Print

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

[Morrigi]

I really don't see breaking up violent riots as oppression, as riots are not protected under the Constitution. The death that kicked this whole thing off is fishy as fuck though.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[lijacote]

I really don't see breaking up violent riots as oppression, as riots are not protected under the Constitution. The death that kicked this whole thing off is fishy as fuck though.

Yeah, sure, people are rioting because riots are broken up. I mean really, if you're really this clueless as to why people are up in arms and marching on the streets and making themselves heard with the only discourse left to them, why don't you try and find out.

I am fed up to my ears with this slandering of resistance.

[SalmonGod]

Or kidnap them...

1. Still out past curfew
2. Known instigator of trouble before
3. Wearing a mask to hide his identity after being out past curfew is extra suspicious

That is why he was arrested.

But clearly it was a KIDNAPPING because... reasons.

Because the brief pause that vehicle made as it was passing made it look as if the protester was stuffed inside.  Which I would think should be in violation of something regarding proper arrest procedures.  I know it wouldn't work out this way in reality, but I would think that if you take somebody into captivity without following any legal procedure for doing so, that it should be classified as an abduction of some sort.  I have since seen the comments verifying that he was not stuffed in the vehicle, but grabbed and taken behind the police line while the vehicle paused to block the view.  I still think that people should be given opportunity to be told they're under arrest and submit themselves peacefully before they're just suddenly manhandled. 

Anyway... known instigator?  Do you have anything on this?

[No lynch]

Meep.

[lijacote]

I really don't see breaking up violent riots as oppression, as riots are not protected under the Constitution. The death that kicked this whole thing off is fishy as fuck though.

Yeah, sure, people are rioting because riots are broken up. I mean really, if you're really this clueless as to why people are up in arms and marching on the streets and making themselves heard with the only discourse left to them, why don't you try and find out.

I am fed up to my ears with this slandering of resistance.

I think everyone would appreciate the maintaining of coolness and collectedness.  I don't see where he said that people are rioting BECAUSE the riots are being broken up.

That said, I'm fed up with the slandering of these people who are expressing their anger at a broken system.  I'd invite anyone who thinks that these people are a bunch of savages or whatnot to live for years under fear and being looked down upon and see how well they take it.

I don't think anyone but these people have a right to judge their actions, because we haven't lived their lives and don't know their circumstances.

"I really don't see breaking up violent riots as oppression," in response to me saying that resistance rises against oppression. Connect the dots. Also word.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[No lynch]

Meep.

[lijacote]

Yeah, there's a reason the US government has historically targeted people trying to organize. Look at COINTELPRO. The FBI harassed and defamed civil rights leaders and groups. If you're an especially good organizer then your career can end in assassination.

Yeeeeep.  As long as people act in a disorderly fashion, they are easy to crack down on and portray as the villains.  When they start organizing, they become a legitimate threat to the status quo.  Same reason unions were cracked down on for so long: the businesses saw them as a threat and used their influence to get the government to break up strikes.

Many of the unions now serve the interests of the business rather than workers, so they're less of a danger. Not a threat, yet.

[Morrigi]

Yeah, there's a reason the US government has historically targeted people trying to organize. Look at COINTELPRO. The FBI harassed and defamed civil rights leaders and groups. If you're an especially good organizer then your career can end in assassination.

Yeeeeep.  As long as people act in a disorderly fashion, they are easy to crack down on and portray as the villains.  When they start organizing, they become a legitimate threat to the status quo.  Same reason unions were cracked down on for so long: the businesses saw them as a threat and used their influence to get the government to break up strikes.

Many of the unions now serve the interests of the business rather than workers, so they're less of a danger. Not a threat, yet.

At the time, many of the unions served the interests of corrupt union bosses at the expense of everyone else.

[Cheeetar]

Yeah, there's a reason the US government has historically targeted people trying to organize. Look at COINTELPRO. The FBI harassed and defamed civil rights leaders and groups. If you're an especially good organizer then your career can end in assassination.

Yeeeeep.  As long as people act in a disorderly fashion, they are easy to crack down on and portray as the villains.  When they start organizing, they become a legitimate threat to the status quo.  Same reason unions were cracked down on for so long: the businesses saw them as a threat and used their influence to get the government to break up strikes.

Many of the unions now serve the interests of the business rather than workers, so they're less of a danger. Not a threat, yet.

At the time, many of the unions served the interests of corrupt union bosses at the expense of everyone else.

You're going to need to cite that somehow.

[Sheb]

You certainly had some high profile case of corruption (but then, back in the late 19th/early 20th century, pretty much all of America was corrupt).

[SalmonGod]

But even so, we wouldn't have most of the worker's rights that we take for granted today without them.

[Morrigi]

But even so, we wouldn't have most of the worker's rights that we take for granted today without them.

Workers' rights are not necessarily dependent on unions. For example, Nazi Germany threw all its union bosses into the concentration camps and simultaneously implemented the 8 hour work day, laws making bathrooms and cafeterias mandatory in factories, and started a program allowing vacations for average workers, paid for by the government, all in the 1930's.

As for modern American unions, while I would not support throwing the bosses (or anyone else) into concentration camps, in my opinion, they do have far more political influence than they should through campaign contributions, i.e. bribery.

[Helgoland]

Nazi = National Socialist, remember. That bolded bit wasn't just for show.


Also you neglected to mention the millions of Jews, Poles, Russians, French, etc etc put into labor camps ('extermination through work' was  abig thing back then) who certainly did not enjoy these benefits while undoubtably qualifying as workers.