My daughter pulled (hard, admittedly) on a classmate’s backpack to get her attention. The mother of the classmate threatened to call the police. My daughter is no longer allowed to speak to this girl. They live half a block away, share the same neighborhood pool, ride the same bus, etc., which makes things awkward at times, but fuck that noise. Threatening to call the cops of school tiff is tantamount to threatening assault, in my eyes.
Maybe this is one of the rapidly shrinking number of schools in America that doesn’t believe in treating students like dangerous prison inmates?
Here in Portland, the antifa crowd was peaceably assembled to counter the “Patriots Prayer” and it was the police who, when the antifa failed to move on police command, started a mini-police riot seriously injuring a couple of those assembled. Unfortunately this got some of the counter-protestors throwing rocks and bottles which only escalated the conflict.
So I think I know who the police are poised to side with should we go full bore fascist.
This was a reply in another thread, but highly relevant here.
That’s it exactly. And we have the ability to compartmentalize and to deny as psychological defenses against news which is upsetting and might indicate we must take action now. “This will never happen here” is a common refrain I’ve read from survivors of pogroms and wars in Rwanda and Bosnia.
Was it just me or did that video conclude with a still shot of the Wicked Witch from Disney’s Snow White and then a still shot of Trump doing his lame ass thumbs up thing? I don’t have any issue with it - just - I dunno - why the Snow White?
The swastika is not an inherently evil sigil. However, it was chosen by inherently evil people to be used as a symbol of their movement.
The idea of making America great isn’t inherently harmful. However, it was chosen as the slogan for an inherently harmful movement.
While political parties and the partisans who make up those parties should solve their differences of opinions using debate and reason, that option is not effective of indeed reasonable when faces with the naked racism, nationalism, and divisiveness that Trump and Cult 45 have foisted upon this nation. I applaud anyone who takes a stand against the forces of hate and bigotry that have taken over this nations government. If that stand involves violence then all I can say is that these people will pay the prescribed price for such action. While illegal, it is indeed righteous.
I believe the correct answer to your conundrum was answered by Popper. There can be no tolerance of intolerance if a tolerant society is to survive. Sure, the KKk can legally march but reasonable people should not tolerate it and should work to stop them.
That is not at all the objective of the fascist. As has been repeatedly demonstrated, these fascists need no excuse and are awaiting no excuses to use violence including murder against those who would stand up to them.
The objective of the fascist is to force people to comply or be punished.
In particular, it represents the campaign statement by a sitting president. However much one deplores the man and his message, there is no way it can at the present time be construed officially as a symbol of hatred. Therefore, if a school dress code permits political speech acts on clothing – and BB is generally in favor of this – then the hat should be permissible. Rather than taking it on themselves to violently enforce the nonexistant dress code, other students should simply do what I do and translate (in their minds) the MAGA logo to “I’m with stupid ↓↓↓”
And for the people upthread who have decided to engage in teacher-blaming: not cool.
I don’t entirely agree. But this does speak to another thought I had which is that we can’t ask children to have a consensus on a message when the adult culture in which they’re embedded cannot itself get its act together on it. And if we allow our kids to be used as proxies in our culture wars, we’re failing them as adults and role models, and we, not they, are to blame.
I think we do everyone involved a disservice when we armchair moralists try to apply simple either/or rules to an event we weren’t there for. I don’t know the past history, current mental state, or future hopes of any of the people in this story.
But having worked in a school for almost two decades, I can say that forcibly touching a teacher is about at the bottom of the list of actions that you’ll get any leeway for.
If I’m the school official sorting this out, “possibly justified political act” is going to have to get in line somewhere after “possible assault.”
I’m sorry if some teachers are afraid of their students, but that’s no excuse for filing criminal charges against a student for slapping someone. That sort of zero tolerance attitude and prison-school mentality doesn’t make schools safer for anyone; it exacerbates the problem by making children paranoid, afraid and unable to trust authority.
There’s no evidence that that is the case here. I agree that criminal charges are disproportionate for this disrespect of his authority, some breakfast-club-style detention should be plenty. However, maintaining classroom discipline has become a big problem everywhere (including affluent school districts), and the apparently common BB idea that teachers should be able to magically keep everyone in line through sheer force of personality is simply no longer realistic.
I don’t disagree with the problem. I disagree with the draconian attempts at a solution that have been failing for over two decades now. Squeezing the fist tighter will only make it worse.
There’s a passing resemblance between the student and the cartoon character. My guess is that the video was uploaded as “proof” of Trump supporters being victims of “violent libtards”.
When discussing Trumpers and their attempts to communicate, it is important to note whether they are verbally talking" i.e. using their words, or sputtering their usual guttural noises mixed with spittle and unexamined hate.
In my day this was easier; if a student pulled a knife on another the teachers would move it out to the schoolyard (and run a betting pool). Or spike our lunches with mescaline. I think things are better now, thought I’m not crazy about cops on campus, and the internet seems to exacerbate bad behavior by giving acts remote validation when they would be shunned locally (as well as the other way around).
Well, the standard is usually “would a reasonable person feel threatened etc…” in cases where self defense is being evaluated, so… Yeah, it is “feel you’re in danger” (assuming that a judge or jury would agree that that was a reasonable conclusion given the circumstances".
Horrible totally fake example: If I shoot someone in “self defense” because they’re chasing me with a kitchen knife, they’re gaining on me, and I pull the classic movie trope and trip because someone is chasing me move, I’d likely not be charged. Now said pursuer may have been wanting to present me with a nice custom chef knife because I’m an awesome guy (and I most certainly am), but given the circumstances there’d be no way for me to know that my life wasn’t in immediate danger. It would have been a reasonable conclusion (that I was about to be killed) based on my feels at the time.
As long as there’s a can (vs must) in that sentence, the answer is negative. There’s no meaningful permission for violence, only necessity.