US Politics Thread

[Moxie]

I really recommend this for @britbox and @mrzz. It does speak to some things that both of you address, I think. It adds some nuance to the placement of empathy, and some wider context to the notion of "conspiracy." I don't agree with direct conspiracy, but I think the destruction of the social contract addresses that. But conspiring to protect the powers that be, yes.

 

[britbox]

I really recommend this for @britbox and @mrzz. It does speak to some things that both of you address, I think. It adds some nuance to the placement of empathy, and some wider context to the notion of "conspiracy." I don't agree with direct conspiracy, but I think the destruction of the social contract addresses that. But conspiring to protect the powers that be, yes.

You and @Anti-Pusher missed the point completely. Let's get something straight - that cop should be tried for murder.

By the way, AP - I said I had no empathy with rioters and looters. You said to check in with Floyd's family. Floyd's girlfriend (who happens to be white) has made it clear that this response is not what he would have wanted. So, square that circle for me.

However, I do have empathy for his family. Who wouldn't? I don't have empathy for wanton violence or for the ones attacking others who had no connection to the incident.

I don't like tribal herd mentality thinking. "If you're <insert name of an identifiable group> then this is what you must think, act and accept as your level of oppression and life..." - Own your own headspace and mindset.

Protests... fine. Riots... Not fine.

By the way, protests should be targetted for a specific outcome to be effective.

Maybe, in this case, a review of Minneapolis police force - including the cop's past history (which I believe included a lot of previous complaints), training, and recruitment procedures. Then you might have a better police force going forward. Wandering around chanting "Black Lives Matter" will have zero impact because there is no target outcome. It's a no brainer anyway, all lives matter.

On the "race" dimension, it was as clear as day from the footage, that there were plenty of white Antifa anarchists at the front of these riots.

 

[mrzz]

I really recommend this for @britbox and @mrzz. It does speak to some things that both of you address, I think. It adds some nuance to the placement of empathy, and some wider context to the notion of "conspiracy." I don't agree with direct conspiracy, but I think the destruction of the social contract addresses that. But conspiring to protect the powers that be, yes.

Thanks for the video. I watched it entirely. I get the frustration, I agree with the general notion of the non observance of the social contract, but, given how close the recent events are, and how close people feel to be to everything that is happening, I surely do not expect a cold and precise analysis. There are more than one connection that he makes that are simply to fragile to be defended at a later, less emotional, time, but that right now it surely speaks to people's emotions. Hell, how can you expect to be rational after seeing one guy get calmly killed? I get that. And I fully subscribe the MLK quote you posted earlier. But MLK's words were more precise, because they explain "why" riots erupt out of nowhere. He is not trying to rationalize or justify their point. He is not turning a blind eye to the fact that some people might cynically explore the (rightful) indignation of others.

I will be the last person to condemn anyone speaking his mind in times like these in the US. But you need to go further than that in your analysis if you want to find how to tackle some questions which pose themselves in the cold day to day reality. I mean, I just saw BB's answer above. Do you really think I don't get the frustration of some? Or that I don't have empathy for the ones affected, or the ones that genuinely feel that it could be them under that knee? Of course I do. And I understand -- and do not condemn -- anyone participating on the riots who are either completely emotionally out of control (which could be the case of a lot of people on day 1), or that genuinely believe that they do not have any other option. Do I think all people participating on the riots fall on those categories? No.

Anyway, in my personal opinion, this is secondary. What really matters is where do we go from here. There is one thing that the guy said on the video that I fully agree with, which is that this one video of this absurd murder has one unique quality: everyone agreed it was wrong. How do we transform this very rare unanimity into real and concrete political action? That is the question I think we should be trying to solve, not looking after justification (and/or political use) of the riots.

 

[Moxie]

You and @Anti-Pusher missed the point completely. Let's get something straight - that cop should be tried for murder.

By the way, AP - I said I had no empathy with rioters and looters. You said to check in with Floyd's family. Floyd's girlfriend (who happens to be white) has made it clear that this response is not what he would have wanted. So, square that circle for me.

However, I do have empathy for his family. Who wouldn't? I don't have empathy for wanton violence or for the ones attacking others who had no connection to the incident.

