OT: Cops kill George Floyd

[E-Balla]

also, so wendys is now owned by wendy ? or was that not a real person ?

She's real but I looked it up and they are a conglomerate owned by the Wendy's Company so I think she's the head.

[E-Balla]

You just took a giant steaming dump on organizing to get out the vote and you have the stones to ask me if I want to be part of the solution or continue to be the problem. FOH

Again, lies and no support for anything your fingers type. Why must you always make a habit out of strawmanning nuanced arguments? Like is it that hard to reflect for you?

Don't try to blame me for falsifying what was said by you.

This quote is from your post:

We've been ruled by Trumps for 400 years with no constitutional constraints. Trumps created the constitution. **** the constitution. **** the vote. Never once in my lineage has anyone gained a right from the power of voting. Never once in my lineage have I gained a right that wasn't fought for. Violence is necessary when words fall of deaf ears and I'm not dumb enough to look at the history of violence and it's accomplishments and say "that's not the way the way is to do what we've done every time we've lost."

Did I take a dump on organizing to get out to vote or did I say non of my rights were gained through a vote so when discussing this particular topic **** talking about a vote?

See that's what I'm saying, building strawmen to not confront your own programming.

Here's a fact, if you're raised in America and don't specifically attempt to unlearn white supremacy you're going to be a white supremacist. You want the red pill or the blue pill Clyde?

[ellobo]

I wrote this earlier in the thread:

The fact of the matter is, Derek Chauvin may not have been charged at all, and he certainly wouldn't have had his charges upgraded to 2nd degree murder, had it not been for the defensive protests, property damage, and looting.

Likewise, his 3 accomplices would likely not have been charged either, had it not been for the massive amounts of supporters engaging in the 3 aforementioned actions.

These statements are impossible to prove or disprove, but I vehemently disagree. Chauvin and the other officers were arrested because enough people were outraged that George Floyd was callously murdered while he was helpless, and enough of those people were outraged enough to make their voices heard. So what does it mean that they "made their voices heard?" People protested peacefully AND people damaged property and looted. So what caused the authorities to respond? We can't conclusively disentangle the causes.

BUT, I believe that the decisive factor is the scale of outrage at the moral offensiveness of the crime.

Why were so many outraged at the tear gassing of protestors in Trump's church stunt? Because the protestors were peaceful and were violently attacked.

Why were so many outraged at the 75 year-old in Buffalo being knocked to the ground. Because he was unthreatening and was violently attacked.

When protestors can say to militarized police, "There's NO RIOT HERE. Why are you in riot gear?" people seeing that just might question the militarization of police. But when people see fires, broken windows, and looting, a lot of them are going to not only accept, but demand a violent response.

The powers that be don't actually give a **** about looting and property damage. It doesn't threaten their power one bit and just gives them an excuse to respond violently to any and all civil unrest. Rioting and looting are mosquito bites on the ankles of the power structure. And you deal with a mosquito problem by spraying them with poison and killing them all.

Curfews are not meant to stop looting. They are a means to criminalize peaceful protest by making normally lawful activity criminal.

It isn't the looting that threatens the status quo, it's the groundswell of public opinion that the status quo needs to change. Looting undermines that groundswell and thereby supports the status quo.

Remember, the people comprise the military and the police force. At some point, they will be reminded of who they are. After all, they live amongst the people when they are not on the clock. Strength has always been in numbers and the power has and will always rest with the people.

Well, here's where I think the opportunity lies in the current moment. Peaceful protest is easy to ignore and dismiss if the only people protesting are a relatively small and historically marginalized group complaining about their own problems. It's when the larger population starts to recognize and empathize with the pain of their brothers and sisters (when they start of look at them as brothers and sisters in the first place), it's when they shift their view of who is "us" and who is "them," that change can happen.

But I have to admit, this passage hit home:

I'll be 100% real here I'm not playing to this nonsense that white people saw a man die and their hearts finally grew like the **** Grinch. That politicians saw on man die and now they finally understand what needs to be done. We've been kidnapped and miseducated but we weren't born yesterday. I understand how America, Americans, and most importantly white people and the system of white supremacy works. Step 1 is always to act as if white people suddenly gained empathy, it destroys the militancy of the movement and leads to our destruction because the second we stop being angry white supremacy goes back to doing what they do best. No progress made in the 5 decades between us tearing **** up but I'm supposed to believe that us tearing **** up again isn't what changed the minds of people? Yeah ight...

