Jesus H Christ. This is a fucking murder they are glorifying.
17 Likes
More specifically, theyâre concerned about what the opposition will do to sway the opinions of the âfence-sittingâ centrists.
The former, being malicious, are always going to be malicious. One could be 100% factually and semantically accurate, no further context required, and it would still be twisted by them into some Bizarro World version for their base. Thatâs their nature.
The latter, meanwhile, must be so purblind (and probably so small in number) that theyâre not worth worrying about. Think about the kind of person who, after four years of this tumult originating from the White House, is still scratching his chin and thinking âwho do I vote for in 2020?â (probably very similar to those who, as you accurately point out, have the luxury of viewing this as a thought exercise rather than as an existential threat to liberal democracy and to minorities).
I canât be bothered fretting about these supposed âfence sittersâ, especially when the regime gives us an opportunity to show progressives whatâs in store for them if it gets a second term. It might get more of them to join us in holding our noses for Biden.
9 Likes
This one is based on the Haitian revolution, and even though itâs fairly progressive it still has a white male protagonist.
6 Likes
No, see itâs not murder when itâs antifa antiwhite antipolice protesters, thatâs just DEFENDINâ MURCA! /s
Ugh⌠I feel sick.
13 Likes
6 Likes
There is some historical evidence that violent protests serve conservative election hopes, but if the protests are peaceful and the authoritarian forces try to crush them with violence the effect is the opposite. Clearly Conway and Trump are hoping for more violence from protestors so they can play the law-and-order card. Unfortunately itâs very difficult not to get violent when the police are provoking and attacking you.
In other words, itâs nearly impossible to even have peaceful protest now because the cops know they need to prod the protestors into reacting to give themselves the appearance of moral high ground. What Conway doesnât want to see is police using fire hoses and dogs on well dressed protestors who donât fight back, a la Birmingham in 1963.
3 Likes
And thatâs easy to do. All you need to do is send a few provocateurs to break windows in front of the TV cameras. Give them combat pay under the table, and promise to drop charges afterward. (You can even gain points by using the dropping of charges to show how kind and merciful Glorious Leader is.)
Which is why it puzzles me that the Trumpists havenât been able to do just that. Instead, they resort to recycling old footage from Catalunya and Ukraine as examples of the âchaos on American streetsâ.
8 Likes
Like this:
or this:
Maybe all the geniuses are looking for a building called the âRikeâs Togâ to set on fire.
11 Likes
i donât understand your shellfish joke. I am suggesting that the problem with defunding them is their reaction to being defunded. Apologies if that wasnât clear I was trying to be subtle. To everyone here, I am suggesting that the defunded p.d. in my area is to blame for the crime wave, as in the off-duty criminals are committing crime knowing it wonât be prosecuted. I am most certainly not waving a blue flag here. Please donât put words in other peopleâs text boxes.
I was replying to a different use with the pearl-clutching line, though it does apply to your post to a lesser degree. Feel free to google âpearl clutchingâ if you donât know what that means.
If your primary concern is what cops will do when they are defunded, then Iâd suggest that shows youâre approaching the problem from a position shielded by privilege. As am I, to be honest, but Iâve been listening to those who are on the receiving end of police abuse, and that has informed my opinion.
The police were shit at preventing crime before the protests against George Floydâs murder erupted. They were killing Black people with impunity. They were killing other people with impunity, too, but especially Black people. Hey were planting evidence and lying under oath before, too. It appears that your worry is either that those things will get worse or start to affect you. That shows the power they have over you, that youâre more worried about how the abusers will react than that they will continue the abuse. Break free from that hold they have on you, and defunding makes a lot more sense.
13 Likes
Fucking A; when is the last time you heard of cops legitimately preventing a crime, let alone solving one?
17 Likes
This is a straw man argument. you are suggesting in crime circles, criminals are having disucssions like âWell, we had a 75% chance of being caught before, but the reduction in police means thatâs now only 50%, whoâs willing to be more bold at those odds? Joe? Susie? How about you, Pete?â
You donât think the record high employment and reduction in social service availability might just maybe have something to do with folks feeling more desparate and having no choice but to turn to crime as a means to survive?
Defunding != abolition. Defunding = redirecting those funds to other social services and removing parts of policing that are not critical. I invite you to educate yourself a little more on the movement rather than taking the right-wing talking points verbatim:
22 Likes
Those people define the economy as the stock market. Of course the stock market is only doing well because the Fed is buying corporate debt to artifically prop it up.
6 Likes
It seems a bit of a stretch to say that the use of the word violence in the context of the prior sentence implies BoingBoingâs headline. Is it not more likely that sheâs referring to the protesters? I mean, hey, Iâm as quick as the next guy to realize that arson and kicking people in the head and punching guys trying to protect their stores and robbing people and throwing fireworks at police and shooting black teenagers because they could have guns and shooting six year olds because their parents took a wrong turn are non-violent, but sheâs a Republican so sheâs unreasonable by definition.
BUT! We canât pick winners and losers!!! Thatâs intervening in the sacred economy!!! /s
God, thatâs unsurprising and depressing.
6 Likes
Well yes, in a way, but only because the violence thatâs being talked about by the right are the killings of protesters, yet itâs being talked about as if it were the protestersâ fault. Thatâs their narrative.
12 Likes
The right talk about plenty of other kinds of violence. The left generally pretend thatâs not violence which leads to memes like the currently circulating screenshot of a CNN reporter standing against a backdrop of a burning city and the chyron saying âfiery but mostly peaceful protests rock Kenosha.â
Iâm just saying we donât have to make it so easy.
You donât seem to understand that there will always be opportunists who glom onto any form of protest in order to vandalise property and generally cause chaos for no other reason than for shits and giggles. Anyone can put on a V For Vendetta mask, a hoodie, and pitch up at a protest and start throwing brick at the pigs!
5 Likes
Right now the rhetoric on the right is about actual violence against human beings - i.e. protesters - and blaming the protesters themselves for that violence. (Either by falsely accusing right-wing killers of actually being left-wing, or by victim blaming.) To the point where the Kenosha killer is widely being hailed as an actual hero by the right. Theyâve gone full fascist - the only statements by the left that matters right now is calling that out.
11 Likes
Iâm not sure how you reached the conclusion that I donât understand that. I fully understand that there are people who fit the description you give contributing to the violence, as well as opportunists of other sorts. There are also rightwing provocateurs and state actors contributing to it, probably because they think it serves their purposes. Anyone looking at the protests should understand thatâs all part of the picture. But that doesnât account for all the violence. There are also people who are responding violently to hundreds of years systematic violence against black people, and segments of the peaceful movement that either deflect from or legitimize those responses. I can understand all that. But I have to wonder how effective it is. The fascists seem pretty convinced it works in their favor; what are the counterbalancing gains?
I donât think Conway was trying to speak to the people who are aching for the moment when they can start tossing their enemies out of helicopters. There are people speaking much more directly to that crowd, including Trump himself. I think she was aiming at people who are much more uncommitted, but are unnerved by the violence theyâve seen or experienced, and think there are steps that can be taken to stop it that fall well short of killing peaceful protesters. Sheâs telling those people that Trump understands their fears, and is claiming (however implausibly) that heâs unambiguously in their corner. An antifascist movement that doesnât understand who Conway is speaking to and how her message is being heard by her intended audience wonât have a chance of contesting the territory sheâs trying to claim. It might be that itâs not worth contesting that territory, but 40+% of eligible voters donât vote in presidential elections. Thatâs a lot of fence sitters.
