Political Roundtable - Part VI

[nate33]

But you're not just criticizing him for his actions. You are saying a police officer is justified in gunning him down for this.

When did I say that?

[Nivek]

A fact-free, postmodern make-it-up world
Rejection of facts could prove lethal

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -up-world/

His point is good, and his examples are fair, but his bias is transparent and undercuts the strength of his argument.

[Zonkerbl]

But you're not just criticizing him for his actions. You are saying a police officer is justified in gunning him down for this.

When did I say that?

You are defending Wilson by saying that Brown is a thug. By implication, therefore, you are saying that being a thug is just cause for summary execution by a police officer. Do you deny it?

[dckingsfan]

I should hope we wouldn't shoot every "thug" we see in public. But I would certainly think that it would have an adverse affect on your lifespan. Kind of the consequence to actions metric. Drinking too much, smoking too much can affect your lifespan as well. Driving to fast in your car or ignoring red lights. Being aggressive with police - even if justified - can shorten your lifespan.

It seems like these are choices we make.

Having said that - I would hope that the police would do everything in their power NOT to inflict bodily injury or death while apprehending a suspect. There is something very wrong in our society when the police become judge and jury.

The IRS equally offends me now that they are seizing and holding assets permanently without a trial. Fining employers that hire illegal aliens even if they are approved by E-Verify with no trial or appeal process offends me as well. When the Police, IRS or HSI are judge and jury - it is a terrible harm to our civil rights. So, I have to side with those that are practicing civil disobedience in a peaceful manner. I wish businesses and individuals would do the same to the IRS and HSI.

[dobrojim]

I should hope we wouldn't shoot every "thug" we see in public. But I would certainly think that it would have an adverse affect on your lifespan. Kind of the consequence to actions metric. Drinking too much, smoking too much can affect your lifespan as well. Driving to fast in your car or ignoring red lights. Being aggressive with police - even if justified - can shorten your lifespan.

It seems like these are choices we make.

Having said that - I would hope that the police would do everything in their power NOT to inflict bodily injury or death while apprehending a suspect. There is something very wrong in our society when the police become judge and jury.

The IRS equally offends me now that they are seizing and holding assets permanently without a trial. Fining employers that hire illegal aliens even if they are approved by E-Verify with no trial or appeal process offends me as well. When the Police, IRS or HSI are judge and jury - it is a terrible harm to our civil rights. So, I have to side with those that are practicing civil disobedience in a peaceful manner. I wish businesses and individuals would do the same to the IRS and HSI.

to paraphrase JFK at Berlin, we should all be Tea Partiers in these regards.

[Zonkerbl]

Being a thug doesn't automatically strip you of your constitutional protections, to your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The constitution doesn't just protect people you like.

God forbid you become unpopular one day and find yourself staring down the barrel of a S.W.A.T. team's sniper rifle. Maybe then you'll understand.

[dckingsfan]

Being a thug doesn't automatically strip you of your constitutional protections, to your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The constitution doesn't just protect people you like.

God forbid you become unpopular one day and find yourself staring down the barrel of a S.W.A.T. team's sniper rifle. Maybe then you'll understand.

Agreed - and some clarification. I tell those that I love - don't be a thug, drive drunk or run red lights. And for those whose civil liberties were trampled - we need to all take heed to dobrojim's paraphrasing.

[nate33]

But you're not just criticizing him for his actions. You are saying a police officer is justified in gunning him down for this.

When did I say that?

You are defending Wilson by saying that Brown is a thug. By implication, therefore, you are saying that being a thug is just cause for summary execution by a police officer. Do you deny it?

I'm absolutely amazed at your extraordinary leaps in logic. I have said nothing of the sort and I challenge you to find a quote even remotely agreeing with this wild interpretation.

I said Brown was a thug because of his actions in the store. The fact that Brown is a thug is relevant in the Wilson encounter because it leads credence to Wilson's story that Brown initiated the violent struggle in the car. Judging by the liquor store incident, Brown was evidently a person not averse to violence and he had a disdain for the rule of law; and furthermore, Brown knew that he had committed a criminal act so he had a motive to be unusually defensive and suspicious of a police officer investigating his activities.

The altercation in the car clearly had bearing on the rest of the encounter. If, in fact, Brown did attack Wilson in his car, (which is corroborated by all physical evidence including Wilson's black eye, the gunshot fired in the vehicle, and Brown's blood in the car) then Wilson had much more cause to believe that his life was in danger if Brown made any aggressive motions toward Wilson during the shooting on the street moments later.