I don't like tribal herd mentality thinking. "If you're <insert name of an identifiable group> then this is what you must think, act and accept as your level of oppression and life..." - Own your own headspace and mindset.

Protests... fine. Riots... Not fine.

By the way, protests should be targetted for a specific outcome to be effective.

Maybe, in this case, a review of Minneapolis police force - including the cop's past history (which I believe included a lot of previous complaints), training, and recruitment procedures. Then you might have a better police force going forward. Wandering around chanting "Black Lives Matter" will have zero impact because there is no target outcome. It's a no brainer anyway, all lives matter.

On the "race" dimension, it was as clear as day from the footage, that there were plenty of white Antifa anarchists at the front of these riots.

We didn't miss the point. You have empathy for where you feel it well-placed. I really do wish you'd watch that Trevor Noah clip. He talks about protest movements being told by the "haves" in this world, the privileged, and yes, us white people that "this isn't the way to do it." So even their protests have to be on your/our terms? I think you can understand the disconnect there, right?

 

[Moxie]

Thanks for the video. I watched it entirely. I get the frustration, I agree with the general notion of the non observance of the social contract, but, given how close the recent events are, and how close people feel to be to everything that is happening, I surely do not expect a cold and precise analysis. There are more than one connection that he makes that are simply to fragile to be defended at a later, less emotional, time, but that right now it surely speaks to people's emotions. Hell, how can you expect to be rational after seeing one guy get calmly killed? I get that. And I fully subscribe the MLK quote you posted earlier. But MLK's words were more precise, because they explain "why" riots erupt out of nowhere. He is not trying to rationalize or justify their point. He is not turning a blind eye to the fact that some people might cynically explore the (rightful) indignation of others.

I will be the last person to condemn anyone speaking his mind in times like these in the US. But you need to go further than that in your analysis if you want to find how to tackle some questions which pose themselves in the cold day to day reality. I mean, I just saw BB's answer above. Do you really think I don't get the frustration of some? Or that I don't have empathy for the ones affected, or the ones that genuinely feel that it could be them under that knee? Of course I do. And I understand -- and do not condemn -- anyone participating on the riots who are either completely emotionally out of control (which could be the case of a lot of people on day 1), or that genuinely believe that they do not have any other option. Do I think all people participating on the riots fall on those categories? No.

Anyway, in my personal opinion, this is secondary. What really matters is where do we go from here. There is one thing that the guy said on the video that I fully agree with, which is that this one video of this absurd murder has one unique quality: everyone agreed it was wrong. How do we transform this very rare unanimity into real and concrete political action? That is the question I think we should be trying to solve, not looking after justification (and/or political use) of the riots.

One thing I really disagree with you on is that everything is too emotional right now and we can't do cold and concise analysis. This is not an event in a vacuum. It happens all the time. Of course the King quote is great...he was a world-class orator. But the very fact that he said it over 50 years ago means that it's not just the emotion of now...it's something we have been dealing with for decades and centuries. There actually is a lot of study out there, a lot of fine points to be discussed. We're scratching the surface here, but we can get down to the more granular. I'm ready. There are plenty of people that are diving deep into the question and problem of race in this country, and the conversations have been very interesting, especially of late. They are subtle, well-considered, and there is a lot in there for everyone.

 

[britbox]

We didn't miss the point. You have empathy for where you feel it well-placed. I really do wish you'd watch that Trevor Noah clip. He talks about protest movements being told by the "haves" in this world, the privileged, and yes, us white people that "this isn't the way to do it." So even their protests have to be on your/our terms? I think you can understand the disconnect there, right?

Not my terms Moxie. It's a law and order based society.

 

[Moxie]

Not my terms Moxie. It's a law and order based society.

I know you're not from the US, but "law and order" is coded here since the 60s for tamping down black people and the civil rights movement. The clip I keep referring you to talks about the social contract. That we all agree to certain principles, that we expect the authorities to administer them fairly, and we expect the society to apply them fairly. If you are a group for whom the social contract has been broken, there is a great betrayal. If you expect the police and otherwise authorities to uphold the law, and the police and such break the law and are not held accountable, particularly in terms of your community, they have broken the social contract, and so you feel that there is no social contract. If the police can break laws, so can you. Capisce? You may not like it, but it's the message that is sent. In a society like mine that still struggles with endemic racism, particularly in the justice system, "law and order" is the comfort of the privileged and white. I know you're not lacking in empathy, but try to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before you judge too harshly, especially from a more comfortable perch.

