of that. As long as basic human rights are a privilege in the US, those that have it will keep those without down for fear of losing out themselves and jealousy of free handouts for the poor.
This post is weird to me because while youre saying Capitalism is not the reason for the racist treatment the cops give POCs, you identify issues that Capitalism contributes to the issue, which is basically what GH says is the problem.
Like, you've identified racist police as a symptom of the US's capitalistic bullshit, I'm not sure what the disconnect it, unless you mean that its not literally the entire problem in which case I agree (and GH also likely agrees), and that its just a huge problem contributing to the racist cop bullshit?
Like I basically agree with the whole post, but the Capitalism is not the reason part could switch 'the' with 'a' and be completely contradictory with the remainder of the post.
Either way, US capitalism sucks and Im tempted to say its unsalvageable within our lifetimes, it'd take a reformation of the collective American conscience towards something more akin to a Scandinavian mindset before I think the US can be trusted with very much capitalism and not just systematically ruin shit.
|
|
|
On August 28 2020 01:58 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 01:15 IgnE wrote:On August 28 2020 00:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
When people use the "Million Uyghurs put in concentration camp" I always wonder whether it's supposed to be the same million from a couple years ago or those ones are all dead in some mass graves somewhere and it's a new million or what?
I also wonder if people have seen a US prison (or the rubble where some Palestinian's home used to be) lately when they look at the conditions afforded Uyghurs in so called concentration camps facilitating genocide.
But the biggest red flag has got to be how invested the right wing is in selling the idea that they give a damn about Muslims, let alone Muslims that aren't even US citizens or able to act as a vassal oil/resource regime. I don't know why you are taking this position. What the Chinese are doing is very bad. Orders of magnitude worse than anything the US government is doing to its citizens. Well, we have concentration camps for immigrants right now so I wouldn't be throwing stones very hard. The US was also forcibly sterilizing many native american women until the 1980s, iirc. Additionally, we have forced labor due to our prison population, which is crazy high (and forced unpaid labor in at least 7 states, as we've discussed before) - in 2007, we had 25% of all the world's prisoners. The only order of magnitude worse is the rumored executions - which are currently just rumors (and it could be argued that the US' almost total negligence at immigration camps during a global pandemic is equivalent in result if not in method). This would ordinarily be whataboutism, but it's already whataboutism to bring up Uighurs in the first place. They have almost no relevance to US politics, and none in the current conversation except as a way of saying "look, this other country is doing something bad too!". (Sidenote: why are we talking about Israel/Palestine/China in the first place? Was there news about it?)
1) Yes, the US is detaining immigrants. Not exactly the same thing, quantitatively or qualitatively, but it's bad. Awful.
2) I am sure the Uyghurs who are alive now feel like everyone should shut up about China so that we can talk about the forced sterilization of some people in the 1980s. I don't know where people get this idea that we are calculating and comparing the goodness scores of the US and China when we point out that China is doing truly heinous things, right now.
3) If the Uyghurs being disappeared and who knows what else had gone through anything remotely comparable to our admittedly imperfect justice system then maybe you'd have a point about incarceration. We know the world is evil, yes, but let's be mindful of the differences.
|
On August 28 2020 02:13 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 01:18 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 28 2020 00:54 Sadist wrote:On August 28 2020 00:44 Nevuk wrote:
The only requirement for a cop to get away with murder is that they be willing to testify under oath that they felt afraid, in the US. This is a principle known as qualified immunity - the idea being that a person can't be charged for executing their job's duties (it applies to other professions though it's nowhere near as prevalant). It's slowly started having some pushback from a few courts due to just how rampant the abuse is, and even Danglars thinks it has gone way too far (I think he wanted to eliminate it instead of other police reforms).
If you watch the video, even if he were going for a knife IN his car, there was no reason to shoot him. The cop grabs him to hold him still so he could shoot him 7 times. Grabbing him to throw him to the ground would be well, not QUITE as easy, but not that much harder than holding him to immobilize.
