In the interest of accuracy, the cop in the Walter Scott case was arrested by his fellow officers on the scene as soon as they saw the video. The police chief came out immediately and said he would be charged with murder.
But would it have happened without the video? Doubt it.
4 Likes
Ya, wait for the police to investigate the police. Wait for authorities to investigate authorities. That’ll get you to the truth.
3 Likes
An innocent person gets killed, and the only solution is to hurt more innocent people. Makes perfect sense to me.
Really? And people are advocating this?
Should forest fires be put out?
Often…no. Fires are a natural part of the ecosystem and a periodic burning of the old, dry, brittle wood allows new shoots to emerge from the ashes.
Though as far as the analogy goes, I don’t think anyone was proposing that this isn’t illegal, just that calling for restraint is not actually fixing anything. A riot is the language of the unheard, after all.
1 Like
Yep. Very bravely, they advocate chaos for others, including hunting cops and burning down the whole city. Two things to remember.
1-They don’t live there, so they won’t have to live through the consequences.
2- They see this as part of the larger struggle against Capitalism…so those class-traitors who own businesses deserve it.
1 Like
Very bravely hurting innocent (non-police) people who just happen to be there. Very bravely destroying the property of (non-police) people who happen to share their community. Very bravely attacking police who had nothing to do with this, and could very well be decent people who disagree with their fellow officers.
I have deep sympathy for the community, victims of police and authority abuse, and the disenfranchised of Baltimore, and every other poor community, black, hispanic, or white. But the rioters are just assholes. To paint them otherwise is irresponsible, and borderline psychotic.
Edit: I forgot the most important part: The rioters are also, very bravely, discrediting the sane voices who are actually bravely standing for change. They are very bravely making responsible, rational, people look like assholes who can be ignored.
1 Like
I like to think of riots and other major disturbances as natural disasters caused by social, rather than natural conditions.
I’m sure there are assholes in those riots, and the mob mentality is a dangerous thing, but unless you mean to say that there was a conspiracy to initiate a riot, can we really expect people to live peacefully in unfair conditions?
I don’t see how.
Seems to me that saying that some people should be treated fairly (business owners) while others continue to be treated unfairly (pick a group) is to condone unfairness. Now, i know you don’t mean that, it just that, it comes down to this:
The best protection for everybody is a fair society.
5 Likes
In 100% agreement there. I also didn’t mean, in critiquing the rioters, to diminish the circumstances that lead to riots. That said, the business owners that suffer the most during riots are generally owned or managed by the people who are being treated unfairly. In many cases there isn’t a difference between “the people” and “business owners”.
It is a sticky ethical thing. Rioting is wrong, but so is the societal, historical, and immediate triggers. Rioting isn’t the answer, but whatever the right solution is, is completely mysterious. Its odd to feel sympathy for the victims, and then be forced to feel bad for the victims of the victims.
Has any people ever managed to get fair treatment from their oppressors through anything other than revolutionary behavior? Serious question, not too good with the old historical detail, myself.
1 Like
Only in modern times, I would think. After the concept of civil rights had been invented and was in practice. After Ghandi.
Speaking of, the American civil rights movement largely avoided violence, didn’t it? And there were big changes in law, though it took quite some time for it all to filter down, particularly in the south…
Not opposed to violence and rioting myself, I agree with the upstream characterization of it as a natural wildfire event because the conditions were right for it.
1 Like
My touchstone was from the UK Industrial revolution. To my understanding, the middle class, for a time The Revolutionary Class, were essentially bought off by the existing power structure. Better than the guillotine I guess but isn’t the threat of an unstoppable revolution, whether it’s peaceful or not, whether it’s even in your country or not, isn’t the threat of an uprising the capital upon which the creation of new social paradigms are gambled?
Gandhi may have preached total non-violence but I feel like the implication of potentially massive violence still cuts a current under the apparent reality of the situation.
The ‘army’ archetype, as a force arising from within the collective spirit of the people, not necessarily an official military, seems to be the bridging concept in my mind.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