 

[britbox]

I know you're not from the US, but "law and order" is coded here since the 60s for tamping down black people and the civil rights movement. The clip I keep referring you to talks about the social contract. That we all agree to certain principles, that we expect the authorities to administer them fairly, and we expect the society to apply them fairly. If you are a group for whom the social contract has been broken, there is a great betrayal. If you expect the police and otherwise authorities to uphold the law, and the police and such break the law and are not held accountable, particularly in terms of your community, they have broken the social contract, and so you feel that there is no social contract. If the police can break laws, so can you. Capisce? You may not like it, but it's the message that is sent. In a society like mine that still struggles with endemic racism, particularly in the justice system, "law and order" is the comfort of the privileged and white. I know you're not lacking in empathy, but try to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before you judge too harshly, especially from a more comfortable perch.

If the police break laws then they should be held accountable. It's not a green flag for everybody else to break the law. Otherwise, you're left with anarchy.

 

[the AntiPusher]

You and @Anti-Pusher missed the point completely. Let's get something straight - that cop should be tried for murder.

By the way, AP - I said I had no empathy with rioters and looters. You said to check in with Floyd's family. Floyd's girlfriend (who happens to be white) has made it clear that this response is not what he would have wanted. So, square that circle for me.

However, I do have empathy for his family. Who wouldn't? I don't have empathy for wanton violence or for the ones attacking others who had no connection to the incident.

I don't like tribal herd mentality thinking. "If you're <insert name of an identifiable group> then this is what you must think, act and accept as your level of oppression and life..." - Own your own headspace and mindset.

Protests... fine. Riots... Not fine.

By the way, protests should be targetted for a specific outcome to be effective.

Maybe, in this case, a review of Minneapolis police force - including the cop's past history (which I believe included a lot of previous complaints), training, and recruitment procedures. Then you might have a better police force going forward. Wandering around chanting "Black Lives Matter" will have zero impact because there is no target outcome. It's a no brainer anyway, all lives matter.

On the "race" dimension, it was as clear as day from the footage, that there were plenty of white Antifa anarchists at the front of these riots.

BB. I know exactly what you were saying about empathy trust me... regardless of Cali and whats his name says..I pay very close to one's words.. however I say it again.. nobody cares if you have empathy or not. It's not about you .its about an ENTIRE RACE of people that has been oppressed and is being murdered by policemen who originally been legalized sworn to protect them however it's been the reverse they have been legalized to "Lynch" them. You say rioting and looters are WRONG which really no decent person condone but if as Trevor Noah's posts so brilliantly stated " the Contract" has been always broken or one sided against the oppressed, then what else is left. For the last time, Enough is Enough. The so called establishment needs to be Burn down then let it Be done then "By any means necessary". For the last time, if you can identify with this, then again your thoughts and philosophies continue to be the problem not the solution.
This should be about JUSTICE but all that is getting murdered is JUST US.

 

[the AntiPusher]

If the police break laws then they should be held accountable. It's not a green flag for everybody else to break the law. Otherwise, you're left with anarchy.

BB. You really are the problem. That's why the protestors turned to rioting.the POLICE HAVE NEVER BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE.. GOOD LORD man , have you no spectacles to quit watching this world with Blinders ON.. How many more Blacks have to be murdered in front of your eyes.. Where's this so called empathy you seem to feel that this World is Gonna be crippled because you have chosen to hold on too. BB ..You are WRONG..

 

[the AntiPusher]

Finally someone who can get some real justice

 

[Moxie]

This is true: Trump is no longer President. He's definitely abdicated control and responsibility for the pandemic to the governors. IMO this is so he can apportion blame later, especially in light of his bid for re-election.