It wasnt a knife in his car it was allegedly a knife in his hand already as he went to his car. The theory is he could have had a gun in uis car, used his vehicle as a weapon, or escaped and harmed someone. I say allegedly because its hard to find a reputible source on it. None of that justifies shooting someone. He was not shot using his car as a weapon, he was not threatening anybody with a gun. Just think about what you are writing here. You say the police might be allowed to kill you, not because you are a threat to them and others, but because you might get away otherwise and become a threat. That is ridiculous. So we are even further then just the police was fearing for his life, now we are at the police was thinking they might get into a situation where they could fear for their life later, so better shoot the man in the back now. If you fight with a police officer and have a knife in hand you are going to lose the benefit of the doubt. You are taking this out of context completely. Its not as if this was a random guy walking to a car knife in hand and a cop drove by and shot him. There is a difference.
Yes, there is, but not in regards to the outcome. A person that is resisting arrest should be treated differently then someone quietly giving up. But not to the extent we see here. If there is not a credible threat to life established, there is simply no way an arrest should turn into a shooting. And if the shooting part affects one group of people more then others, it is fair to point to that and forget the part about resisting.
It's like the age old argument, it's so sad that this woman got raped, but she dressed really provocative and was on her own. Statistically, Blake got shot because of his skin color, not because he resisted arrest. He probably even got arrested because of his skincolor.
|
On August 28 2020 01:16 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 00:53 Jockmcplop wrote:On August 28 2020 00:37 JimmiC wrote:On August 28 2020 00:30 Jockmcplop wrote:On August 28 2020 00:22 JimmiC wrote:On August 27 2020 23:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 27 2020 23:33 maybenexttime wrote:
What genocide in Palestine? Do you even know what a genocide is? I know there's absolutely no possible coherent reasoning for referring to an Uighur genocide but refusing to identify Israel's treatment of Palestinians as such. If we want to be lazy we can at minimum agree to classify them both as either genocide or not together. Now only one has the full-throated support of the US government and was part of the RNC convention location theater though (so an appropriate topic for this thread). You do know that the Uighur's are being sent to "re-education camps" where they often never come back and that the all powerful Chinese government is forcefully sterilizing them right? That the far right of Israel who barely won the last election is taking sacred and agreed upon land is certainly awful and that Trump is supporting the corrupt Netenyahu is also terrible. But it is not in the same ball park as what is happening in China to its own citizens. You do realise that millions of Palestinians have lived their entire lives in an open air prison, right? Its not just taking land. Palestinians are deprived of basic freedoms for their entire lives with no hope of change. The Palestinian vs Israel thing is super complicated, one that most of the free world had a large hand it fucking right up. You can not ignore the Holocaust, that the Jews are still the most hated group and enemy of conspiracy theories on both sides. There are countries (and posters in this thread) that want to wipe them off the map. The Chinese Government is committing genocide and it is not at all complicated. I'm not trying to minimize the plight of the Palestinians, just that the two situations are from equal. I'm not really interested in the political context surrounding the issues here, rather the experience of Uighurs compared to that of Palestinians. I would argue its much worse for the Palestinians. At least the Uighurs had some chance at living a normal life for a while. I think we will have to just agree to disagree. The Uighurs have had all their religious building destroyed, they have 0 rights, are being forcibly sterilized, having their culture destroyed but also their ability to have children stolen. The re-education camps have people go and often never return. They have no government and no one on the international stage campaigning for them, no country or army fighting for them. They are ignored because of China's economic power. Palestine is a horrible situation, but it is not on the same level. There are political parties within Israel that want better for them. There is negations. Until this past year they could still make their pilgrimage. And unlike with the Uighurs, who have done nothing to China there is years of hostility, rockets launched and so on. We could have someone here who understood the issue for the Israelis and another for the Palestinians and have a debate. That could not happen for the Uighurs because unless you think removing a large population of people and a culture is good, as long as it it helps the Party and the Han people. This analogy may be bad, and if it is I apologize. Sexism exists in North America and that is awful. Sexism exists in Taliban run Afghanistan and that is awful. It is far far worse for women in Taliban run Afghanistan than it is for women in North America. That does not mean it is not awful in NA and it does not minimize there plight. But there are different degrees of things.
Claiming that Uyghurs have done nothing is factually incorrect. There's been plenty of terrorism committed by Uyghurs (which doesn't mean they should be punished as a whole). The conflict has a long history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_conflict
|
There's a liquor store near my house back home, and it says:
"Russia helped Castro, now they help Trump, Maximo Alvarez can kiss my rump"
The trump supporting Cuban Americans are an embarrassment to all other Cubans who struggled to get to the US, and any other Cubans who openly see the similar scenario as Cuba once was in.
|
On August 28 2020 02:34 ShoCkeyy wrote:
There's a liquor store near my house back home, and it says:
"Russia helped Castro, now they help Trump, Maximo Alvarez can kiss my rump"
The trump supporting Cuban Americans are an embarrassment to all other Cubans who struggled to get to the US, and any other Cubans who openly see the similar scenario as Cuba once was in.