I'm not prepared to endorse tearing **** up or that righteous anger and militancy equals or has to take the form of tearing **** up, but...[not sure what comes after the "but"...still processing...]

[Pointgod]

Are you planning on committing arson or just supporting those do?

Are you planning on defending storefronts with a gun or just supporting those who do?

I can ask insulting questions too Clyde you don't want that smoke.

It wasn't an insult.

It was what you were advocating.

If you condone it, what is the difference between you committing arson and applauding someone else doing it?

If you do it, do you believe you're committing a crime or being a freedom fighter or both?

If someone else does it, do you organize a fund to bail them out or just tell us it was justified and let them rot?

There is either some kind of unity to your thought or there isn't and I'm asking you these questions because it still feels like you can justify pretty much anything, but it has no basis other than revenge.

And how selective are you at the end of the day?

When your house or apartment gets burned down do you say that's OK I was in the way of a just cause and that you're cool with sleeping under a bridge after that?

I just find this willingness to excuse anybody else's suffering to justify payback for 400 years of suffering to be more selfish than selfless.

Listen I’ve read this back and forth and you’re both right. Looting and rioting doesn’t get people on your side but at a certain point you need to ask what do people have to lose? Martin Luther King protested peacefully and got a bullet in the head for it. You can’t discount the psychological impact of seeing your leaders murdered and living under suppression for centuries during slavery and by the government post emancipation.

At a certain point you have to ask how much worse does it get? Instead of talking about looting and rioting, we should be asking how was it able to get this bad to this point. I don’t know sometimes things need to get so out of control that it’s a signal that only changes at the top will change things.

[Clyde_Style]

i'm just saying, it's not happening enough to be in a fit about it swaying the election. clyde is totally obsessed with trump and he worries about anything that might sway swing voters. that's his main concern. but he has to understand, we had a black democratic president and unarmed black men were still getting killed by police on his watch. it was happening in the bluest of blue states. voting is not this panacea that will solve all racial injustice. as i think is your point.

I'm not an apologist for Obama and never have been Sham.

I've said many times I like Obama as a person, but I found him way too status quo. He was not the progressive I thought he was when he got elected.

I don't offer panaceas, but I've been more than justified to say that if the GOP stays in power then what do you expect to happen? Get better, worse or it doesn't matter? I'm pretty sure you don't want that either

And how is it wrong for a white person to say they hope the black community votes in force? How does that get turned around and used as a negative? It's perverse

Anyway, I'm tired of being made out to be some kind of stuffy white person who is afraid of broken china. That kind of twisted narrative is only possible because this particular board is in a bubble

I started today by trying to say there's a big difference between torching your neighborhood bodega owner and a Walmart and the response from E-Balla is that is what insurance is for. This is BS and I'm not going to be made out as being something I not because I believe these kinds of distinctions are necessary if you claim to want justice. At this point, I'm hearing that the justice wanted is not actually the same for everyone so we're not all on the same page then. At least that much is more clear now

It is not just about Trump though. You're not wrong about that being a primary concern since I do think if we lose then everything is lost and we'll be in Robocop for the rest of our lives.

But it is also about being able to agree on what a multi-cultural nation will mean in the future. If people are really going to call out a white guy for participating and advocating different means to an end then I'm not even that confident that the END goal will be agreed on in the future. If not wanting to fan the flames of a race war means I'm an ignorant white boy then excuse me for trying to argue against escalation

And I think you're right that there is probably mostly peaceful gatherings since the first wave of looting, but it is still a topic that others are grappling with and if people paint a rational debate about it as the concerns of stuck-up whiteys then that's a damn shame

[E-Balla]

I wrote this earlier in the thread:

The fact of the matter is, Derek Chauvin may not have been charged at all, and he certainly wouldn't have had his charges upgraded to 2nd degree murder, had it not been for the defensive protests, property damage, and looting.