Fire, pestilence and a country at war with itself: the Trump presidency is over | Robert Reich

A pandemic unabated, an economy in meltdown, cities in chaos over police killings. All our supposed leader does is tweet

www.theguardian.com

 

[Federberg]

If the police break laws then they should be held accountable. It's not a green flag for everybody else to break the law. Otherwise, you're left with anarchy.

I think the whole point of the protests is that the police to date haven't been held accountable. I thought everyone understood this

 

[Federberg]

This is true: Trump is no longer President. He's definitely abdicated control and responsibility for the pandemic to the governors. IMO this is so he can apportion blame later, especially in light of his bid for re-election.

Fire, pestilence and a country at war with itself: the Trump presidency is over | Robert Reich

A pandemic unabated, an economy in meltdown, cities in chaos over police killings. All our supposed leader does is tweet

www.theguardian.com

it's funny you know. We grade him on this curve so it's easy to miss this very obvious point. He really is just watching tv, playing golf and tweeting. I hope voters take note. He doesn't want to win re-election for them, clearly just for himself!

 

[britbox]

BB. You really are the problem. That's why the protestors turned to rioting.the POLICE HAVE NEVER BEEN HELD ACCOUNTABLE.. GOOD LORD man , have you no spectacles to quit watching this world with Blinders ON.. How many more Blacks have to be murdered in front of your eyes.. Where's this so called empathy you seem to feel that this World is Gonna be crippled because you have chosen to hold on too. BB ..You are WRONG..

I said straight out of the traps that the police need to be accountable... and I have empathy for those killed. Including the people killed by your braying mob. If burning, looting, and killing cops, is your "solution" then who with half a brain cell would want to be part of that shit?

 

[mrzz]

One thing I really disagree with you on is that everything is too emotional right now and we can't do cold and concise analysis. This is not an event in a vacuum. It happens all the time. Of course the King quote is great...he was a world-class orator. But the very fact that he said it over 50 years ago means that it's not just the emotion of now...it's something we have been dealing with for decades and centuries. There actually is a lot of study out there, a lot of fine points to be discussed. We're scratching the surface here, but we can get down to the more granular. I'm ready. There are plenty of people that are diving deep into the question and problem of race in this country, and the conversations have been very interesting, especially of late. They are subtle, well-considered, and there is a lot in there for everyone.

My point is that the analysis I am seeing in the two videos uploaded and discussed here, are too emotional. I am not dismissing them, I think they are honest reactions, that need to be heard.But, as an analysis, because of the emotional part, they are limited and/or wrong. I do not doubt that there people out there making good, well thought analysis of this problem since the 60's, 70's, 80s... But when I do see you writing the word "subtle", I cannot help but remember that it is very easy to confuse subtlety for "unverified underlying assumption".

There is one giant elephant in the room that is simply being ignored (in this thread I mean). In all the talk above, when people say that the "social contract is not being observed" (which is by the way a very clever and concise way to put things), people are not referring to one single death, as tragic as it may be. If the social contract is failing, those things are happening in a mass scale. If they are happening in a mass scale, you then need to look at the data. In that regard, ANY conclusion reached without looking at the data is COMPLETELY void.

Now comes the important part. If people are so sure that the data will show what they think it will, fine, roll up your sleeves and show your point. Nobody (or almost nobody) would be able to argue then. Or the effort isn't worth the price? Of course it is.

Someone could say, "but oh, data is corrupt'" (in the US I frankly doubt it, it could be, up to a point, here in Brazil). Well, anyway, if you put your hands in the data you would be able to prove, or at the very least show huge inconsistencies, in the data, and that would prove that something "sistemic" is wrong. (by the way, I really think systemic racism or institutional racism are very idiotic concepts. If racism is not coded in words, it is then present on people, period. Get it out of the people, you get it out of the system. If people are not racist, and you show them race injustice, they will act. If they are racist, they will not. It is as simple as that.)

Or, in other words: We can understand the riots as the voice of the unheard, but we cannot rationalize it and use it as a political tool. The ones that can be heard can do better than that, are obliged to do better than that. We cannot forget that part.