I get the impression you're not talking about Batista? I mean Trump probably doesn't even know how to a shoot a gun. Not Cuban myself but Trump/the US seems to be on the Batista path more than the Castro path (but I'm hopeful for the latter. without China sanctioning us like we do Cuba though).
|
On August 28 2020 01:48 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 01:15 IgnE wrote:On August 28 2020 00:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
When people use the "Million Uyghurs put in concentration camp" I always wonder whether it's supposed to be the same million from a couple years ago or those ones are all dead in some mass graves somewhere and it's a new million or what?
I also wonder if people have seen a US prison (or the rubble where some Palestinian's home used to be) lately when they look at the conditions afforded Uyghurs in so called concentration camps facilitating genocide.
But the biggest red flag has got to be how invested the right wing is in selling the idea that they give a damn about Muslims, let alone Muslims that aren't even US citizens or able to act as a vassal oil/resource regime. I don't know why you are taking this position. What the Chinese are doing is very bad. Orders of magnitude worse than anything the US government is doing to its citizens. On August 27 2020 22:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 27 2020 21:26 Sadist wrote:On August 27 2020 20:57 Zambrah wrote:On August 27 2020 19:46 Sadist wrote:On August 27 2020 16:25 Broetchenholer wrote:
Analyzing anything about the specifics of the black victim is kinda pointless if you see how the white people are treated in the same week. The guy that shot 2 protestors was miraculously not shot in the back. One man might have been reaching for a knife in the car with his 3 children, the other was holding an semi automatic long weapon, people were yelling that he had shot people. And if i just tell you that and that one of those was shot 7 times, which one would it have been? The circumstances are not relevant. The bar is different. Many guys had rifles walking around. Did the police see that guy shoot someone or were they called in a response to a shooting? I honestly dont know. Context matters here. You can bet if the guy with the rifle resisted arrest and made the officers feel endangered hed have been shot. If we rush to judgement and are wrong we lose credibility. Its important to be correct about this stuff. It may very well have been unjustified and the officer should go to jail be we dont know all the details. With George Floyd we didnt need all the details because they were irrelevant. The issue was having your knee placed on a mans neck while he was already subdued. That went on for minutes. This shooting was a split second by comparison. It may not be a good idea to lump this guy in with Tamir Rice, Philando Castille, George Floyd, etc Why is the white kid with the rifle less frightening than a black person literally doing nothing wrong in their own fucking home like Breonna Taylor? The officers fucked up with Breonna Taylor. Bad things happen every day. There is only an illusion of safety. Your last few posts show how much of a cop apologist you are and how misinformed/callous you are about people of color and their lives. The more you post, the more you come across as a complete and utter moron. If your first thought is "wait, what's all the details of both situations" when video evidence is right there for you, then you're lost and will remain so. Commenting on this topic is probably not something you should do going forward. The naive assumption that "video evidence" is transparent and immediately available for everyone's judgment is becoming a serious problem. People should be thinking "wait, what's the total context here." But it must be consistently applied. It can become evil when video evidence that confirms your prejudice is seen as transparent and video evidence that challenges your prejudice is seen as opaque, requiring a further "debunking." You apply the same thinking to the George Floyd killing? The Philando murder? The Eric Garner manslaughter? With ample video evidence and I watched the video of Blake up until the shooting, the cop followed him. The cop could have stood where he was and watched and then, and only then, saw that he was a threat, discharge his duty. But he followed him to the vehicle and shot him in the back. I agree any and all evidence should be scrutinized as warranted. This is pretty clear cut.
I don't know what you mean by "the same thinking." They are all obviously different cases. In some sense I apply the "same" form of thinking to each one, but the content is always different.
Blake is still alive in this case. He will have his day in court no doubt. There are a host of possible objections to your version of events. That the cop "could have stood where he was" for example doesn't really seem to take into account the fact that once the guy gets in the car he can turn it on and drive away or into cops and will be more difficult to stop. I wouldn't want to commit myself here to the truth of that, because I don't know what the truth is. I just think anyone who looks at the video and thinks they immediately know everything about the situation is almost definitely missing something.
