Why not just make it simple and condemn police brutality while also condemning lawless rioting? — BitconnectCarlos

Because police brutality is directed at people and "lawless rioting" is directed at property and guess which one I care about

Good, 'cause I'm not.

s directed at property and guess which one I care about — Maw

Some of that property is people's livelihoods. Nice of you not to care. Why not just focus on the police?

Burning precincts and cop cars should be enough to get everyone's attention. No need to destroy the rest of the community. — Marchesk

Scorched Earth is a venerable military tactic, of proven effectiveness.

Hope someone burns your house down.

Scorched Earth is a venerable military tactic, of proven effectiveness. — unenlightened

It's also an ends justify the means. It would be better if the human race didn't use that tactic.

Because police brutality is directed at people and "lawless rioting" is directed at property and guess which one I care about

Would you like it if you spent years saving up to start your own business and establish your own source of income only to see it burned down by rioters? This is what happened to a bar that was owned by a black fireman who spent his life saving up for it. People are out of work now due to their workplaces being destroyed and communities are being destroyed by these rioters.

Don't pretend you give two shits about local owners if you have nothing to say about the systemic conditions that keep black people poor and vying for uninsured minimum wage jobs, all while defending MNCs.

Burning precincts and cop cars should be enough to get everyone's attention. No need to destroy the rest of the community. — Marchesk

Says who? "The rest of the community" needs to be threatened enough to change those laws & policies which permit, aide & abet domestic terrorism by police and self-deputized, rightwing, "stand your ground" vigilantes. History decisively demonstrates that the status quo hasn't ever changed without either violent insurrection or the credible threat of loss of their lives & livelihoods - which one is needed this time will be, as always, up to "the rest of the community" sooner or later.

It's the difference between domestic terrorism and resistance to domestic terrorism. — 180 Proof

That sums it up for me and why most of the objections to what's happening are ill-founded. In a situation where there is no justice, there can be no legitimate appeal to some neutral foundation of law. The law itself and its enforcers are agents of violence, both overt and systemic. The system that allows Target to exploit workers by paying them less than a living wage (half the minimum wage of most western European countries) is far more nefarious than anything a few rioters can do to their physical property. In fact, there is a good argument to be made that looting such businesses is fair reappropriation if not full recompense for the looting they've done of the labour of those under their control. (And with no good alternative options provided so will it remain).

So, regardless of specific rights and wrongs, the imposition of a skewed perspective that makes the perpetrators of major systemic violence into victims where only minor instances of localised violence forms the 'crime' against them turns the conversation into a worthless back and forth where the forest is missed for the trees. Yes, some of the localised violence is uncalled for and counterproductive and even carried out for completely the wrong reasons but that does not negate the justification for fighting back and fighting back hard against a system that wants its victims forever on their knees feeding its greed and cruelty.



:up:

I guess then it's time to ask the million dollar question: Is there any race that's not racist? — TheMadFool

No, that's not the million-dollar question. And if you have nothing intelligent and on-topic to say, please exit the discussion now. Thank you.

Says who? — 180 Proof

Not MLK or Gandhi.

Was going to respond but @180 Proof summed it up better.

'Non-violent resistance' is only a tactic and not a strategy. (vide Mandela, MLK & Gandhi)

Really no point in letting these two continue to howl about property damage while remaining silent about police brutality

Especially the part about the rest of the community needing to being threatened. /s

Fuck you. I said keep the anger targeted at the police.

Pointing out that some bad things have been done by the protesters is fine as far as it goes. But I presume if police were torturing members of your community to death in broad daylight some of you might take offence and behave "badly" too. Such is human nature. But the more important question to focus on is how do we get the police (and others) in the US to stop feeling like they have a licence to brutalize and mistreat minorities (and the poor and homeless, I might add). Not focusing on that makes it look like you're not interested in what's significant here.

your "suspicious white man" invalidates the uprising and what communities of color and communities of conscience are struggling for? The only 'provocation' that matters is the fact that the four lynchers have not been arrested and charged with George Floyd's murder yet despite many eye-witnesses and video recordings from several perspectives. Probable fuckin' cause easily established and the authorities still dither. "Suspicious white man"? IDGAF because I don't have the luxury or priviledge, unenlightened, to miss the forest fire for the wormwood trees. — 180 Proof

Another take on the validity of this uprising, from the mayor of Atlanta:https://www.fox5atlanta.com/video/689455

Not focusing on that makes it look like you're not interested in what's significant here. — Baden

You mean like all the talk about capitalism? That's a separate issue from police racism and brutality, and yet certain revolutionaries want to make it about that.

This is my post. It's obviously primarily about racism and brutality.

But I presume if police were torturing members of your community to death in broad daylight some of you might take offence and behave "badly" too. Such is human nature. But the more important question to focus on is how do we get the police (and others) in the US to stop feeling like they have a licence to brutalize and mistreat minorities (and the poor and homeless, I might add). — Baden

But again, you seem to be here just to complain about property loss. Got anything else to say?

Got anything else to say? — Baden

Yeah, I don't think a socialist overthrow of capital is going to solve the problem of racism. A nation-wide reform of police departments from top to bottom is a good start, though.

Cops with prior incidents need to be reviewed and fired or charged as necessary. There needs to be better and longer training in de=escalation. And the psychopathic power hungry ones need to be weeded out of the hiring process.

Also, further investigation into white supremacy groups inside the police. They need to be removed.

If you want to quote something in one of my posts you disagree with, go ahead. If you're capable. Because you don't seem to be following what's going on in the argument so far.

I wasn't responding to your arguments. But I added a paragraph on what I think needs to happen, somehow.

OK, that would certainly help.

But the more important question to focus on is how do we get the police (and others) in the US to stop feeling like they have a licence to brutalize and mistreat minorities (and the poor and homeless, I might add).

Now this is a good question, and I can tell you that throwing molotov cocktails or assaulting police officers and destoying their vehicles is DEFINITELY not going elicit the response you're hoping for. You're not going to get a more compassionate police force by intimidating them. I support body cameras and transparency. Maybe encourage the creation of programs where cops go into these inner city neighborhoods and maybe coach basketball or involve themselves in the community somewhere.

Not focusing on that makes it look like you're not interested in what's significant here.

I'm interested in both sides of the problem but in this thread commentators are like 100% on one side here with many commentators actually supporting the destruction of property and assault of business owners. It's completely absurd. If everyone was 100% pro-cop I'd be arguing with them.

Is there any race that's not racist? — TheMadFool

I'll hazard a reply by quoting myself excerpted from an old post (follow the link for more context):

Thus, "racist" seems an apt epithet for accusing anyone who, regardless of demographic traits or personal prejudices, (A) enjoys and actively seeks benefits from the accumulated historical legacies and/or (B) (via inaction or action) implements or supports current policies of ... — 180 Proof

... systemic "racial" [out-group] discrimination & violence.

Furthermore ... (mostly for emphasis)

Good, 'cause I'm not. — StreetlightX

Unfortunately, people who think like you do, as far as the extremism goes.

You make some good points, but then throw it away with the extremist stuff. I think your approach to society would be worse than what it is now. But some reforms within the current system along those lines would be good, in moderation.

The only thing extreme is the utter shitness of a society in which George Floyds happen regularly and when all people like you can moan about are property.

:up:

Non sequitur. What else is a public official supposed to say? Make pronouncements against her office's interests? :roll:

The riots are self-defeating, which is a shame. Whatever was gained by peaceful protests is lost and unravelled with riots. There is likely to be a rightward shift in voting if more innocent people and property are damaged, or worse, a violent reactionary backlash.