Print

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

[wierd]

They might not have started it, but adding more violence on top is as stated, not a path toward solution.

Arguing over "who started it" is something a 3 year old does, not something adults should do. If your reaction to a situation is to engage in further violence, you are not being part of a solution, you are being part of the problem that caused the violence to begin with.

As I stated, some problems cannot be solved, and have to "burn out."

What does that mean exactly? It means the violence becomes so complete, and so destructive, that the continuation of the violence is so expensive to both sides, that they re-evaluate their priorities, the rate of atrocity drops, and progress toward solution can resume.

[hector13]

I understand what you're saying there, but I can't really accept that we have to let it burn itself out.

I know you're offering this as a simplistic look at it, but I don't think I can accept that the best thing to do is stand and watch the violence get worse and worse until enough sense is knocked into both sides. There are going to be voices on both sides saying they can't stop, they have to wipe the other side out, and if both sides have committed atrocities to the other, there's ample fuel for that fire to burn forever.

"They did x so we need to do y!"

"Oh my goodness, they did y after we did x, which was totally necessary so we need to do z!"

"Wtf man, we clearly were in the right doing y after they did x, but they did z too, so now we need to do a!"

and so on...

[SalmonGod]

Meh... I've gone over my thoughts in excruciating detail dozens of times already in this thread about why I see that as a false equivalency.  So whatever.

Arguing details about specific incidents is irrelevant in the face of hundreds of years of history, and one side's ideology being openly aggressive in its nature vs the other side just not seeing that as ok.

[ChairmanPoo]

. Call me naive, but violence is never the answer 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[wierd]

CP:  LOL


SG:  The problem is that the aggressive side sees the mere existence of the other side as "not OK", to the point where forced co-existence results in violence.  The only way that an be resolved is for that aggressive side to re-evaluate that position. Something more dear to them than their hate must be sacrificed on that altar before that can happen.

Famous literary example: Romeo and Juliette.  Families only *FINALLY* realize that the violence itself is worse than the existence of their hated enemy, after BOTH sides lose their most dear child, directly attributable to the violence between them.

Putting water on this fire will only make it smoulder for generations, and breed further hatred for the 3rd parties trying to keep the lid on.  Sadly, I really dont see a solution other than it flaring out so terribly that the supremists have no choice but to admit that their hatred is itself destructive, and put it down instead of clinging to it with passion.

[Blaze]

Um, anyone want to give a reason of why the police were told by the mayor to stand down unless directly attacked, thus allowing things to devolve into a fight in the first place?

[wierd]

Firestorm shitpost:

Actually peaceful protesters dont really need police intervention of that nature, due to being *peaceful* protesters.

Less shitposty:
Police get a bad rap for intervening physically, as that is a no-win situation where they get smeared by both sides for getting involved. Like I JUST said, 3rd parties spraying water on the fire just get fire aimed at them in response, and it just keeps things smouldering instead of put out. The ONLY way that fire goes out, is when both sides stop teaching their children to hate.

[Starver]

For all their Sturm und Drang rhetoric, these guys have the tiniest balls.

Plural?

[Mech#4]

For all their Sturm und Drang rhetoric, these guys have the tiniest balls.

Plural?

I would hope they have more than one amongst themselves.

[Starver]

For all their Sturm und Drang rhetoric, these guys have the tiniest balls.

Plural?

I would hope they have more than one amongst themselves.

I would hope they haven't. But that's just to make it one individual, at most, that you need to keep from breeding by continually interrupting any socialising, dating, etc with awkward comments and loud, embarrassing anecdotes.

[smjjames]

CP:  LOL


SG:  The problem is that the aggressive side sees the mere existence of the other side as "not OK", to the point where forced co-existence results in violence.  The only way that an be resolved is for that aggressive side to re-evaluate that position. Something more dear to them than their hate must be sacrificed on that altar before that can happen.

Famous literary example: Romeo and Juliette.  Families only *FINALLY* realize that the violence itself is worse than the existence of their hated enemy, after BOTH sides lose their most dear child, directly attributable to the violence between them.

Putting water on this fire will only make it smoulder for generations, and breed further hatred for the 3rd parties trying to keep the lid on.  Sadly, I really dont see a solution other than it flaring out so terribly that the supremists have no choice but to admit that their hatred is itself destructive, and put it down instead of clinging to it with passion.

The problem is that flaring out terribly also means casualities to others. How terrible does it have to flare out before they realize that it's destructive? If a world war didn't do it, then what will? I might be misinterpreting what you mean by "flare out terribly".

[Neonivek]

Well you know... Basing a society around hunting down, subjugating, and harassing others is definitely a healthy society.

I think we should create a council that makes a list on what we can and cannot believe in or say... and if we violate that then we should round up a bunch of likeminded individuals who believe they have a moral imperative to act... and then enact some sort of retribution for their harm onto society, perhaps throwing rocks or stones.

This list, of course, in an attempt to stem the tide of bad people will need to be loose in order to ensure that every bigot is dealt with. We might even need to enter people's homes, their lives, or subject them to interrogation to ensure they are not bad people.

Now, of course, people will criticize these tactics. This is because they want to dismantle our just society and are clearly sympathetic to the bad people and are likely bad people themselves. We should subject them to the same treatment.

Finally because we need this system in place we should show people it works. Show people the bad men and them being punished. There is no need to show anything else, they don't need to know of anything going wrong, as that would only weaken our sense of justice and make us incapable of handling those Bad people. If anyone exposes these, they should be swiftly dealt with.

At the end of the day we can rest assured that we are very good people and have created a very good society.

So, evidently there are several more events planned next Saturday. I think... 9 alt-right protest marches are planned across major cities?

Honestly I am not sure if I'd leave town... or board up my home against looters...

But I suspect that the news and social media will be as impartial and objective as possible when reporting on the 100% expected aftermath.

[smjjames]

The sarcasm is heavy.

The CEO of Merck has quit the Presidents manufacturing council over the lack of response on Charlottesville. With Trump angrily tweeting basically "FINE! GIVES ME MORE TIME TO LOWER DRUG PRICES!"

Also, he's expected to speak again on Charlottesville sometime later today.

So, evidently there are several more events planned next Saturday. I think... 9 alt-right protest marches are planned across major cities?

Honestly I am not sure if I'd leave town... or board up my home against looters...

But I suspect that the news and social media will be as impartial and objective as possible when reporting on the 100% expected aftermath.

Aren't you in NYC (or near it)? I'm sure you can count on the NYPD to keep a lid on things.

[Neonivek]

On a side note... FINALLY I found a video that sort of explains the racism in the police system.

The problem with just "Systematic, systematic, systematic" is it doesn't explain anything. A business cannot just racism people away, it needs to actually DO something.

So the video, which isn't about racism and police, actually explains several reasons why Blacks are in jail far more often even if they aren't the ones committing the crime more often.

Should I be linking the video? I mean it isn't extensive or anything and I cannot vouch for accuracy... It is just nice to have some idea beyond just looking at a number and hypothesizing on causes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVTzIZ1ZVYU

It also explains why in spite of Police Quotas being illegal the police still SEEM to act like they are still under a police quota.

[smjjames]

Cracked tends to be, well, coarser, than your usual mainstream media and they do entertainment stuff more than politics, but they're decent. The only thing remotely objectionable in the vid is something a Nixon adviser said.