I think the context around destruction of property can, in certain circumstances, be violence. If a white mob burns down a black-owned business as an act of intimidation, that intimidation is a form of violence.
But a trashcan going through a Starbucks window or people grabbing a flatscreen at Walmart, nah
Just cause we're fine with the violent thing that's happening doesn't make it not violence it just means the violence is justifiable and excusable. Like I'm not gonna call punching nazis non violence cause nazis are garbage people I don't like or very much care about. It's still violence to punch em, it just also happens to be good excusable violence.
Just cause we're fine with the violent thing that's happening doesn't make it not violence it just means the violence is justifiable and excusable. Like I'm not gonna call punching nazis non violence cause nazis are garbage people I don't like or very much care about. It's still violence to punch em, it just also happens to be good excusable violence.
People can be hurt, things and corporations can't.
Yang: "An army is an institution for violence, and there are two kinds of violence."
Julian: "Good violence and bad violence?"
Yang: "No, not quite. Violence to control and oppress, and violence as a means of liberation. You know what we call a national army is fundamentally the former example. It is a pity, but history does not lie. When those in power confront popular opposition, there are not many examples of the army siding with the people. Far from it, in the past in country after country, the army itself evolved into a power structure and came to control the people with violence."
Whether or not something is violence is semantic. Violence is simply an aspect of the natural world. The effect of violent or non-violent acts matters a lot more than whether or not the act was violent.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
+3
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
Though grammar nazis would try to have you believe otherwise, the phrasing of such an act does not effect the moral value of the result.
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
Just cause we're fine with the violent thing that's happening doesn't make it not violence it just means the violence is justifiable and excusable. Like I'm not gonna call punching nazis non violence cause nazis are garbage people I don't like or very much care about. It's still violence to punch em, it just also happens to be good excusable violence.
People can be hurt, things and corporations can't.
but the supreme court has ruled that corporations are people, and furthermore end my suffering please
Just cause we're fine with the violent thing that's happening doesn't make it not violence it just means the violence is justifiable and excusable. Like I'm not gonna call punching nazis non violence cause nazis are garbage people I don't like or very much care about. It's still violence to punch em, it just also happens to be good excusable violence.
People can be hurt, things and corporations can't.
but the supreme court has ruled that corporations are people, and furthermore end my suffering please
The story behind how that happened feels very modern. The Supreme Court is deciding a case on corporate law, and the sole surviving drafter of the 14th Amendment (a Republican with financial interests in the case) goes to the press saying that the original drafters of the Amendment meant for it to cover corporations, despite no letters, papers, or any other evidence supporting this.
An unnamed court clerk wrote this into the decision, and thereafter the vast majority of 14th Amendment cases involved corporate law.
Whether or not something is violence is semantic. Violence is simply an aspect of the natural world. The effect of violent or non-violent acts matters a lot more than whether or not the act was violent.
maybe, but the semantics get important when we can't even agree as a society on what violence is based on who's doing it
what's "fun" is how, despite how much biden throws protestors/rioters under the bus at every turn, he's STILL getting painted as the lawless anarchist candidate that wants to burn down cities
though in his defense i don't know how he could have possibly predicted that he'd be slammed as a leftist extremist regardless of whether he stood by or sold out the left
Olivawgood name, isn't it?the foot of mt fujiRegistered Userregular
My most sincere hope is that if Biden wins, it will act as its own bit of accelerationism, as people realize that oh yeah, none of these ghouls actually give a shit about us
And while that's happening we're also like, cutting out the legs from under American fascism, but y'know, that's implied
what's "fun" is how, despite how much biden throws protestors/rioters under the bus at every turn, he's STILL getting painted as the lawless anarchist candidate that wants to burn down cities
though in his defense i don't know how he could have possibly predicted that he'd be slammed as a leftist extremist regardless of whether he stood by or sold out the left
I guess the only thing to see is how effective those blatantly garbage claims are. Like, is anyone other than Forever Trumpers actually believing that Biden is a leftist extremist?
EDIT: Decided I should check myself and at least back in August they were not very persuasive claims according to polls:
Voters’ perceptions of Biden’s ideology have gone unchanged since a Morning Consult/Politico poll in July, despite Trump repeatedly hammering him as a “puppet of the radical left” and “against god.”
...
The Biden campaign hasn’t done much to parry Trump’s attacks on Harris as a radical leftist, and there may be a good reason for that. Even when voters are introduced to Harris’s relatively progressive policy proposals and record, voters view her favorably, according to Morning Consult reporter Eli Yokley. “Harris’ policy record — including her support for raising taxes on the rich and placing restrictions on gun ownership, as well as her implementation of racial bias training for police officers while serving as San Francisco’s district attorney — inspired the most positive reception,” he wrote of the poll’s findings.