It's a senseless tragedy that should not have happened. The cop who shot him acted wrongly. But I think we are not asking questions that need to be asked because we are fixated by the video images, which provoke a deep, visceral response in many people. We should be trying to look beyond the proximate causes on video tape to the deeper situation that led to the encounter in the first place. When I reflect on it, I see something stochastically inevitable given the starting conditions of the video. If we replayed that scenario out across America a million times, the vast majority would not end in a shooting. Some would. I don't know how we can change that without changing the starting conditions.
Law enforcement, generally speaking, is a very difficult problem. I think the root cause of police brutality/killing is most often the instinctual, adrenal conflict between police and citizen that finds its source in the serious consequences of an arrest. Being arrested sets off vast, uncaring judicial processes which can result in loss of jobs, disintegration of families, and social stigma. That burden falls disproportionately on the poor and non-white people. I step maybe onto dangerous ground here, but if we imagine a world in which everyone immediately submits to a police officer making an arrest, it follows that there would be no police shootings. Not submitting to police should not be a death sentence, and many famous police shootings have nothing proximately to do with an individual's non-compliance, but are rather tragic, deadly misunderstandings. All that I mean to say is that policing is never just policing. It is also the state justice apparatus behind it, which depends on trust for its legitimacy.
|
|
|
On August 28 2020 02:32 Broetchenholer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 02:13 Sadist wrote:On August 28 2020 01:18 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 28 2020 00:54 Sadist wrote:On August 28 2020 00:44 Nevuk wrote:
The only requirement for a cop to get away with murder is that they be willing to testify under oath that they felt afraid, in the US. This is a principle known as qualified immunity - the idea being that a person can't be charged for executing their job's duties (it applies to other professions though it's nowhere near as prevalant). It's slowly started having some pushback from a few courts due to just how rampant the abuse is, and even Danglars thinks it has gone way too far (I think he wanted to eliminate it instead of other police reforms).
If you watch the video, even if he were going for a knife IN his car, there was no reason to shoot him. The cop grabs him to hold him still so he could shoot him 7 times. Grabbing him to throw him to the ground would be well, not QUITE as easy, but not that much harder than holding him to immobilize.
It wasnt a knife in his car it was allegedly a knife in his hand already as he went to his car. The theory is he could have had a gun in uis car, used his vehicle as a weapon, or escaped and harmed someone. I say allegedly because its hard to find a reputible source on it. None of that justifies shooting someone. He was not shot using his car as a weapon, he was not threatening anybody with a gun. Just think about what you are writing here. You say the police might be allowed to kill you, not because you are a threat to them and others, but because you might get away otherwise and become a threat. That is ridiculous. So we are even further then just the police was fearing for his life, now we are at the police was thinking they might get into a situation where they could fear for their life later, so better shoot the man in the back now. If you fight with a police officer and have a knife in hand you are going to lose the benefit of the doubt. You are taking this out of context completely. Its not as if this was a random guy walking to a car knife in hand and a cop drove by and shot him. There is a difference. Yes, there is, but not in regards to the outcome. A person that is resisting arrest should be treated differently then someone quietly giving up. But not to the extent we see here. If there is not a credible threat to life established, there is simply no way an arrest should turn into a shooting. And if the shooting part affects one group of people more then others, it is fair to point to that and forget the part about resisting. It's like the age old argument, it's so sad that this woman got raped, but she dressed really provocative and was on her own. Statistically, Blake got shot because of his skin color, not because he resisted arrest. He probably even got arrested because of his skincolor.
This is the reason I think the knife is not being brought up in the Media. There will be accusations of victim blaming.
If you fight/resist arrest with multiple police officers, have a knife in hand, and try to enter your car with the officer right behind you, i think there is a high probability you get shot regardless of race.
All of these police officers are shown videos of cops being murdered by suspects during traffic stops, pursuits, etc. After they are asked or told what to do differently and/or how to protect themselves so it doesnt happen to them. These guys know if someone enters their car an officer has been killed in that situation before. Thats why they are likely to shoot.
