Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 148 149 [150] 151 152 ... 297

Author Topic: Occupying Wallstreet  (Read 294252 times)

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2235 on: December 10, 2011, 07:21:43 am »

I can't recall the name of the experiment, but it explains this behavior quite well. The one where people were giving shocks to someone while a researcher stood by and told them they would be absolved of any responsibility.

Milgram Experiment
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2236 on: December 10, 2011, 12:33:42 pm »

How can you say this is "one bad apple"? A whole precinct's worth of policemen was here, anyone could have called an ambulance. But no. They had to obey, and their orders were to use force.
I agree. I'm sorry, but Milgram effect or no Milgram effect; these cops take every opportunity to be heinous power-tripping lunatics. There's no reasoning with that sort of attitude.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

kaijyuu

  • Bay Watcher
  • Hrm...
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2237 on: December 10, 2011, 01:15:26 pm »

I'm sorry, but Milgram effect or no Milgram effect; these cops take every opportunity to be heinous power-tripping lunatics.
Meh. We're just making different assumptions. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt, you're assuming the worst. There's nothing saying you can't be right about that; I just tend to be optimistic about people on an individual level.



On a side note, remember that nothing promotes the occupy message better than police brutality. Think about all that entails. There is absolutely no good reason to do anything other than demonize, dehumanize, and altogether paint any contrary authority as complete scum. Taking a step back and thinking that maybe those are actual human beings out there and that a uniform doesn't turn them into a legion of sociopaths would certainly be ethical, but would weaken your message (not to mention those "dirty hippies" aren't going to get the same courtesy). A legion of sociopaths is easier to fight than a legion of people conditioned to do what they do. In war, if you empathize with your opponent you lose. This is a political and social war.

Maybe I'm just raging against the unchangeable facts of life, but I'm honestly sick of everyone claiming black and white morality (in every conflict, big and small, not just this one). They've all the reason to do so and no good reason not to, though.
Logged
Quote from: Chesterton
For, in order that men should resist injustice, something more is necessary than that they should think injustice unpleasant. They must think injustice absurd; above all, they must think it startling. They must retain the violence of a virgin astonishment. When the pessimist looks at any infamy, it is to him, after all, only a repetition of the infamy of existence. But the optimist sees injustice as something discordant and unexpected, and it stings him into action.

ChairmanPoo

  • Bay Watcher
  • Send in the clowns
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2238 on: December 10, 2011, 01:58:31 pm »


Quote
On a side note, remember that nothing promotes the occupy message better than police brutality.
Yess, those nice cops were just doing their part to curtail the abuses of the financial elite! They're just undercover!
Logged
Everyone sucks at everything. Until they don't. Not sucking is a product of time invested.

kaijyuu

  • Bay Watcher
  • Hrm...
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2239 on: December 10, 2011, 02:37:39 pm »

Yep. How nice of them to bash in people's heads :P

(I can't tell if you're legitimately strawmanning me or just making a joke, but obviously that's not the point I was making or saying at all)
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 02:42:52 pm by kaijyuu »
Logged
Quote from: Chesterton
For, in order that men should resist injustice, something more is necessary than that they should think injustice unpleasant. They must think injustice absurd; above all, they must think it startling. They must retain the violence of a virgin astonishment. When the pessimist looks at any infamy, it is to him, after all, only a repetition of the infamy of existence. But the optimist sees injustice as something discordant and unexpected, and it stings him into action.

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2240 on: December 10, 2011, 03:50:20 pm »

There is absolutely no good reason to do anything other than demonize, dehumanize, and altogether paint any contrary authority as complete scum.

Except there has been a major theme among the Occupy movement to categorize police as 'part of the 99%'.  There have been plenty of individuals demonizing the police, but I've seen many more participants constantly reminding everyone that they're just doing their jobs, they need to be respected as people, get angry at the system not the police, etc.  The movement has definitely publicized police abuse, but it seems strongly aimed at pointing out that a definite nerve has been struck with authority figures, meaning something is being said that they genuinely fear and can't just ignore, and that the police are abused by those authorities to carry out their personal will instead of the law.