This is pure common sense. I'm amazed that I have to spell this out to people.

I'm not saying that these facts totally exonerate Wilson. We don't know exactly how the shooting on the street went down. Did Brown charge Wilson? Did Wilson shoot Brown after Brown fell on his knees? How close were they when the shooting happened?

[Zonkerbl]

Let me put it this way, Nate. When I hear "He's a thug" I immediately make the connection that Brown deserves to die because he's black. Because that's what racists do - they dehumanize the target of their ire in order to justify their hateful actions.

Once you use a racially charged word like "thug" the burden falls on you to communicate what you mean clearly.

Your argument is only "common sense" from the cop's perspective, from a white person's perspective whose prism on the world is distorted by fear of black people. From such a perspective it is "common sense" that young black men so often end up getting shot or strangled to death by overeager cops.

It's not "common sense," Nate, it's institutionalized racism.

[Nivek]

There's plenty about this case we don't know. Asserting an interpretation as if it's fact doesn't make it The Truth. The evidence currently available can be interpreted a number of different ways. That Brown robbed the store and started a fight with Wilson is a POSSIBLE interpretation. But, it's also equally plausible that the "robbery" was a misunderstanding or an argument with the store owner.

It's plausible that Wilson was confrontational with Brown and his friend (using a swear word to tell them to get out of the street, throwing his Tahoe in reverse and backing up close to them). It's plausible that Wilson opened his SUV door and that it hit Brown and closed back on him -- NOT that Brown pushed him back into the vehicle. It's plausible that Wilson was embarrassed, angry and afraid, and that he went for his weapon, and that Brown reached in to stop him from getting to it.

At that point, Brown and his buddy tried to run away. His buddy hid behind a car. Wilson reportedly got out of his vehicle and chased him on foot. At that point, there are at least a couple possibilities. One is that Brown turned around and charged him, and that Wilson fired in self defense. Another is that Brown turned around to surrender. And, it could be that Wilson -- adrenaline pumping, face hurting from being hit by SUV door -- opened fire.

Same evidence -- differing interpretations. We don't know what's correct. Maybe the courts can figure it out.

[nate33]

Let me put it this way, Nate. When I hear "He's a thug" I immediately make the connection that Brown deserves to die because he's black. Because that's what racists do - they dehumanize the target of their ire in order to justify their hateful actions.

Once you use a racially charged word like "thug" the burden falls on you to communicate what you mean clearly.

Your argument is only "common sense" from the cop's perspective, from a white person's perspective whose prism on the world is distorted by fear of black people. From such a perspective it is "common sense" that young black men so often end up getting shot or strangled to death by overeager cops.

It's not "common sense," Nate, it's institutionalized racism.

This is just utter nonsense. I think you are projecting racism if you think the word "thug", which can apply to anyone, only applies to black people. It's rhetoric like this that makes honest discussion about these issues impossible.

If Brown was a skinhead white guy, nobody would object to me characterizing him as a thug (and I would). But because he's black, all the Thought Police have to step in and accuse me of Crimethink. This would laughable if it weren't so sad.

[Nivek]

Let me put it this way, Nate. When I hear "He's a thug" I immediately make the connection that Brown deserves to die because he's black. Because that's what racists do - they dehumanize the target of their ire in order to justify their hateful actions.

Once you use a racially charged word like "thug" the burden falls on you to communicate what you mean clearly.

Your argument is only "common sense" from the cop's perspective, from a white person's perspective whose prism on the world is distorted by fear of black people. From such a perspective it is "common sense" that young black men so often end up getting shot or strangled to death by overeager cops.

It's not "common sense," Nate, it's institutionalized racism.

This is just utter nonsense. I think you are projecting racism if you think the word "thug", which can apply to anyone, only applies to black people. It's rhetoric like this that makes honest discussion about these issues impossible.

If Brown was a skinhead white guy, nobody would object to me characterizing him as a thug (and I would). But because he's black, all the Thought Police have to step in and accuse me of Crimethink. This would laughable if it weren't so sad.

Leaping to conclusions unsupported by available information makes discussion difficult. Applying labels that may not be warranted shuts down discussion. Inability to accept that there are possibilities beyond one's own assumptions makes these conversations just about pointless.

As for me, I've never seen you apply the "thug" label to anyone who's not black. I'm sure you do it all the time at home.

[tontoz]

Let me put it this way, Nate. When I hear "He's a thug" I immediately make the connection that Brown deserves to die because he's black. Because that's what racists do - they dehumanize the target of their ire in order to justify their hateful actions.

