From my own vantage point, I have rarely come across people who listen to what the president says and coming to their own conclusions, instead preferring to be informed by certain media outlets, political PACS and even celebrities. This is how mass hysteria begins. So it’s disconcerting when people say the president divides while at the same time relying on yellow journalism to inform them what to think. We know that many journalists have eschewed the ethics of their craft in favor of activism, and I think we are viewing the result.

I know that if rioters burned my business to the ground I would be happy if the leader of our country came in support. I can’t think of any leader having the balls to do so.

But to blame Trump for the division, when most if not all of the rioters inform themselves through a hostile media, seems to me to be short-sighted and to attribute omnipotent power to one man. — NOS4A2

Let's do one reality check here before we continue. First, there are whole states that have seen NO riots in the last 20 years in the US including this year:



So from the map we can see that basically this is about some cities in the US. Yet the vast majority of the 320+ million Americans have not have riots on their streets.

To respond your comment: First, the political division was already there, and on election years it has been implemented right from the start by the two political parties for them to stay in power, for people to come and vote because the other side is so despicable. Now with the pandemic and the economy in shambles, this just backfires in the way we have seen.

Yet you simply should be objective and compare, just for example, the acceptance speeches of Joe Biden and Donald Trump. Yes, Biden did mention Charlottesville and Trump saying about "very fine people on both sides", but Biden didn't attack Republicans and the RNC. (Perhaps that was done by some other in the convention). Trump, many times, portrayed the democrats and their inaction to be cause of the riots and looting. So when Trump says "If the Radical Left takes power, they will apply their disastrous policies to every city, town, and suburb in America. Just imagine if the so-called peaceful demonstrators in the streets were in charge of every lever of power in the U.S. Government." is Biden making same kind of outrageous claims? No.

You may shrug it off as Trump being Trump, but that's the problem, just as with the most eccentric and wokest protesters and leftist hotheads you find in the social media, they both basically don't think that their outrageous accusations made in tweets etc. would have a physical response.

then he slayed another who tried to hit him with a skateboard. It turns out if you attack a man with a gun you get shot. — NOS4A2

Oh yes, a skateboard. Such a deadly weapon.

But this just shows how easily things escalate if you bring firearms into a riot. The next step is that both sides bring them. How "mostly peaceful" will that be? With self-loading rifles the death toll can easily rise. And it's the likely outcome in the US if and when riots and looting is allowed to continue. So those that celebrate and think it's OK and understandable to loot and destroy private property, the next level of civil unrest is very close by especially if the police doesn't take control of the situation. This response is just a part of the American psyche, not my moral opinion.

The basic problem why I am so pessimistic is that I do not see any way or even any intension to de-escalate the divide and the polarization. Nobody is interested in trying to unify the country, nobody cares about social cohesion. And the winner of the election, whoever it might be, is full of shit if he thinks he can then unite and heal the country.

then he slayed another who tried to hit him with a skateboard. It turns out if you attack a man with a gun you get shot. — NOS4A2

And it turns out if you attack BLM protesters with paintballs and pepper spray, you might get shot too. What's your point? That using deadly force against non-deadly force (skateboards, paintballs, pepper spray etc) is OK? Or what?

Yeah there's that double standard/hypocrisy again. When rightwing domestic terrorists/mass-shooters murder BLM protesters they're lauded as heroes, but its a different story as soon as the shoe's on the other foot. I don't imagine we'll won't see many (if any) on the left trying to glorify whoever shot this member of Patriot Prayer (a violent rightwing/fascist/white nationalist group, ftr- since rightwingers love bringing up a victim's personal history as justification for their having been hurt/killed) the way the right did with Kyle Rittenhouse. Disgusting, shameless, and downright pitiful.

moreover, the fact that something was foreseeable or predictable doesn't mean its therefore justified. If you were Jewish and decided to walk down the street reading from the Torah in Nazi Germany, you'd predictably/foreseeably end up in a concentration camp (or come to some other similarly grim end). That doesn't justify putting people in concentration camps, obviously. And so it is here: just because the mass-shooter would predictably shoot the guy with the skateboard, doesn't mean he was therefore justified in doing so.

Also worth noting that the fact the first victim threw a balled up paper bag at Rittenhouse, or that the 2nd victim tried to hit him with a skateboard, does not constitute a valid self-defense claim under WI statute: in order to justify use of lethal force (shooting someone with a rifle, for instance), one's life needs to be in danger. Having a balled up plastic bag thrown at you or having someone chase you wielding a skateboard do not constitute threats to ones life, and so Rittenhouse has no valid self-defense claim in shooting them (i.e. lethal force).