And I'm not just speaking for myself here.  This is genuinely what I see as the prevailing sentiment.  I personally disagree with the majority of it.  Yeah, police are human beings.  Even so, I believe the institution of law enforcement is itself of a certain nature, which aggregates people of a certain range of dispositions and subsequently generates a certain internal culture that can be described as sociopathic, even if the individuals would not be so when judged by their behavior outside of that group.  People's behavior can change drastically according to the people who are sharing that participation with them, and especially when that behavior is backed by a strong sense of officiated legitimacy, mutual support, and powerful resources. 

I suspect plenty of cops in their personal lives seem like completely ordinary or even great people.  Then they suit up in armored uniforms and weapons and march out in large numbers with firm convictions in support of the law as defined to them by the people writing their paychecks.  They go to manage a large number of people who have firm convictions against the current state of the law, and believe it should not be defined by the people writing officer's paychecks.  They're encouraged by their superiors to see these people as enemies.  Their personal sense of identity fades into the shared identity of the law enforcement apparatus, and is directly pitted against the shared identity of everyone outside of their group.  People who are identifying themselves as police officers instead of human beings are handling people who they are identifying as criminals instead of human beings.  It's a situation where they're bound to do things they'd never dream of in any other situation, where they'd be human beings interacting with other human beings.

And it absolutely does not excuse them.  They put themselves in that situation.  They give themselves up to that group dynamic.  They submit their personal moral agency to their faith in an institution and/or a paycheck.

I had military recruiters hounding me in my late teens.  I've had people encourage me to get into a career in law enforcement or security.  I recognized far in advance that I could absolutely never do it, because I knew could never directly participate in the harm of another human being without direct and thorough personal knowledge that the harm is truly deserved and that is exactly what those positions are at their core.  They are a careers that require a person to simply accept when they are told that someone deserves to get hurt.  It's very hard for me to have respect for anyone with that level of concern for the consequences of their actions on others.
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

kaijyuu

  • Bay Watcher
  • Hrm...
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2241 on: December 10, 2011, 05:09:36 pm »

Except there has been a major theme among the Occupy movement to categorize police as 'part of the 99%'.  There have been plenty of individuals demonizing the police, but I've seen many more participants constantly reminding everyone that they're just doing their jobs, they need to be respected as people, get angry at the system not the police, etc.  The movement has definitely publicized police abuse, but it seems strongly aimed at pointing out that a definite nerve has been struck with authority figures, meaning something is being said that they genuinely fear and can't just ignore, and that the police are abused by those authorities to carry out their personal will instead of the law.
Fair enough. I haven't seen much of that, but you're more involved with occupy than I, so I'll take your word for it.

Quote
And I'm not just speaking for myself here.  This is genuinely what I see as the prevailing sentiment.  I personally disagree with the majority of it.  Yeah, police are human beings.  Even so, I believe the institution of law enforcement is itself of a certain nature, which aggregates people of a certain range of dispositions and subsequently generates a certain internal culture that can be described as sociopathic, even if the individuals would not be so when judged by their behavior outside of that group.  People's behavior can change drastically according to the people who are sharing that participation with them, and especially when that behavior is backed by a strong sense of officiated legitimacy, mutual support, and powerful resources. 

I suspect plenty of cops in their personal lives seem like completely ordinary or even great people.  Then they suit up in armored uniforms and weapons and march out in large numbers with firm convictions in support of the law as defined to them by the people writing their paychecks.  They go to manage a large number of people who have firm convictions against the current state of the law, and believe it should not be defined by the people writing officer's paychecks.  They're encouraged by their superiors to see these people as enemies.  Their personal sense of identity fades into the shared identity of the law enforcement apparatus, and is directly pitted against the shared identity of everyone outside of their group.  People who are identifying themselves as police officers instead of human beings are handling people who they are identifying as criminals instead of human beings.  It's a situation where they're bound to do things they'd never dream of in any other situation, where they'd be human beings interacting with other human beings.
I'm fine with people calling out organizations. I'll agree with anyone claiming that the police organization itself is corrupt and has sociopathic tendencies. I just draw the line at personal attacks, for the very reasons you mentioned. They are instruments in a corrupt system's hand; they are not (necessarily) corrupt themselves.