Wow

There are plenty of white/asian/latin thugs. They break the law, sometimes violently. If i call them thugs does that mean i am saying they deserve to die? If i was black and called them thugs would that mean i am a racist?

Does using the word thug mean nate is a racist?

W T F

[Nivek]

I wouldn't conclude nate is a racist because he uses the word "thug," though I do think he have bias in his thinking based on other things he's written (and, we all have our own biases). However, Zonker's point is fair -- namely that the use of a label like "thug" serves to dehumanize. It's a powerful term. It carries connotations of violence, criminal intent, and so on. And yes, it is -- in certain contexts -- a racially charged term.

Now, nate didn't explicitly say Brown "deserved" getting shot. But, the message in his post seemed to me that Brown caused his death by being a "thug and a criminal." I disagree with that notion, whether nate was communicating that message or whether it was me reading into what he posted. I disagree with his assertion that Brown was "obviously" a thug and a criminal. There's much we don't know.

[Benjammin]

There's plenty about this case we don't know. Asserting an interpretation as if it's fact doesn't make it The Truth. The evidence currently available can be interpreted a number of different ways. That Brown robbed the store and started a fight with Wilson is a POSSIBLE interpretation. But, it's also equally plausible that the "robbery" was a misunderstanding or an argument with the store owner.

I

Obviously, the video is open to interpretation. But it strains all credulity to assert that it was "equally plausible" that it was simply a "misunderstanding or an argument with the store owner" rather than a robbery.

[Nivek]

There's plenty about this case we don't know. Asserting an interpretation as if it's fact doesn't make it The Truth. The evidence currently available can be interpreted a number of different ways. That Brown robbed the store and started a fight with Wilson is a POSSIBLE interpretation. But, it's also equally plausible that the "robbery" was a misunderstanding or an argument with the store owner.

I

Obviously, the video is open to interpretation. But it strains all credulity to assert that it was "equally plausible" that it was simply a "misunderstanding or an argument with the store owner" rather than a robbery.

Maybe I shouldn't have used "equally." But, it is plausible.

It's obvious from the video that the two argued. Since there's no sound, it's impossible to determine what they were arguing about. It's obvious that the store owner came from around the corner and grabbed Brown, and that Brown used his size and the threat of force to intimidate the store owner.

One part of the video seems to show Brown paying for the stuff he carried out of the store. The store didn't call it in -- a customer who THOUGHT there was a robbery called it in. The customer may not have known.

[nate33]

I wouldn't conclude nate is a racist because he uses the word "thug," though I do think he have bias in his thinking based on other things he's written (and, we all have our own biases).

Wow. I've come to expect this from Zonker, but not from you Nivek. "Nate isn't racist. He's only biased against certain races." Whatever.

[Nivek]

I wouldn't conclude nate is a racist because he uses the word "thug," though I do think he have bias in his thinking based on other things he's written (and, we all have our own biases).

Wow. I've come to expect this from Zonker, but not from you Nivek. "Nate isn't racist. He's only biased against certain races." Whatever.

You don't understand the difference between outright racism and implicit bias?

Really?

[nate33]

However, Zonker's point is fair -- namely that the use of a label like "thug" serves to dehumanize. It's a powerful term. It carries connotations of violence, criminal intent, and so on. And yes, it is -- in certain contexts -- a racially charged term.

Synonyms of "thug":

bandit
bully
criminal
goon
hooligan
troublemaker
delinquent

In none of these, is there any overt or implied hint of race. A thug is a totally non-racial term. It's just a word. If you read race to it, it must be due to your own prejudices. Yes it carries connotations of violence and criminal intent, because that's what I saw in the video: violence and criminal acts. (The cigars were reported stolen, BTW.)

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I think the thug/criminal is Darren Wilson, the guy who unloaded six rounds into a fleeing teenager. His actions touched off riots. Had Wilson not been a coward and a bully who probably was just mad that he couldn't intimidate Brown in the first place he wouldn't have killed him in cold blood.

nate, I don't post in this thread often for a reason. I hate to hit and run but I just used a bunch of labels and incendiary words. Call the black a thug. Call the white guy a thug. Labels incite.

I think cultural bias will prevent me from being objective. My actual thoughts are the cop was a punk and a mean-spirited guy. Had he done a double tap and not shot the guy in the back I would feel differently. I think hatred, retribution, and anything but professionalism got Brown shot. This same cop had harassed another young black male earlier. I just think the cop is a jerk. Might not even be racially motivated at all.