Likewise, his 3 accomplices would likely not have been charged either, had it not been for the massive amounts of supporters engaging in the 3 aforementioned actions.

These statements are impossible to prove or disprove, but I vehemently disagree. Chauvin and the other officers were arrested because enough people were outraged that George Floyd was callously murdered while he was helpless, and enough of those people were outraged enough to make their voices heard. So what does it mean that they "made their voices heard?" People protested peacefully AND people damaged property and looted. So what caused the authorities to respond? We can't conclusively disentangle the causes.

BUT, I believe that the decisive factor is the scale of outrage at the moral offensiveness of the crime.

Why were so many outraged at the tear gassing of protestors in Trump's church stunt? Because the protestors were peaceful and were violently attacked.

Why were so many outraged at the 75 year-old in Buffalo being knocked to the ground. Because he was unthreatening and was violently attacked.

When protestors can say to militarized police, "There's NO RIOT HERE. Why are you in riot gear?" people seeing that just might question the militarization of police. But when people see fires, broken windows, and looting, a lot of them are going to not only accept, but demand a violent response.

The powers that be don't actually give a **** about looting and property damage. It doesn't threaten their power one bit and just gives them an excuse to respond violently to any and all civil unrest. Rioting and looting are mosquito bites on the ankles of the power structure. And you deal with a mosquito problem by spraying them with poison and killing them all.

Curfews are not meant to stop looting. They are a means to criminalize peaceful protest by making normally lawful activity criminal.

It isn't the looting that threatens the status quo, it's the groundswell of public opinion that the status quo needs to change. Looting undermines that groundswell and thereby supports the status quo.

Remember, the people comprise the military and the police force. At some point, they will be reminded of who they are. After all, they live amongst the people when they are not on the clock. Strength has always been in numbers and the power has and will always rest with the people.

Well, here's where I think the opportunity lies in the current moment. Peaceful protest is easy to ignore and dismiss if the only people protesting are a relatively small and historically marginalized group complaining about their own problems. It's when the larger population starts to recognize and empathize with the pain of their brothers and sisters (when they start of look at them as brothers and sisters in the first place), it's when they shift their view of who is "us" and who is "them," that change can happen.

But I have to admit, this passage hit home:

I'll be 100% real here I'm not playing to this nonsense that white people saw a man die and their hearts finally grew like the **** Grinch. That politicians saw on man die and now they finally understand what needs to be done. We've been kidnapped and miseducated but we weren't born yesterday. I understand how America, Americans, and most importantly white people and the system of white supremacy works. Step 1 is always to act as if white people suddenly gained empathy, it destroys the militancy of the movement and leads to our destruction because the second we stop being angry white supremacy goes back to doing what they do best. No progress made in the 5 decades between us tearing **** up but I'm supposed to believe that us tearing **** up again isn't what changed the minds of people? Yeah ight...

I'm not prepared to endorse tearing **** up or that righteous anger and militancy equals or has to take the form of tearing **** up, but...[not sure what comes after the "but"...still processing...]

So I'll say this as someone who arrived at my conclusion after a lot of thinking but there's nothing after the but. Anything after the but is a learned behavior from white supremacy learned to keep the system going. Look at how much people loved Hong Kong tearing **** up in America. Look at how much we enjoyed the Yellow Vest protests. Arab Spring. Hell we got people that'll scream free Palestine then get mad at the idea that the descendants of slaves are an ethnic group.

You're trying to process an emotional reaction into logic. Why not let that emotion be what it is while knowing that logically your emotions hold no water and shouldn't be used to paint your look at a struggle for equality?

[Clyde_Style]

Again, lies and no support for anything your fingers type. Why must you always make a habit out of strawmanning nuanced arguments? Like is it that hard to reflect for you?

Don't try to blame me for falsifying what was said by you.

This quote is from your post:

We've been ruled by Trumps for 400 years with no constitutional constraints. Trumps created the constitution. **** the constitution. **** the vote. Never once in my lineage has anyone gained a right from the power of voting. Never once in my lineage have I gained a right that wasn't fought for. Violence is necessary when words fall of deaf ears and I'm not dumb enough to look at the history of violence and it's accomplishments and say "that's not the way the way is to do what we've done every time we've lost."