It is the "us verses them" mentality that drives most the problems; that can very well end up being true for both sides. Don't fall to that mentality. Falling for that mentality is what allows all this shit to happen, from spraying defenseless people to pepper spray, to rage against "the man," to trying to find some dude named Charlie in a jungle, to chopping off all the heads of the nobility. Those actions are justified in people's heads because those actions are against "them," not "us."

In reality there is no "them"; only "us." When we fight each other we fight ourselves. Why people subscribe to this notion when decrying war and violence but not other forms of unnecessary conflict and hate, I don't know. Maybe I just watched too much Mr Rogers as a kid.

(before someone says I'm advocating complacency or something here, let me say I'm not. I'm saying understand the consequences and implications of the means before justifying it with the end, whether it be a war fought with guns or words. When slinging mud everyone gets dirty, no black and white morality, no perfect heroes or true villains, all that good stuff. Claiming moral high ground when attacking the tools in the corruption's hand instead of the corruption itself is a bit difficult to swallow. It's the people in suits who start wars and cause these large scale problems; they deserve your ire, not the soldiers who fight for them.)
Quote
And it absolutely does not excuse them.  They put themselves in that situation.  They give themselves up to that group dynamic.  They submit their personal moral agency to their faith in an institution and/or a paycheck.

I had military recruiters hounding me in my late teens.  I've had people encourage me to get into a career in law enforcement or security.  I recognized far in advance that I could absolutely never do it, because I knew could never directly participate in the harm of another human being without direct and thorough personal knowledge that the harm is truly deserved and that is exactly what those positions are at their core.  They are a careers that require a person to simply accept when they are told that someone deserves to get hurt.  It's very hard for me to have respect for anyone with that level of concern for the consequences of their actions on others.
The difference between you and them here is simply trust. Not everyone's skeptical of authority, as we're raised in a culture that teaches respect for authority. They probably believe they're doing the right thing, or at least right overall. I definitely would not claim it's an issue of moral character; just naivete, ignorance, complacency, apathy, etc. I at least respect people more for their intentions than the consequences of their actions. Stupidity and ignorance is not malice, and it takes malice for me to actually dislike someone like that.

Show me a video of a cop spraying a line of protesters sitting on the ground, yeah I'll say that's pretty disgusting. Show me a guy holding a riot shield standing in a line, I'm not passing judgement.




Side note: Someone's going to have to explain to me sometime how in the hell kicking out protesters helps anyone's paycheck. Making a scene does NOT help corporate interests. It only further serves to demonize the police and justify the protesters. Either I'm missing something or there's some massive, massive stupidity going on. Corporations should want the police to back off, so news of protesters will fade away, and be forgotten. Every time I hear people call the police corporate dogs or whatever, I can only respond with a flat what, because I can't see any benefit whatsoever to attacking the protesters.

The only reason I can see for kicking protesters out is that they can be a a nuisance to local governments. A nuisance to towns and cities themselves, and not anyone higher. Litter and property damage is rather inevitable with a large number of people.
Logged
Quote from: Chesterton
For, in order that men should resist injustice, something more is necessary than that they should think injustice unpleasant. They must think injustice absurd; above all, they must think it startling. They must retain the violence of a virgin astonishment. When the pessimist looks at any infamy, it is to him, after all, only a repetition of the infamy of existence. But the optimist sees injustice as something discordant and unexpected, and it stings him into action.

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2242 on: December 10, 2011, 06:07:38 pm »

They went through all the standard steps.  They did ignore it at first.  It grew.  Then they tried discredit and ridicule.  It still grew.  What comes next?  The powers that be can't afford to let occupy's message spread through the public conscious.  Sympathy for victims of police brutality is more manageable than an epidemic of honest dialogue about corruption.  Violent oppression of protesters distracts from that dialogue, moving the focus onto one particular type of corruption and away from economic inequality.  There's been a general fear I've seen mentioned a lot among the movement for the last month or so that the whole thing is becoming just a magnifying glass on police brutality, and the original message is getting drowned out.  I totally agree with this.
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

