The one Trumpist riot is panned as violent rebellion while a wide variety of euphemism is used to explain away the hundreds of BLM riots.

I just don’t get it. — NOS4A2

One difference is that BLM riots are based on actual faults in law enforcement whereas you’ve said yourself that you don’t believe that there was widespread voter fraud.

No, I do not think racism went away, or else I would not be against identity politics. Believe it or not, I think the descendants of slaves are deserving of some form of reparations. But you cannot do that with identity politics, when you believe all people who have dark skin are deserving of the same. Not only is it racist to think that way, it’s unjust.

If the Trumper movement was about anti-corruption.. Trump is more corrupt than all the insider politicians so don't know what that's about either. My theory is people like leaders that act like dicks. They want an idiot boss that just rules by force of personality and not reasoned understanding. — schopenhauer1

I certainly do not rule that out and as has been pointed out above, it is a staple in fascist ideology, charismatic leadership as Weber called it. Here we saw the clash between charismatic leadership and formal rational leadership play out. I do also think though in order for people to risk being hurt there must be something at stake for them, apart from a leader that is a dick. Whether they marched against their own interests is irrelevant, they thought they marched for them.

But the most obvious disparity is in the cultural response. Trump has already been banned from social media for “incitement to violence” whereas BLM, its leaders, its countless enablers have not. In fact, they received corporate donations in the countless of millions, and support from virtue signallers world wide. (We cannot know whether companies like Apple donate because they believe in the cause or because they didn’t want their apple stores looted). The one Trumpist riot is panned as violent rebellion while a wide variety of euphemism is used to explain away the hundreds of BLM riots. — NOS4A2

Yes and it is entirely rational to do so. It is a tried and tested way of dealing with protest groups and it is called accommodation. (At least in the parlance of Dutch governance studies it is). It is rational because oppression does not work and and they demand a seat at the table, so you give them a seat at the table. The strategy is also known as repressive tolerance in Marxis palance. Corporate sponsors of course donate because they see they have sympathy of a lot of people and the protesters and their sympathisers are a significant market. The BLM riots display a wholly different pattern from the trump riot and that is because their aims are different. Trumpers do not wat a seat at the table (they have that), they want to determine the table and who is sitting on it. That is a much more ambitious and dangerous aim. I wonder why you keep missing the distinction while i has been explained in countless forms.

No, I do not think racism went away, or else I would not be against identity politics. Believe it or not, I think the descendants of slaves are deserving of some form of reparations. But you cannot do that with identity politics, when you believe all people who have dark skin are deserving of the same. Not only is it racist to think that way, it’s unjust. — NOS4A2

I don't know why one thing would exclude the other. But, oddly I can see this as being somewhat reasonable from one point of view. You realize, Trump and his ilk would be the least likely to be for anything like reparations right? If you truly believe this, then you are backing the wrong horse.. I don't even know if there is a conservative politician that would agree with reparations.. there's barely liberal politicians that would agree with that.

I guess then, what is your idea of identity politics? It is quite clear that "white identity" is something Trump supporters identify with very strongly, so even that would be against your own devotion to Trump.

Also, generally speaking, identity politics has to do with discrimination of some sort. But if you can identify specific instances of using identity politics poorly I can evaluate what you mean more clearly.

I certainly do not rule that out and as has been pointed out above, it is a staple in fascist ideology, charismatic leadership as Weber called it. Here we saw the clash between charismatic leadership and formal rational leadership play out. I do also think though in order for people to risk being hurt there must be something at stake for them, apart from a leader that is a dick. Whether they marched against their own interests is irrelevant, they thought they marched for them. — Tobias

I can see that, perhaps. But there has to be a strong correlation with sympathizing with dick leadership style.. They defend the right for him to lead like a dick, even to the point of risking being hurt themselves. I wonder though as @darthbarracuda, that there are personality types that are drawn to fascist personalities. People that rule out of poisoning the well, erratic decision-making, having no filter or nuance, etc. Some people really respond to that shit. It's like if you took a book on good leadership and inversed every principle.