Did I take a dump on organizing to get out to vote or did I say non of my rights were gained through a vote so when discussing this particular topic **** talking about a vote?

See that's what I'm saying, building strawmen to not confront your own programming.

Here's a fact, if you're raised in America and don't specifically attempt to unlearn white supremacy you're going to be a white supremacist. You want the red pill or the blue pill Clyde?

We won't be educating each other any time soon it appears so take care.

[Capn'O]

Are we all at least unified on statue toppling?

[Context]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Pretty insightful thread

Also from that thread Go:

Excerpt from: "Confessions of a Former Bastard Cop"

I was a police officer for nearly ten years and I was a bastard. We all were.
This essay has been kicking around in my head for years now and I’ve never felt confident enough to write it. It’s a time in my life I’m ashamed of. It’s a time that I hurt people and, through inaction, allowed others to be hurt. It’s a time that I acted as a violent agent of capitalism and white supremacy. Under the guise of public safety, I personally ruined people’s lives but in so doing, made the public no safer… so did the family members and close friends of mine who also bore the badge alongside me.
But enough is enough.
The reforms aren’t working. Incrementalism isn’t happening. Unarmed Black, indigenous, and people of color are being killed by cops in the streets and the police are savagely attacking the people protesting these murders.
American policing is a thick blue tumor strangling the life from our communities and if you don’t believe it when the poor and the marginalized say it, if you don’t believe it when you see cops across the country shooting journalists with less-lethal bullets and caustic chemicals, maybe you’ll believe it when you hear it straight from the pig’s mouth.

https://medium.com/@OfcrACab/confessions-of-a-former-bastard-cop-bb14d17bc759

more:

HOW TO BE A BASTARD
I have participated in some of these activities personally, others are ones I either witnessed personally or heard officers brag about openly. Very, very occasionally, I knew an officer who was disciplined or fired for one of these things.
Police officers will lie about the law, about what’s illegal, or about what they can legally do to you in order to manipulate you into doing what they want.
Police officers will lie about feeling afraid for their life to justify a use of force after the fact.
Police officers will lie and tell you they’ll file a police report just to get you off their back.
Police officers will lie that your cooperation will “look good for you” in court, or that they will “put in a good word for you with the DA.” The police will never help you look good in court.
Police officers will lie about what they see and hear to access private property to conduct unlawful searches.
Police officers will lie and say your friend already ratted you out, so you might as well rat them back out. This is almost never true.
Police officers will lie and say you’re not in trouble in order to get you to exit a location or otherwise make an arrest more convenient for them.
Police officers will lie and say that they won’t arrest you if you’ll just “be honest with them” so they know what really happened.
Police officers will lie about their ability to seize the property of friends and family members to coerce a confession.
Police officers will write obviously bull tickets so that they get time-and-a-half overtime fighting them in court.
Police officers will search places and containers you didn’t consent to and later claim they were open or “smelled like marijuana”.
Police officers will threaten you with a more serious crime they can’t prove in order to convince you to confess to the lesser crime they really want you for.
Police officers will employ zero tolerance on races and ethnicities they dislike and show favor and lenience to members of their own group.
Police officers will use intentionally extra-painful maneuvers and holds during an arrest to provoke “resistance” so they can further assault the suspect.
Some police officers will plant drugs and weapons on you, sometimes to teach you a lesson, sometimes if they kill you somewhere away from public view.
Some police officers will assault you to intimidate you and threaten to arrest you if you tell anyone.
A non-trivial number of police officers will steal from your house or vehicle during a search.
A non-trivial number of police officers commit intimate partner violence and use their status to get away with it.
A non-trivial number of police officers use their position to entice, coerce, or force sexual favors from vulnerable people.
If you take nothing else away from this essay, I want you to tattoo this onto your brain forever: if a police officer is telling you something, it is probably a lie designed to gain your compliance.
Do not talk to cops and never, ever believe them. Do not “try to be helpful” with cops. Do not assume they are trying to catch someone else instead of you. Do not assume what they are doing is “important” or even legal. Under no circumstances assume any police officer is acting in good faith.
Also, and this is important, do not talk to cops.
I just remembered something, do not talk to cops.
Checking my notes real quick, something jumped out at me:
Do
not
****
talk
to
cops.
Ever.
Say, “I don’t answer questions,” and ask if you’re free to leave; if so, leave. If not, tell them you want your lawyer and that, per the Supreme Court, they must terminate questioning. If they don’t, file a complaint and collect some badges for your mantle.

