The Latest Potentially-Explosive Racially-Charged Murder

[Avatar]

It amuses me to see the LGBTQI+ community co-opting the "proudboys" hashtag by using it to tag things that make them proud.

For Trump, I really do suspect that it's as simple as not caring who votes for him, as long as they vote for him.

Pretty sure that if a coalition of convicted serial killers endorsed him, he'd have something good to say about them.

--A

[Gaius Octavius]

It amuses me to see the LGBTQI+ community co-opting the "proudboys" hashtag by using it to tag things that make them proud.

For Trump, I really do suspect that it's as simple as not caring who votes for him, as long as they vote for him.

Pretty sure that if a coalition of convicted serial killers endorsed him, he'd have something good to say about them.

--A

The #ProudBoys troll campaign is pretty hilarious.

[Avatar]

Damn good post Fist.

--A

[Fist and Faith]

It amuses me to see the LGBTQI+ community co-opting the "proudboys" hashtag by using it to tag things that make them proud.

That really is good!

For Trump, I really do suspect that it's as simple as not caring who votes for him, as long as they vote for him.

Agreed.

Pretty sure that if a coalition of convicted serial killers endorsed him, he'd have something good to say about them.

Uh, I'd appreciate it if you kept thoughts like these to yourself. It would be very easy for them to strike a deal: Every convicted serial killer who votes for him gets a presidential pardon.

[TheFallen]

For Trump, I really do suspect that it's as simple as not caring who votes for him, as long as they vote for him.

--A

Av, seriously?

Are you honestly maintaining that this is a unique Trump position, rather than the default one religiously adopted by literally any politician anywhere and anywhen, upon being faced with an election?

If so, you are grievously mistaken, methinks...

[peter]

He exists outside really any party from an ideological standpoint.

Yes - I figured as much. I seem to remember that the republican party only picked him up between two fingers at distance (while holding their nose) when they granted him the nomination in the first place. Guess they thought that he had tapped into something that could carry them into power - and they were right.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

While you are at it, care to address what F&F had to say?

No, because the officer who was kneeling on that black man's neck was fired and charged with serious crimes.

As far as slavery is concerned....it was made illegal in 1863 so that matter is settled. No living person today knew a living relative who lived under slavery so technically it does not directly effect anyone on a personal level. The only people who say that slavery still effects them on a daily basis have been led to be convinced of it but they are incorrect. Don't forget--not every black person in the United States is the descendant of slaves and not every white person is the descendant of people who owned slaves, so blaming "white people" for slavery is grossly inaccurate.

Finally, people are more upset about slavery here, which ended about 160 years ago, than they are about China's treatment of the Uyghurs, which is happening right now and involves many of the same institutions.

FF says it isn't enough to put Chauvin in prison. I suppose we are to publicly execute him, or put him in a cage where people can watch him starve to death then observe as his corpse rots...but what would that solve?

None of what he said addresses the ongoing problem that the number one killer of black people in the United States is "other black people". No one is forcing them to prey upon each other.

[Fist and Faith]

I'm going to address this first, because, wow.

FF says it isn't enough to put Chauvin in prison. I suppose we are to publicly execute him, or put him in a cage where people can watch him starve to death then observe as his corpse rots...but what would that solve?

I'm asking for a show of hands on a few questions.
1) How many of you are so dense you think that's what I meant?
2) How many of you think Hashi is so dense that he thought that's what I meant?
3) How many of you think Hashi knew that's not what I meant, but tried to make my position look ridiculous by claiming that's what I meant?

While you are at it, care to address what F&F had to say?

No, because the officer who was kneeling on that black man's neck was fired and charged with serious crimes.

Thank goodness the problem is solved!! Thank goodness we don't have to worry about a white police officer killing a black person because without anything resembling just cause!

Oh damn... It happened again. Oh well, we'll put that cop in jail, too. And I'm sure THAT will be the last time we have to worry about it! *whew*

As far as slavery is concerned....it was made illegal in 1863 so that matter is settled. No living person today knew a living relative who lived under slavery so technically it does not directly effect anyone on a personal level. The only people who say that slavery still effects them on a daily basis have been led to be convinced of it but they are incorrect.

It still affects black and white Americans because the horrors didn't come close to ending when slavery did, as I said in my previous post. It was just the beginning of a chain that continues today. Even today, 400 years after the first Africans were brought to Virginia, we STILL get to watch a white man kneel on the neck of a black man who is not attempting, or able, to struggle against it! Even if Chauvin wasn't taunting him while doing so. Even if he didn't kill Floyd. He's so entitled to dominate a black man that he does it in full view of the world, as his cohorts keep anyone from interfering. And that chain is never going to end until people like you stop dismissing it, and start taking it seriously. How does someone like him not feel entitled to do that when he knows there are many people like you saying it's not even worth discussing because more blacks are killing blacks? The law's going to nail him anyway. But his attitude is not a result of the law.

Don't forget--not every black person in the United States is the descendant of slaves and not every white person is the descendant of people who owned slaves, so blaming "white people" for slavery is grossly inaccurate.

No, blaming "white people" for slavery is not grossly inaccurate. That stuff simply means not every black person in the United States is the descendant of slaves and not every white person is the descendant of people who owned slaves.

Finally, people are more upset about slavery here, which ended about 160 years ago, than they are about China's treatment of the Uyghurs, which is happening right now and involves many of the same institutions.

None of what he said addresses the ongoing problem that the number one killer of black people in the United States is "other black people". No one is forcing them to prey upon each other.

Now you've added a second thing to try to distract from the topic at hand. Why now start a thread about these things? (Yes, I know this thread is not the "potentially racially charged" thread. But I'm not the one who dragged the topic into this thread.) How many other things that are not the topic at hand do you want to bring up?