We dont know if the officers escalated the situation or what happened before the video starts. Maybe they could have de-escalated. Who knows. If they did try to deescalate and it went nowhere, and the tazers failed, what are their other options? Once he got off of the ground and out of their control and tried to get into the car there was little chance of it going the other way. They could have just let him drive off but then people would be upset about that too. You see it when people are let out of Jail on parole then murder someone. I think alot of these cops and people in the criminal justice system are in a position where they cant win.
|
On August 28 2020 02:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 02:34 ShoCkeyy wrote:
There's a liquor store near my house back home, and it says:
"Russia helped Castro, now they help Trump, Maximo Alvarez can kiss my rump"
The trump supporting Cuban Americans are an embarrassment to all other Cubans who struggled to get to the US, and any other Cubans who openly see the similar scenario as Cuba once was in. I get the impression you're not talking about Batista? I mean Trump probably doesn't even know how to a shoot a gun. Not Cuban myself but Trump/the US seems to be on the Batista path more than the Castro path (but I'm hopeful for the latter. without China sanctioning us like we do Cuba though).
They're both total shit, I would never hope for either or, and that's all these Cubans have ever known is dictators. I never really understood why Cubans fought for so much "freedom" to just be ruled by one person constantly. It's some kind of masculinity problem they have. Cuba was literally a US Territory for a while, they could of been their own version of Puerto Rico if they would just stuck it out with the US.
|
On August 28 2020 02:23 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 01:06 Broetchenholer wrote:
Can we stop comparing Palestine to China? It has nothing to do with the discussion. The problems the US face are the problems of the US and it does not matter that other countries are worse in area xyz. Capitalism is not the reason that african americans are shot in the back, nor is a government form that is not capitalist a solution for the issue. The US needs to chnage their attitude towards social justice from commodity for those that can afford it to everyone gets it. The fact that everything you want in the US has a pricetag, keeps those without means out. The police is just a symptom of that. As long as basic human rights are a privilege in the US, those that have it will keep those without down for fear of losing out themselves and jealousy of free handouts for the poor. This post is weird to me because while youre saying Capitalism is not the reason for the racist treatment the cops give POCs, you identify issues that Capitalism contributes to the issue, which is basically what GH says is the problem. Like, you've identified racist police as a symptom of the US's capitalistic bullshit, I'm not sure what the disconnect it, unless you mean that its not literally the entire problem in which case I agree (and GH also likely agrees), and that its just a huge problem contributing to the racist cop bullshit? Like I basically agree with the whole post, but the Capitalism is not the reason part could switch 'the' with 'a' and be completely contradictory with the remainder of the post. Either way, US capitalism sucks and Im tempted to say its unsalvageable within our lifetimes, it'd take a reformation of the collective American conscience towards something more akin to a Scandinavian mindset before I think the US can be trusted with very much capitalism and not just systematically ruin shit.
Yes, of course. I said as much last page and a few before that. The "Capitalism is the only problem" trope is a deliberate diversion here. The closest to that would be Igne's class reductionism (he wouldn't call it that) imo but even that would be a woefully benighted description of it.
|
|
|
On August 28 2020 03:03 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 02:32 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 28 2020 02:13 Sadist wrote:On August 28 2020 01:18 Broetchenholer wrote:On August 28 2020 00:54 Sadist wrote:On August 28 2020 00:44 Nevuk wrote:
The only requirement for a cop to get away with murder is that they be willing to testify under oath that they felt afraid, in the US. This is a principle known as qualified immunity - the idea being that a person can't be charged for executing their job's duties (it applies to other professions though it's nowhere near as prevalant). It's slowly started having some pushback from a few courts due to just how rampant the abuse is, and even Danglars thinks it has gone way too far (I think he wanted to eliminate it instead of other police reforms).
If you watch the video, even if he were going for a knife IN his car, there was no reason to shoot him. The cop grabs him to hold him still so he could shoot him 7 times. Grabbing him to throw him to the ground would be well, not QUITE as easy, but not that much harder than holding him to immobilize.