[HarthorneWingo]

by no means do I want to derail this thread from the importance of why we are here for the social injustices. So I will just say we can agree to disagree on the value of unions.

My point, to get back on topic, is bad police officers are protected by them. If we are looking for an end game here. What all this protesting and reform needs to be about. There needs to be stronger review processes for officers they need to be more accountable for prior interactions to hopefully weed out and stop the bad ones before they are put in a position to kill someone (especially in this came racist ones) with a prior history of violence in there past.

Unions, which I theoretically believe in strongly, could use a make over as well. There are no panaceas out there and many of our institutions need to be put under a microscope so that they are not misused either.

Well we know that many times the leadership goes rogue and makes decisions that rank and file members oppose, so yeah maybe it's time for an overhaul

That's exactly what I'm talking about. And then the rank and file grow dissatisfied with the union and its decisions on when and how to use union funds to support its members. Understandable. Then there is the union officials access to the pension fund. I have to believe that that's still "a thing" too.

[E-Balla]

Are you planning on defending storefronts with a gun or just supporting those who do?

I can ask insulting questions too Clyde you don't want that smoke.

It wasn't an insult.

It was what you were advocating.

If you condone it, what is the difference between you committing arson and applauding someone else doing it?

If you do it, do you believe you're committing a crime or being a freedom fighter or both?

If someone else does it, do you organize a fund to bail them out or just tell us it was justified and let them rot?

There is either some kind of unity to your thought or there isn't and I'm asking you these questions because it still feels like you can justify pretty much anything, but it has no basis other than revenge.

And how selective are you at the end of the day?

When your house or apartment gets burned down do you say that's OK I was in the way of a just cause and that you're cool with sleeping under a bridge after that?

I just find this willingness to excuse anybody else's suffering to justify payback for 400 years of suffering to be more selfish than selfless.

Listen I’ve read this back and forth and you’re both right. Looting and rioting doesn’t get people on your side but at a certain point you need to ask what do people have to lose? Martin Luther King protested peacefully and got a bullet in the head for it. You can’t discount the psychological impact of seeing your leaders murdered and living under suppression for centuries during slavery and by the government post emancipation.

At a certain point you have to ask how much worse does it get? Instead of talking about looting and rioting, we should be asking how was it able to get this bad to this point. I don’t know sometimes things need to get so out of control that it’s a signal that only changes at the top will change things.

This is also revisionist history. MLK himself might've been a peaceful man but the idea that none of his protests exploded into riots isn't true and so is the idea that he didn't support rioting and rioters.

Screw a bullet in the head let's talk about how MLK got next to nothing done prior to when cities started burning down. Well over 140 race riots between 1960-68, all across America, combined with MLK's "peaceful protesting" is what worked.



By talking about violence against buildings you're playing into their game.

[robillionaire]

Let your wife move to a state without a strong teacher's union and let's see how much she hates them then when there's nothing protecting her from the whims of the state and administration.

The idea of getting paid based off how good you are at your job is absurd on its face too but this isn't a "debate the failings of the market" thread so imma let that slide. Just know that specific anti union rhetoric you used was birthed by the government attempting to break up unions by convincing white workers they existed to unfairly make black workers earn more than them. I work in the private sector and believe me our salaries aren't at all based on who does the best/most work.

by no means do I want to derail this thread from the importance of why we are here for the social injustices. So I will just say we can agree to disagree on the value of unions.

My point, to get back on topic, is bad police officers are protected by them. If we are looking for an end game here. What all this protesting and reform needs to be about. There needs to be stronger review processes for officers they need to be more accountable for prior interactions to hopefully weed out and stop the bad ones before they are put in a position to kill someone (especially in this case racist ones) with a prior history of violence in there past.

