What it's about is giving kids like this the society they deserve. That's all. How do we do it?

I actually did see that first video before and it is fucking insane. The stuff of nightmares. In fact, worked it into a short story I wrote. (In the second video, the officers show an absolute callous disregard for the victim but aren't actively trying to kill or injure him). Anyway, yes, absolutely, police brutality does not break exactly along the lines of race but when you look at the numbers it's skewed towards the poor and minorities.

A very basic taxonomy of systemic racism (overlapping with systemic classism).

Rich, powerful and white: Police reaction: Subservience.
Middle-class white: Police reaction: Respect
Poor and black: Police reaction: Contempt

Obviously, this is a generalization but seems close enough to the unwritten rules of US policing in enough states to be accurate.

Is there racism in the U.S., yes, but is there "systematic racism," absolutely not. — Sam26

It's been proven beyond a doubt there is.

Please delete my account. — Sam26

You can just leave for now, I suppose. We'll remove your personal details, delete your name and so on later.

Back to systemic racism.



Just make her black and poor and imagine the response. That's all it takes. (I mean at any point in the video does anyone think there's even a remote possibility they are going to lay one finger on this horrible self-entitled bitch?)

:clap:

This is brilliant.



These cops arrest a guy because he "looks like" a suspect (i.e. he's black). Turns out the guy is FBI. :fire:

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/06/03/derek-chauvins-murder-charge-will-now-be-2nd-degree-3-other-ex-mpd-officers-also-face-charges/

It's working. Keep it up!

Reading that now. All too likely. Add in technological advances in bioengineering etc. applied in a polarised fashion dependent on social strata and you've got a nice little dystopia in the making.



Ooh. Bullseye!

I love the opening line: "Australia is now in line with the United States, Ghana and Botswana in terms of civil freedoms." Like - ew, not in line with the US! — StreetlightX

:lol:

Fuck, the UK is already "narrowed". Ireland is still green. Hang in their lads!

(And before someone starts shouting that we're overreacting, you're not there yet, but authoritarianism and the continued erosion of constitutional rights is the clear direction of travel. Does anyone imagine that Trump won't take it absolutely as far he can?)



That's disturbing. The UK to is probably next. Ireland is more naturally egalitarian but the neoliberal juggernaut crushes all in its path and if democracy just slows it down, who knows...

Trump's clear model for the US is Putin's Russia. Only with more Walmarts. But the left is "authoritarian" and against "freedom". Anyway, yes, it poses a huge problem: as the balance starts to tilt towards right authoritarianism, it becomes normalized. If you've got China, Russia, and now the US going this route, open democracies start to look like a weird novelty.

Yep, just that there's absolutely no corner of ambiguity for them to hide in now. Video of police flash bombing, tear-gassing, and beating peaceful protesters engaged in exercising their supposed constitutional rights, punching members of the press in the face and generally just practising for the fascist state of their dreams can't be hand waved away. What the right, as a political force, want is an oppressive state that serves the interests of a socioethnic uber-class with everyone else untermenschen only around to serve them their lattes and mow their lawns.

On the positive side, it's useful evidence to demonstrate that the American right and their representatives don't essentially care about the constitution or any other of the principles that found their hallowed slogans ("give me liberty or death" etc.), they will back anyone on their "team" no matter what the actual content of the behaviour is. They're a collection of ideologies without content, nothing but a black hole of power struggles against anyone who threatens their selfish interests (all the resources for me and those who look and sound like me, now!). So, when they talk of this or that right (guns or whatever) as being fundamental to their position as American citizens, this can be thrown right back in their faces: You supported the denial of the very same rights you're now claiming to be fundamental. Then just watch them fall into the gaping abyss of their own hypocrisy.

Anyone who continuously posts low quality like @Chester will be banned. Take him as a brilliant example of what not to do on the site. If you still can't work out why, that's fine. But we're not going to spend days and days explaining one of the most obvious banning decisions we ever made to someone who has decided they just won't accept it.