ZappsMcJack

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2243 on: December 11, 2011, 03:53:57 pm »

aaaaaa
« Last Edit: December 03, 2015, 04:03:49 pm by ZappsMcJack »
Logged

Zangi

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2244 on: December 12, 2011, 10:14:27 am »

Well, does seem an effective way to put the heat on local politics and away from country-wide politics...
Gotta wonder who's pockets are getting lined for these police actions to continue as they are... or more likely.. who is getting campaign funding for the next election.
Logged
All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu...  This is the truth! This is my belief! ... At least for now...
FMA/FMA:B Recommendation

Nadaka

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nadaka.us
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2245 on: December 12, 2011, 01:30:38 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gingrich-end-fed-focus-jobs-focus-only-inflation-141508938.html

Read it and weep. Gingrich's proposed economic policies are directly and blatantly aimed at INCREASING income inequality. It is a laundry list of nearly everything a person with power could possibly do to screw over the American people so that investment bankers can have a fat payday while pushing the nation into abject financial ruin.
Logged
Take me out to the black, tell them I ain't comin' back...
I don't care cause I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me...

I turned myself into a monster, to fight against the monsters of the world.

Truean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ok.... [sigh] It froze over....
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2246 on: December 12, 2011, 01:40:24 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gingrich-end-fed-focus-jobs-focus-only-inflation-141508938.html

Read it and weep. Gingrich's proposed economic policies are directly and blatantly aimed at INCREASING income inequality. It is a laundry list of nearly everything a person with power could possibly do to screw over the American people so that investment bankers can have a fat payday while pushing the nation into abject financial ruin.

[sigh]

There may have once been a kernel of reason in these policies at one time long ago, which is why the old guard is still pushing it. (Key phrase, "long ago"). They refuse to see that the world has changed and these ideas no longer have any validity anymore.

It used to be that if you gave Ford motor company a tax break, they would be able to afford to hire more workers. More importantly, they WANTED AND DESIRED to hire more workers. Simple, direct, easy. Essentially, the government purchased jobs....

Now, the corporations don't give a shit and will either: a.) Take a payday for stockholders, or b.) hire, but only in the 3rd world due to globalization. It's a cost benefit scenario. Despite American Workers being rather productive, the company can hire 20 workers in the third world, not have to worry about health, worker safety or environmental regulations, and whip their workers with a rubber hose if they feel like it.

The problem, exactly like the banks is, "throwing money at the problem used to work, because there was ONE result and direction the money could go in. Now, there are multiple directions the money can go in and many results. The desired one, jobs for Americans, is not what American multinational companies find most attractive.

I lost well over 70% of America in that explanation and, "Giving the company money so it can hire people." Fits on a bumper sticker or in a 5 second time slot soundbite.... :(
Logged
The kinda human wreckage that you love

Current Spare Time Fiction Project: (C) 2010 http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63660.0
Disclaimer: I never take cases online for ethical reasons. If you require an attorney; you need to find one licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Never take anything online as legal advice, because each case is different and one size does not fit all. Wants nothing at all to do with law.

Please don't quote me.

Willfor

  • Bay Watcher
  • The great magmaman adventurer. I do it for hugs.
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2247 on: December 12, 2011, 01:51:15 pm »

"If we give companies tax breaks, they can hire more people in Taiwan! Go Taiwan!"

Sarcasm, satire, these things fit on bumper stickers. Use them.
Logged
In the wells of livestock vans with shells and garden sands /
Iron mixed with oxygen as per the laws of chemistry and chance /
A shape was roughly human, it was only roughly human /
Apparition eyes / Apparition eyes / Knock, apparition, knock / Eyes, apparition eyes /

SethCreiyd

  • Bay Watcher
  • [VESPERTINE]
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2248 on: December 12, 2011, 05:21:15 pm »

Maybe a dumb question, but.

If a domestic company produces goods in factories overseas and brings them back home, are they counted as domestic goods or foreign imports?
Logged

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2249 on: December 12, 2011, 05:35:15 pm »

Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".
Pages: 1 ... 148 149 [150] 151 152 ... 297