(and of course Rittenhouse was already a criminal before he even pulled the trigger: he was illegally open-carrying + violating curfew... and yet the supposed party of "law and order" has nothing to say about any of that, naturally)

I don't imagine we'll won't see many (if any) on the left trying to glorify whoever shot this member of Patriot Prayer — Enai De A Lukal

But there will be those, and they will be heard by Foxnews etc. And the mudslinging and modern day tribalism will continue.

Nobody is interested in trying to unify the country, nobody cares about social cohesion. And the winner of the election, whoever it might be, is full of shit if he thinks he can then unite and heal the country. — ssu

I share this view as far as the Republican-Democratic frontrunners go. Interestingly, I just recently came across an "Articles of Unity 2020" push for Gabbard, Yang, McCraven, Ventura, and others as potential last minute alternatives, though I don't see them getting much exposure to have any impact on November as of yet, nor do I know much about the organization behind the push other than it seems spearheaded by Brett and Eric Weinstein and looks like it may have some possible backing by Peter Thiel of Thiel Capital.

Indeed.

Someone walks up to a protester, a so-called Trump supporter, executes him, and rather than condemn the act we condemn the partisanship. Brains rotting from the inside out. — NOS4A2

No, it's the fact that you're deluded in your partisanship, hence why the selective outrage.

I’m not sure Trump’s comments are so outrageous, especially given the unrest, violence and destruction of property occurring right now. No amount of hand waving can make that disappear. It is happening. It exists.

I think the Democrat’s deserve Trump’s shade. They’ve reviled him, obstructed him, and spread hatred about him at almost every step of his presidency. But my point isn’t that one politician or another causes division. My point is that a majority of people inform themselves through the bits and pieces offered to us by an unethical, activist media, and not from politicians. This is the source of your division.

As for the tragic shooting in Kenosha, I think it was self-defence. A man rushed him, went for his gun, but he protected himself. A mob chased him, tried to beat him, came at him with a gun, and they payed for it dearly. This is how easily things escalate when you are given free reign to destroy communities and the properties of innocent people.

As for the tragic shooting in Kenosha, I think it was self-defence. — NOS4A2

The guy drove an hour to get into the action, carrying a military-style assault weapon. Nobody was trying to break into his home. He put himself in that situation. The people he shot dead were unarmed. He's been charged with felony murder and should be sentenced accordingly.

Reading just now that Trump is actually attacking the very idea of politics. Politics is about getting along, compromising with those you don't agree with, and working together for the common good. Trump has never believed in that, and will do everything in his power to undermine it, including egging on violence against those that he deems 'the enemy'.

I doubt it. Feel free to post it if they do, but obviously we shouldn't be holding our breath on that one. Among the many other asymmetries and false equivalences between the left and right (and hence the vacuity of this mindless bothsidesism rhetoric), the left simply lacks the right's stomach for justifying violence, especially while deploying blatant double-standards in doing so. The Dems are certainly no strangers to hypocrisy and double-standards, but not on this particular front.

An AR-15 is a civilian rifle.

Video and images show he was there to protect businesses, clean up the mess, and to offer medical attention. He worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha the day before. Only when the teenager was violently attacked by grown men, one of them holding a pistol, did he unleash fury.

Politics has always been about division in my books.

An AR-15 is a civilian rifle. — NOS4A2

Only in America.

Doesn't matter. The law sets out specific requirements to qualify as a legally valid self-defense or defense of property claim. In order to justifiably use lethal force in WI, ones life must be in danger. His was not. So, no valid self-defense claim. Nor was he the owner of the property (or employee/agent of the person whose private property) he was purportedly "protecting": again, invalidating any claim to a legal defense of property.

Just a straight-up criminal to begin the night (illegally open-carrying and violating curfew), and a murderer/mass-shooter/domestic terrorist by the end of the night. And the supposed party of "law and order" is bending over backwards to defend and glorify this scumbag. I sincerely hope his night of LARPing + murder was worth it, the price is going to be steep: with any luck, it'll have come at the cost of the rest of his life in prison.

I share this view as far as the Republican-Democratic frontrunners go. Interestingly, I just recently came across an "Articles of Unity 2020" push for Gabbard, Yang, McCraven, Ventura, and others as potential last minute alternatives, though I don't see them getting much exposure to have any impact on November as of yet, nor do I know much about the organization behind the push other than it seems spearheaded by Brett and Eric Weinstein and looks like it may have some possible backing by Peter Thiel of Thiel Capital. — Kevin

The Weinstein brothers are a refreshing alternative to the ordinary hyper partisan approach. "Unity 2020" is a bit far off, but still, great insights. Nice to notice that others follow them too here.

No, I think it’s wise for the president to show support to the victims of riots, and I think it’s a good move politically. — NOS4A2

I can’t think of any leader having the balls to do so. — NOS4A2

My point is that a majority of people inform themselves through the bits and pieces offered to us by an unethical, activist media, and not from politicians. This is the source of your division. — NOS4A2

A divisive media I can agree with. Balls and wisdom - unappreciated but for those with eyes to see if not for the former - seems a bit of a reach.