Of course, it goes without saying that not only do we consider the guidelines, we consult each other in most cases. Even with @Chester, I made a suggestion in the mod forum after he ignored my warning that someone else look at whether he merited keeping on. He didn't. But I didn't want to take a unilateral decision to ban him. Thing is, we know bans need to be justified, so we're not going to stick our necks out on them unless we're either super sure or we get a second and, in some cases, third opinion.

Honestly, @Chester didn't need baiting. He was politically, ethnically, and personally insulting anyone who disagreed with him from day one. And all that got him was a warning for low quality until he jumped the shark. Hardly unfair.

Not sure about logic, but the secret to getting us to do what you want is just to complain about us publically. We hate that and will probably give in to make you stop.

It's fair enough to complain. We mods get blind to our faults sometimes and can end up acting unfairly and intemperately. It's good to remind us when we do and keep us honest. As for @Chester, even if he had never flamed, he would have been banned. I also warned him for low quality (not flaming, which is well tolerated in the political discussions as you may have noticed). So, he was given a couple of warnings for low quality, ignored them, and got banned.

Apart from the Irish jokes, which had me in stitches. Ok, no...

His posts were garbage and he was a fool.

Yes, absolutely, those need to go. :clap:

I'm guessing we can close this now as the main issue seems to have been resolved.

Thank you, frank. :up:

As I said, frank, I realize now you were genuinely concerned about my well-being in asking me if I was drunk as you were the time when you said you thought I sounded stressed and all the rest was just a misunderstanding on my part. And, of course, this thread is a genuine attempt to uncover the systemic oppression on this site. As I've indicated, I won't mod you anymore and actually I shouldn't mod anyone I interact with, so you have my apologies and please do keep fighting your good fight.

:lol: It all makes sense now.

I think we just don't understand each other tbh. That's all there is to it.

And I'm sure frank's PMs to me claiming he was concerned I was drunk were not an attempt to annoy me so he could claim he was being harassed. I need to see the good in people more.

I'm sorry I was mean to frank everyone. When he said he was calling Hanover for help with a sad face emoji, it sounded like a joke and I responded with an lol. The idea of Hanover saving anyone sounds inherently amusing to me. But apparently my response was harassful oppression, so I apologize.

The systemic oppression is so heavy here we haven't yet banned @NOS4A2 and @Chester. We may have to up our game.

I was told I'd be banned if I trolled anymore — frank

As above:

I said I don't care about and that you (posters in general) don't troll on the site or you get banned. Period. That's a statement of fact regarding the rules not a statement of my intention to do anything... I've already said I'd leave moderating you to others. — Baden

No, I didn't say you're due to be banned nor did I suggest that you're generally badly behaved. Yesterday, you called a post bullshit and then when asked for a reason said you didn't even read it. I can't think of a more trollish thing to do than that. It seems disingenuous to me you wouldn't recognize that, but fine.

Today, you came up with some excuse which I said I don't care about and that you (posters in general) don't troll on the site or you get banned. Period. That's a statement of fact regarding the rules not a statement of my intention to do anything. But whatever, feel free to continue this with someone else. I've already said I'd leave moderating you to others (if that happens to be necessary). That's all I have to say about it.

What you'll find in the political discussions is many emotive posts interspersed with some decent ones. That's just the nature of politics. Emotionally, people tend to react more strongly to things like police brutality than most philosophical topics. If we modded political topics like philosophical ones, we'd have to rip so much out of the discussions that they'd become incoherent. Anyway, the door's always open if you want to make the discussion better.

Hm.

It's not baiting. There is some good stuff on here and your post was a low-quality complaint about low quality (a sweeping generalization). I don't doubt you can contribute, so go ahead.

Thanks for introducing him to me. :up:



Having said that, there is still some pretty good analysis to be found here considering what an emotive topic this is. What's your contribution been, @Brett? If you think you have something philosophical to say, please say it. Complaining about people falling into holes is no better than the lowest quality stuff on here.

Trump stooges attacking "the enemy of the people" again.

No worries. The whole thing is horrible. That can't be said enough.

Oh, I know, concerning the situation, I was just referring to the statement.