It wasnt a knife in his car it was allegedly a knife in his hand already as he went to his car. The theory is he could have had a gun in uis car, used his vehicle as a weapon, or escaped and harmed someone. I say allegedly because its hard to find a reputible source on it. None of that justifies shooting someone. He was not shot using his car as a weapon, he was not threatening anybody with a gun. Just think about what you are writing here. You say the police might be allowed to kill you, not because you are a threat to them and others, but because you might get away otherwise and become a threat. That is ridiculous. So we are even further then just the police was fearing for his life, now we are at the police was thinking they might get into a situation where they could fear for their life later, so better shoot the man in the back now. If you fight with a police officer and have a knife in hand you are going to lose the benefit of the doubt. You are taking this out of context completely. Its not as if this was a random guy walking to a car knife in hand and a cop drove by and shot him. There is a difference. Yes, there is, but not in regards to the outcome. A person that is resisting arrest should be treated differently then someone quietly giving up. But not to the extent we see here. If there is not a credible threat to life established, there is simply no way an arrest should turn into a shooting. And if the shooting part affects one group of people more then others, it is fair to point to that and forget the part about resisting. It's like the age old argument, it's so sad that this woman got raped, but she dressed really provocative and was on her own. Statistically, Blake got shot because of his skin color, not because he resisted arrest. He probably even got arrested because of his skincolor. This is the reason I think the knife is not being brought up in the Media. There will be accusations of victim blaming. If you fight/resist arrest with multiple police officers, have a knife in hand, and try to enter your car with the officer right behind you, i think there is a high probability you get shot regardless of race. All of these police officers are shown videos of cops being murdered by suspects during traffic stops, pursuits, etc. After they are asked or told what to do differently and/or how to protect themselves so it doesnt happen to them. These guys know if someone enters their car an officer has been killed in that situation before. Thats why they are likely to shoot. We dont know if the officers escalated the situation or what happened before the video starts. Maybe they could have de-escalated. Who knows. If they did try to deescalate and it went nowhere, and the tazers failed, what are their other options? Once he got off of the ground and out of their control and tried to get into the car there was little chance of it going the other way. They could have just let him drive off but then people would be upset about that too. You see it when people are let out of Jail on parole then murder someone. I think alot of these cops and people in the criminal justice system are in a position where they cant win.
I disagree. If the police argument boils down to, he resisted arrest, the only way to stop that was to shoot him with intent to kill, you are punishing a crime without trial with death. Even if he had a knife, he did not make any aggressive movements towards the police with it. He walked away from them. He might have gotten away? Yes, that is their option. Just let the man leave. He will calm down. People know him. What makes this man so dangerous, that we cannot allow to let him get away alive? The encounter could have ended with a later arrest. And that would have been it, a trial for resisting arrest, not headlines, no outrage. Not two more people killed 3 days later.
|
On August 28 2020 03:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2020 02:23 Zambrah wrote:On August 28 2020 01:06 Broetchenholer wrote:
Can we stop comparing Palestine to China? It has nothing to do with the discussion. The problems the US face are the problems of the US and it does not matter that other countries are worse in area xyz. Capitalism is not the reason that african americans are shot in the back, nor is a government form that is not capitalist a solution for the issue. The US needs to chnage their attitude towards social justice from commodity for those that can afford it to everyone gets it. The fact that everything you want in the US has a pricetag, keeps those without means out. The police is just a symptom of that. As long as basic human rights are a privilege in the US, those that have it will keep those without down for fear of losing out themselves and jealousy of free handouts for the poor. This post is weird to me because while youre saying Capitalism is not the reason for the racist treatment the cops give POCs, you identify issues that Capitalism contributes to the issue, which is basically what GH says is the problem. Like, you've identified racist police as a symptom of the US's capitalistic bullshit, I'm not sure what the disconnect it, unless you mean that its not literally the entire problem in which case I agree (and GH also likely agrees), and that its just a huge problem contributing to the racist cop bullshit? Like I basically agree with the whole post, but the Capitalism is not the reason part could switch 'the' with 'a' and be completely contradictory with the remainder of the post. Either way, US capitalism sucks and Im tempted to say its unsalvageable within our lifetimes, it'd take a reformation of the collective American conscience towards something more akin to a Scandinavian mindset before I think the US can be trusted with very much capitalism and not just systematically ruin shit. Yes, of course. I said as much last page and a few before that. The "Capitalism is the only problem" trope is a deliberate diversion here. The closest to that would be Igne's class reductionism (he wouldn't call it that) imo but even that would be a woefully benighted description of it.
I don't think anyone else here thinks that I am the one in this thread closest to always saying "capitalism is the only problem." Capitalism is itself many problems.
I wouldn't call it that because it's not true. I am anti-reductionism.
|
I look for what is different in the US compared to other democratic countries that don't have the same issues
Its hard to say,the usa is a pretty unique country in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