I’m not sure Trump’s comments are so outrageous, especially given the unrest, violence and destruction of property occurring right now. — NOS4A2

But will the Democrats put the demonstrators in charge of every lever of power in the U.S. Government?
Will the Democrats defund Police Departments all across America?
Will they pass federal legislation to reduce law enforcement nationwide?
Will they make every city look like Democrat-run Portland, Oregon?

Do you genuinely think that a Biden administration will do all those things once in power?

The point is, Trump's only interest in the dreadful civil unrest, destruction of property, and, now, actual violent deaths, is to the extent that whipping up fear about it 'helps his re-election bid'. He's so obviously exploiting the fear of civil unrest for blatant partisan-political ends, and shows no interest in the subject beyond that. It's not as if he would say, hey, let's reach across the aisle, and see what we can all do together to heal the divisions, redress the injustices. Can you see Trump ever doing that?

I know that if rioters burned my business to the ground I would be happy if the leader of our country came in support. I can’t think of any leader having the balls to do so. — NOS4A2

Not even ballsy in the sense of it being a risky stunt, because no matter how it turns out he’ll be a hero in the eyes of his cult-like followers. If he ends up not going, for instance, it will show prudence rather than cowardice, right?

Rioting and looting is not civil protest. There are a lot of bad actors on all sides of the fence exploiting the situation for various reasons.

"Rioting is not protesting," said Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden during a speech at a steel mill in Pennsylvania today. "Looting is not protesting. Setting fires is not protesting."

Biden called for the prosecution of looters, shaming them for destroying small businesses and harming working families. 1

aaaaand there's that vacuous bothsidesism, right on cue. :roll:

And Joe Biden doesn't get to decide what constitutes protest or not (any more than you do), especially given his utter lack of impartiality or credibility on this particular issue. Worse, clutching pearls over property damage (all commercial insurance policies cover damage from vandalism/arson/rioting/etc anyways- so any affected businesses will have a check in the mail to cover their losses) while dragging their feet on addressing the police violence (including literal murder) that the protests are about in any meaningful or substantive way, robs Biden and the Dems of any sort of moral authority here.

As they say, respect existence or expect resistance. If Joe Biden or any other of these neoliberal dipshits want the fires to stop burning, the solution is simple enough: start holding police accountable for breaking the laws they're paid to enforce and killing/harming those they're paid to be protecting. The protesters are pretty clear about what they want. And for all the finger-pointing at Republicans, there are plenty of cities that have few if any Republicans on the city council (and/or have state legislatures + governorships controlled by Dems), that could institute meaningful police reforms without having to so much as even look at a Republican, if they were motivated to do so. But clearly, that's asking for too much, and so we get purely performative/symbolic gestures (like Pelosi et al taking a knee for a photo op), and both the violence and the protests will continue.

:clap:

If Joe Biden or any other of these neoliberal dipshits want the fires to stop burning, the solution is simple enough: start holding police accountable for breaking the laws they're paid to enforce and killing/harming those they're paid to be protecting. The protesters are pretty clear about what they want — Enai De A Lukal

:cheer:

If Joe Biden or any other of these neoliberal dipshits want the fires to stop burning, the solution is simple enough: start holding police accountable for breaking the laws they're paid to enforce and killing/harming those they're paid to be protecting. — Enai De A Lukal

Fair point. But surely you agree that this doesn't warrant Trump smearing the opposition by saying they're the ones fomenting violence.

But clearly, that's asking for too much, and so we get purely performative/symbolic gestures (like Pelosi et al taking a knee for a photo op), and both the violence and the protests will continue. — Enai De A Lukal

Yeah to this point the liberal bandage on a centuries old wound has been primarily symbolic. Grotesque photo ops, renaming streets (which as recently as yesterday resolve nothing), even pulling down statues of Confederates are symbolic insofar as they aren't part of wider material substantive change for the black community and the police.

aaaaand there's that vacuous bothsidesism, right on cue — Enai De A Lukal

More like a vacuous assault on common sense and the political center from radicals from both sides, but in this case especially from the left.

As if people aren't against police using excessive force. As if there is some hidden racist undertone or disregard of police brutality in saying like Wayfarer that "rioting and looting is not civil protest". That's the vacuous part which is so strange.

But I guess these days you still can divide people if there would be common ground.

. As if there is some hidden racist undertone or disregard of police brutality in saying like Wayfarer that "rioting and looting is not civil protest". That's the vacuous part which is so strange. — ssu

I just don't get how setting fire to cars and buildings is going to do anything other than play into Trump's scare campaign.

If Trump wins another term, how is that going to help anyone?