I just don’t get it. — NOS4A2

Yes, you do. It's been explained to you often enough.

Trump’s Legacy: Voters Who Reject Democracy and Any Politics but Their Own

While the turmoil on Wednesday has divided Republican officials, with some resigning or calling for Mr. Trump to leave office and others rallying behind him, there are few signs of division among these voters who fervently back Mr. Trump. In lengthy interviews with some of them this week, they expressed sympathy with what they said were the motives of the mob — to stop the counting of Electoral College results in Congress, under the false premise that widespread fraud had deprived the president of re-election.

The adherence of Mr. Trump’s base to his groundless claims of a “sacred landslide” victory, and their rejection of a routine Constitutional process — a position abetted by 147 Congressional Republicans who objected to certifying Mr. Biden’s election — suggests that a core part of the Republican Party, both voters and some officials, is dead-set on rejecting the legitimacy of any politics or party but their own.

Personally, I think that democratic rights come with obligations - first and foremost, the obligation to acknowledge facts. Of course judgement is a matter of individual choice, as a matter of definition; but 'everyone has a right to their own opinions, but not to their own facts'.

What is dire about the Trump legacy, buttressed by a small number of utterly unscrupulous media outlets, is that significant numbers of people believe a lie. Because there's no doubt that the presidential election was a free and fair election, and that Biden won by around 10 million votes. As long as that remains contested, then there's no basis for reconciliation, because there's no recognition of the facts.

Trump insurrectionist being shot for those who want to debate it. Viewer discretion advised.

More context.

Trump insurrectionist being shot for those who want to debate it. Viewer discretion advised. — Baden

Not sure I have the stomach for it, but I guess I'll get the gist from others.

It's awful that the left-wing media supported the BLM protests but condemn these people for simply exercising their right to hold lynch mobs.

Trump insurrectionist being shot for those who want to debate it. Viewer discretion advised. — Baden

From the clip, she appeared not to be threatening anyone's life, so it seems unjustified, but maybe there's more to this.

Your thoughts?

I'm not sure. As a rule, I'm for minimal force. With proper training, there should be a way to prevent a threat without resorting to a lethal shot. And this was clearly that. What might mitigate the situation in this context would be:

a) An angry, potentially armed, crowd shouting that they wanted to murder the VP.
b) If there was a warning.

I mean, suppose he let the woman climb through the door and she was armed and intent on killing lawmakers? His career would be over if he wasn't already dead. There has to be a final line of defence and it would be totally justified to presume these people (as a group) to be terrorists considering what they were openly claiming they were going to do.

Again though, not enough information just from the video for me. (And I might add, I consider the woman mostly to be a victim of Trump and his cronies and it's a tragedy she was killed).

It's awful that the left-wing media supported the BLM protests but condemn these people for simply exercising their right to hold lynch mobs. — Kenosha Kid

Yes, attempting to hang Mike Pence is pretty much the exact equivalent of calling for racial justice. :brow:

What might mitigate the situation in this context would be:

a) An angry, potentially armed, crowd shouting that they wanted to murder the VP.
b) If there was a warning.

I mean, suppose he let the woman climb through the door and she was armed and intent on killing lawmakers? — Baden

I think even without him thinking it through that far ahead, he's one of a surprisingly small number of police officers defending the senate from an overwhelming violent mob. I think it's a miracle that only one person got shot under those circumstances. The people condemning this would be the first to defend a police officer shooting a black man for the slightest resistance or intimidation.

Yes, attempting to hang Mike Pence is pretty much the exact equivalent of calling for racial justice. — Baden

With the number of racists and fascists on the site atm, I'm worried you think I was being serious.

With the number of racists and fascists on the site atm, I'm worried you think I was being serious. — Kenosha Kid

:lol: No, man. I dig.

phew! :rofl:

If the US saw what the US does to the US, it would invade the US to liberate the US from US tyranny. A coup is a coup, no matter where it occurs. A fascist is a fascist, no matter who he is.