The endgame needs to be about just getting rid of the police as an institution. 99% of police work should not be done by police. The beat cop should be extinct.

To reach that endgame, essential questions must be asked like, what are their origins and what function do they serve in society today? You already know this. But a society built primarily on the idea of upholding the property rights of the wealthy relying on exploitation of people home and abroad that performs labor to enrich a small segment of wealthy oligarchs cannot sustain itself without having a violent enforcement arm to suppress peasant uprisings and labor uprisings and race riots as we have witnessed time and time throughout history.

So I believe it’s going to be impossible to get rid of police as they exist now without also committing to uprooting the system that inherently requires the use of force to maintain the relations of production and the social hierarchy. There have been reforms on top of reforms already and we are still in the same place. So the union talk is completely on topic because organized labor gives additional power to really grind the whole machine to a halt, I saw this touched on in films like “Sorry To Bother You” and some of the stuff Boots Riley talks about.

[E-Balla]

Don't try to blame me for falsifying what was said by you.

This quote is from your post:

We've been ruled by Trumps for 400 years with no constitutional constraints. Trumps created the constitution. **** the constitution. **** the vote. Never once in my lineage has anyone gained a right from the power of voting. Never once in my lineage have I gained a right that wasn't fought for. Violence is necessary when words fall of deaf ears and I'm not dumb enough to look at the history of violence and it's accomplishments and say "that's not the way the way is to do what we've done every time we've lost."

Did I take a dump on organizing to get out to vote or did I say non of my rights were gained through a vote so when discussing this particular topic **** talking about a vote?

See that's what I'm saying, building strawmen to not confront your own programming.

Here's a fact, if you're raised in America and don't specifically attempt to unlearn white supremacy you're going to be a white supremacist. You want the red pill or the blue pill Clyde?

We won't be educating each other any time soon it appears so take care.

Cool, just know you're our enemy and an enemy of progress. That you prefer righteousness to justice.

[Clyde_Style]

Did I take a dump on organizing to get out to vote or did I say non of my rights were gained through a vote so when discussing this particular topic **** talking about a vote?

See that's what I'm saying, building strawmen to not confront your own programming.

Here's a fact, if you're raised in America and don't specifically attempt to unlearn white supremacy you're going to be a white supremacist. You want the red pill or the blue pill Clyde?

We won't be educating each other any time soon it appears so take care.

Cool, just know you're our enemy and an enemy of progress. That you prefer righteousness to justice.

OK jackazz

[robillionaire]

Are we all at least unified on statue toppling?

I’d like to say yes but it’s destruction of property and technically illegal direct action so who knows

[E-Balla]

Are we all at least unified on statue toppling?

I’d like to say yes but it’s destruction of property and technically illegal direct action so who knows

Those statues being destroyed might destroy someone's livelihood? What if it accidentally topples and destroys a housing complex, now 100 people have nowhere to sleep. Violence accomplishes nothing fellas what's the point of harming those statues? Let's vote Trump out of office that'll get rid of them.

[Capn'O]

Are we all at least unified on statue toppling?

I’d like to say yes but it’s destruction of property and technically illegal direct action so who knows

Those statues being destroyed might destroy someone's livelihood? What if it accidentally topples and destroys a housing complex, now 100 people have nowhere to sleep. Violence accomplishes nothing fellas what's the point of harming those statues? Let's vote Trump out of office that'll get rid of them.

Statue toppling is job creation. Somebody gotta move 'em. And then somebody else needs to make a better statue.

[E-Balla]

Only 25% of Americans thought the Civil Rights Act needed to be enforced when it was passed. Minds don't need to change to make progress, minds will change when we drag them into the light if history is any indication. Hell the public opinion on BLM skyrocketed when the cities started burning and now even 49% of white people support the movement. I know and work with a lot of 60+ year old white men born and raised in Georgia, and Missouri but I don't know one old white man that was pro segregation as a kid.

[Fat Kat]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[Capn'O]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

There were the two near LA too. Count me dubious that suicide by tree has suddenly become vogue.