[Savor Dam]

My hand stays down for options 1 & 2, up for 3. That sort of sophistic deflection is an all-too-frequent feature of discussions here. +1 for calling it out, Fist.

The reason jailing Chauvin isn't enough is not because it doesn't do enough about him; it isn't enough because it is narrowly-focused on the single incident and ignores the broader systemic issues. Punishing the bad cop is justice theater. Rooting out the attitudes that enable, support and shield the bad cop (Chauvin, the Louisville midnight no-knock squad, etc., etc., etc.) is a further step...but still not the entire solution.

[Gaius Octavius]

"Not every white person in the US is descended from a slave owner."

Are you absolutely certain of that, though? Not that I think it's particularly relevant, but admixture across several generations would make it likely that at least the majority of white Americans are indeed descended from slave owners, either directly or indirectly.

It's like how everyone with English heritage in the US is descended from King John, or how everyone with European heritage is descended from Charlemagne.

[Fist and Faith]

Maybe so, but it doesn't matter. White people bought and owned slaves. That's where the blame belongs. Not today's white people, and I don't accept the sins of the father.

But if the sinning continues, in a chain 400 years long and counting, then today's white people certainly take blame for the continuation.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

"Not every white person in the US is descended from a slave owner."

Are you absolutely certain of that, though?

Yes. I went to school with a guy whose grandparents--all 4 of them--immigrated from Italy during the 1930s. His father from one family, his mother from another family, and finally him; therefore, no one in his immediate family ever had the possibility of being connected to slavery. Proven.

He's so entitled to dominate a black man that he does it in full view of the world, as his cohorts keep anyone from interfering. And that chain is never going to end until people like you stop dismissing it, and start taking it seriously. How does someone like him not feel entitled to do that when he knows there are many people like you saying it's not even worth discussing because more blacks are killing blacks? The law's going to nail him anyway. But his attitude is not a result of the law.

We have not been able to change human nature in over 12,500 years of trying; therefore, we aren't going to change it in the next 125 years, either. Change is up to the individual.

Now....to start splitting the posts over to where they belong.

[Fist and Faith]

He's so entitled to dominate a black man that he does it in full view of the world, as his cohorts keep anyone from interfering. And that chain is never going to end until people like you stop dismissing it, and start taking it seriously. How does someone like him not feel entitled to do that when he knows there are many people like you saying it's not even worth discussing because more blacks are killing blacks? The law's going to nail him anyway. But his attitude is not a result of the law.

We have not been able to change human nature in over 12,500 years of trying; therefore, we aren't going to change it in the next 125 years, either. Change is up to the individual.

It's not up to the individual in a society. There are a good many things that cause great harm to societies, and the societies need to prevent those things from happening. At the very least, those who are sworn (and paid) to safeguard our society should not be doing things that can so easily be seen as a violation of our highest principles. That should not be up to the individual. Anyone can think and feel anything they please. But they cannot act on it. And punishing those who do is insufficient. It does not seem to be a deterrent. Preventing it is better. That's what we should be doing. But I've been told I live in the Land of Should. Still, we should.

[wayfriend]

If there is one single thing that society is for, it is to moderate the actions of one human towards another.

If there is one single thing that government is for, it is to protect every human from unjust harm caused by others.

If there is one single thing that civilization is for, it is to continually improve society and government.

[Gaius Octavius]

"Not every white person in the US is descended from a slave owner."

Are you absolutely certain of that, though?

Yes. I went to school with a guy whose grandparents--all 4 of them--immigrated from Italy during the 1930s. His father from one family, his mother from another family, and finally him; therefore, no one in his immediate family ever had the possibility of being connected to slavery. Proven.

He's so entitled to dominate a black man that he does it in full view of the world, as his cohorts keep anyone from interfering. And that chain is never going to end until people like you stop dismissing it, and start taking it seriously. How does someone like him not feel entitled to do that when he knows there are many people like you saying it's not even worth discussing because more blacks are killing blacks? The law's going to nail him anyway. But his attitude is not a result of the law.

We have not been able to change human nature in over 12,500 years of trying; therefore, we aren't going to change it in the next 125 years, either. Change is up to the individual.

Now....to start splitting the posts over to where they belong.

Yes, the Roman Empire never owned slaves.

[TheFallen]

"Not every white person in the US is descended from a slave owner."

Are you absolutely certain of that, though?

Yes. I went to school with a guy whose grandparents--all 4 of them--immigrated from Italy during the 1930s.

Yes, the Roman Empire never owned slaves.

Seriously??? That's a point you think worth making?

Is white guilt really so addictive that you have to reference the Roman Empire 16 centuries or more ago, in order to locate something to feel bad about? What next? We're all direct descendants of murderers because of Cain?

[wayfriend]

Why are you blaming ur-Nan for something Hashi brought up?

Bold.

[TheFallen]

Even someone like you should recognise the ludicrous reach there...

...but then again, quite possibly not

Heartwarming to see you sticking together though. That's almost cute.

[Fist and Faith]

The conversation is not about slavery in general, and it is certainly not about ancient Rome. It is about the way black people have been treated in what is now America, since before it became America, beginning with the slavery here. Hashi did not specify that the slave owner was a white person owning slaves in some part of what is now America. But it was implicit. For the purposes of this conversation, Hashi's statement is accurate, regardless of the fact that the point he was trying to make with it is not.

[wayfriend]

Even someone like you should recognise the ludicrous reach there...
...but then again, quite possibly not

Hashi said that people from Italy had no slaveholders in their ancestry.
ur-Nanothnir pointed out that they did, and why that was so.

A far more direct and honest response than you're used to, I'd say.