If the US saw what the US does to the US, it would invade the US to liberate the US from US tyranny. A coup is a coup, no matter where it occurs. A fascist is a fascist, no matter who he is. — Miguel Hernández

:rofl: and :up:

Yes, attempting to hang Mike Pence is pretty much the exact equivalent of calling for racial justice. :brow: — Baden

There are certainly critical distinctions between the Trumpers and the BLM protesters, but there is a similarity often overlooked, and that is that both comprise a marginalized underclass, even if the Trumpers don't realize the source of their anger and even if they are members of the majority race.

True.

In several sates there is a so-called stand-your-ground law. It's in every case a terrible law for civilians, but for police? To my way of thinking there either exists or does not exist some line, which, if crossed can get the trespasser shot. Storming the US Capitol in that manner would seem to be such a crossing. It's too bad that woman was killed; it appears there were better candidates. And I'll concede they're all better trained and smarter than me, and that probably it's better no more were killed. But if I'm there, and they cross the wrong line, I go full automatic until it's all done.

Too funny not to share...

There are certainly critical distinctions between the Trumpers and the BLM protesters, but there is a similarity often overlooked, and that is that both comprise a marginalized underclass, even if the Trumpers don't realize the source of their anger and even if they are members of the majority race. — Hanover

Yes. But the BLM protesters sought police reform because they were victimised by the police. The marginalised underclass that supports Trump is an economic underclass protesting on behalf of someone who wishes to cut taxation and public ("wasteful") spending. Even in that similarity they are starkly different.

I don't mean to imply Trump's policies or ideology are similar to Nazism, but if you read Evans' Third Reich trilogy (a very comprehensive history), it's impossible not to see parallels in the petty corruption, infighting, disdain for expertise, and ability to plug any and all issues into a simplistic ideological format.

I just drove across country and am in the final book and this stood out to me.

There are certainly critical distinctions between the Trumpers and the BLM protesters, but there is a similarity often overlooked, and that is that both comprise a marginalized underclass, even if the Trumpers don't realize the source of their anger and even if they are members of the majority race. — Hanover

Some believe that a part of the anger that Trump utilized was them becoming underclass and seeing minorities rising in status.

Trump voters in 2016 and 2020 were wealthier than average.

The idea that the median Trump voter is a poor blue collar white worker simply doesn't line up with data. That is branding.

Trump lost support with lower income voters this time around even as he gained ground with minorities and higher income voters.

That's not to say millions of low income voters didn't vote for him, but his core base is middle to upper middle class. And they're old. He lost voters under 55 by landslide margins in both elections, so the core of his support isn't the generations (Millennials and Z), who are more downwardly mobile. Indeed, their the group cleaning up in terms of government spending, getting both UBI and universal healthcare through federal entitlements.

The idea that the median Trump voter is a poor blue collar white worker simply doesn't line up with data. That is branding. — Count Timothy von Icarus

I wonder how many of them are people who think that they are poor blue collar workers and have no idea how rich they are. I see a lot of “rednecks” in my neighborhood with big expensive trucks and boats and RVs in the driveways of their expensive real houses, and so apparently a lot more money than “classy” well-educated “liberal elite” trailer-trash like me.

Yeah, but it always astounds me the huge proportion of people who leverage up on debt and spend everything they earn on a year and then some. There is a reason Baby Boomers had the most advantageous economy in US history (hell, maybe world history), and median savings for people 55-64 is $15,000.

I certainly know people who say they couldn't go two weeks without a check who redo their kitchen every 3 years and have a brand new truck in the driveway.

Still, you at least need a middle class income to get approved for those loans.

That is absurd. 80% or more were approving of him after 4 years. Does that sound like a poor choice? Not from their point of view, and your point of view is just your opinion. — FreeEmotion

I really can’t believe people still use this phrase.

“Just your opinion.” Well it’s just YOUR opinion that it’s my opinion.

Really adds depth to the discussion.

Please stop that.

I just don’t get it. — NOS4A2

I wonder why.