 

[Federberg]

My point is that the analysis I am seeing in the two videos uploaded and discussed here, are too emotional. I am not dismissing them, I think they are honest reactions, that need to be heard.But, as an analysis, because of the emotional part, they are limited and/or wrong. I do not doubt that there people out there making good, well thought analysis of this problem since the 60's, 70's, 80s... But when I do see you writing the word "subtle", I cannot help but remember that it is very easy to confuse subtlety for "unverified underlying assumption".

There is one giant elephant in the room that is simply being ignored (in this thread I mean). In all the talk above, when people say that the "social contract is not being observed" (which is by the way a very clever and concise way to put things), people are not referring to one single death, as tragic as it may be. If the social contract is failing, those things are happening in a mass scale. If they are happening in a mass scale, you then need to look at the data. In that regard, ANY conclusion reached without looking at the data is COMPLETELY void.

Now comes the important part. If people are so sure that the data will show what they think it will, fine, roll up your sleeves and show your point. Nobody (or almost nobody) would be able to argue then. Or the effort isn't worth the price? Of course it is.

Someone could say, "but oh, data is corrupt'" (in the US I frankly doubt it, it could be, up to a point, here in Brazil). Well, anyway, if you put your hands in the data you would be able to prove, or at the very least show huge inconsistencies, in the data, and that would prove that something "sistemic" is wrong. (by the way, I really think systemic racism or institutional racism are very idiotic concepts. If racism is not coded in words, it is then present on people, period. Get it out of the people, you get it out of the system. If people are not racist, and you show them race injustice, they will act. If they are racist, they will not. It is as simple as that.)

Or, in other words: We can understand the riots as the voice of the unheard, but we cannot rationalize it and use it as a political tool. The ones that can be heard can do better than that, are obliged to do better than that. We cannot forget that part.

This sounds like sophistry to me. If you really need "data" after all the events we've seen over the last decade then either you've stuck your head in the sand or you haven't been paying attention. Just a few days ago, white protesters in Michigan surrounded the State legislature with automatic rifles, and the police just stood calmly. When, before the rioting, protesters (a mix of black and white folk) peacefully showed up, the police responded as if they were facing a higher threat. If you don't believe that race had anything to do with that, then the conversation is futile from the get go.

"If racism is not coded in words, it is then present on people, period. Get it out of the people, you get it out of the system. If people are not racist, and you show them race injustice, they will act. If they are racist, they will not. It is as simple as that"

I had to laugh at this. That's not how it works mate. We have seen over the years. And MLK once eloquently discussed this very issue....

" I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

 

[mrzz]

This sounds like sophistry to me. If you really need "data" after all the events we've seen over the last decade then either you've stuck your head in the sand or you haven't been paying attention. Just a few days ago, white protesters in Michigan surrounded the State legislature with automatic rifles, and the police just stood calmly. When, before the rioting, protesters (a mix of black and white folk) peacefully showed up, the police responded as if they were facing a higher threat. If you don't believe that race had anything to do with that, then the conversation is futile from the get go.

"If racism is not coded in words, it is then present on people, period. Get it out of the people, you get it out of the system. If people are not racist, and you show them race injustice, they will act. If they are racist, they will not. It is as simple as that"

I had to laugh at this. That's not how it works mate. We have seen over the years. And MLK once eloquently discussed this very issue....

" I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

You are COMPLETELY missing the point. I do not need to look at the data to know that racism exists, I need to look at the data to see how racism manifests itself. If people start from the conclusion, then no conversation is needed, and the only possible outcome is conflict.

I think the MLK quote is completely out of context. The times are different, the direct action needed back then was to CHANGE THE LAWS. The laws have been changed, now they need to be enforced. I am not saying people should not be out there protesting, I am only questioning which is the more effective way to protest. By the way, I completely agree with the way Colin Kaepernick protested. And I ask you this: what is more potent? People burning things five nights after the fact, or policemen calmly kneeling in sign of protest? Can I simply ask this question? Or I need to keep reading that my head is buried in the sand or BB is part of the problem?

 

[the AntiPusher]

I think the whole point of the protests is that the police to date haven't been held accountable. I thought everyone understood this

It appears not or they refused to accept it

 

[britbox]

It appears not or they refused to accept it

I've stated it at least three times AP, but keep ignoring it at your leisure.