Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Yeah, that's the least harm that could come to them. Monopoly money is useful stuff, it can break or save lives...but it's still just numbers on a page. A computer page, these days. Just look at how the Fed has been doing things these past few months for a big example. That is not the true power, control of labor is.

Trump is hardly the only one to "lose it all" again and again, and yet suddenly find himself rich anyway. I'm sure none of us believe that's any skill at work. They've just got a safety net, a real one, and there is an incentive to prove to the ruling class that their net usually will catch them if they fall.

Whereas for a worker, the price is often death. Epstein had to literally be on the verge of selling out half a dozen world leaders before they fed him to the grinder!

[SalmonGod]

Trump is hardly the only one to "lose it all" again and again, and yet suddenly find himself rich anyway.

Yuuuup.  Wealth is a matter of status as much as, if not more than, one's score in the imaginary number game.

[Egan_BW]

Social status just exists as a pattern in some brains, it's just as imaginary as computer numbers! Clearly what we have to do is hack the brains of every human on earth.

[Bumber]

Property damage is not violence.

It is according to the Oxford dictionary:

1. Behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

[wierd]

Bumber is correct.  This is why "The violence of the storm" is valid use.

[Bumber]

Bumber is correct.  This is why "The violence of the storm" is valid use.

I think that's an example of definition 2: "Strength of emotion or of a destructive natural force."

[delphonso]

Clearly what we have to do is hack the brains of every human on earth.

I think this is called education.

[SalmonGod]

Context matters, though, and in the context of discussing the behavior of protesters, describing it as violence is not linguistically honest or useful in comparison to other human acts described as violence or in attempts to draw an equivalence between protesters and violent criminals or the violence police use against them.

And in the spirit of recognizing that, it's much more effective communication to simply state that property destruction (in the context of protest and controversy surrounding it) is not violence

[Bumber]

So is a police officer smashing up someone's house a violent or non-violent act?

[SalmonGod]

So is a police officer smashing up someone's house a violent or non-violent act?

Violent, as I made clear not long ago.

[Egan_BW]

Clearly what we have to do is hack the brains of every human on earth.

I think this is called education.

Well, that's one method. The other is nanomachines.

[delphonso]

Clearly what we have to do is hack the brains of every human on earth.

I think this is called education.

Well, that's one method. The other is nanomachines.

As a Metal Gear fan, I think the choice is obvious.

[wierd]

Don't be so silly.

Propaganda is highly effective, and does the same job.

[kaijyuu]

Words mean what people use them to mean. My point saying "property damage is not violence" is to criticize the tendency of people to equate protester "violence" to police "violence."

Graffiti and window smashing are not on the same level as swinging batons, rubber bullets, tear gas, arrests, etc. People who say "well the protesters are violent too!" are gratuitously falsely equating these, and that's ultimately what I want to disagree with. Bodily harm is far worse. Along with standard issues of responsibility, where someone in a position of authority (ie, a police officer or riot cop) has more liability than someone without comparatively power (like a protester).

If my previous statement(s) did not convey this, I rescind them.

[Bumber]

So is a police officer smashing up someone's house a violent or non-violent act?

Violent, as I made clear not long ago.

What about somebody smashing church windows?