And in September, from the same Morning Consult poll:
Efforts by President Donald Trump and his Republican allies to paint former Vice President Joe Biden as a radical liberal after he selected Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) as his running mate have not made an impact on public perceptions, according to a new Morning Consult/Politico poll, which also found that voters continue to see the Democratic ticket as closer to the ideological center than the Republican ticket.
Voters in the Sept. 11-14 survey, which asked respondents to place the candidates on a scale of one to seven (with one meaning “very liberal,” four meaning “moderate” and seven meaning “very conservative”), rated Biden at 2.7, similar to findings measured a month ago following his selection of Harris, who has a 2.5 rating. Trump was placed at 5.8, just slightly to the left of the 6 rating for Vice President Mike Pence.
Looters are assholes, police actions historically lethal in mental health scenarios.
In 11 words, i addressed the morning and the police killing and maiming of the public with more force than the freaking vice president's campaign staff.
Nobody wants to be looting and protesting about this stuff.
But nobody is fixing any of the problems. If you stop cops from killing unarmed black people you'll stop the looting and protests. Its that fucking simple.
Nobody wants to be looting and protesting about this stuff.
But nobody is fixing any of the problems. If you stop cops from killing unarmed black people you'll stop the looting and protests. Its that fucking simple.
Oh I sure as shit know there are people that want to loot. There are assholes enough that deserve none of the freedoms this nation affords them. But that is another conversation to tie subprime mortgage bonds to the bricks going through the window of that black woman's bakery in Ferguson.
As the nation marches forward and replaces the current America with an incrementally better one, the bottom feeders will scurry about to gorge themselves on what they can.
[James Baldwin] I object to the term "looters" because I wonder who is looting whom, baby.
[Interviewer] How would you define somebody who smashes in the window of a television store and takes what he wants?
[James Baldwin] Before I get to that, how would you define somebody who puts a cat where he is and takes all the money out of the ghetto where he makes it? Who is looting whom? Grabbing off the TV set? He doesn't really want the TV set. He's saying screw you. It's just judgment, by the way, on the value of the TV set. He doesn't want it. He wants to let you know he's there. The question I'm trying to raise is a very serious question. The mass media-television and all the major news agencies-endlessly use that word "looter." On television you always see black hands reaching in, you know. And so the American public concludes that these savages are trying to steal everything from us, And no one has seriously tried to get where the trouble is. After all, you're accusing a captive population who has been robbed of everything of looting. I think it's obscene.
My most sincere hope is that if Biden wins, it will act as its own bit of accelerationism, as people realize that oh yeah, none of these ghouls actually give a shit about us
And while that's happening we're also like, cutting out the legs from under American fascism, but y'know, that's implied
i think it's a lot more likely if biden wins that a lot of liberals (especially ones who have clout and a platform to tell everyone their opinions) will bury their heads in the sand and pretend a lot of problems just went away now that their guy is back in. there's a huge amount of mistaking effect for cause going on right now where a whole lot of people genuinely believe that trump is the cause of all the shit we have going on and once he's out we'll be okay again. this is useful as far as it goes, having a lot of people angry about stuff is valuable in its own right even if they're not really angry for the right reasons, but if it all evaporates in the event biden gets in then that's really bad
plus i don't think there's any reason to believe that all the criticizing-biden-is-helping-the-GOP shit we're seeing now will go away if he takes office, especially if the democrats take the white house but not the senate
My most sincere hope is that if Biden wins, it will act as its own bit of accelerationism, as people realize that oh yeah, none of these ghouls actually give a shit about us
And while that's happening we're also like, cutting out the legs from under American fascism, but y'know, that's implied
i think it's a lot more likely if biden wins that a lot of liberals (especially ones who have clout and a platform to tell everyone their opinions) will bury their heads in the sand and pretend a lot of problems just went away now that their guy is back in. there's a huge amount of mistaking effect for cause going on right now where a whole lot of people genuinely believe that trump is the cause of all the shit we have going on and once he's out we'll be okay again. this is useful as far as it goes, having a lot of people angry about stuff is valuable in its own right even if they're not really angry for the right reasons, but if it all evaporates in the event biden gets in then that's really bad
plus i don't think there's any reason to believe that all the criticizing-biden-is-helping-the-GOP shit we're seeing now will go away if he takes office, especially if the democrats take the white house but not the senate
Just from the campaign, I think this is going to be much harder under Biden than it was under Obama or Clinton. He's got all the bad qualities of old-school Democrats without the charm and self-awareness, especially once he stops being judged in comparison with Trump.
My most sincere hope is that if Biden wins, it will act as its own bit of accelerationism, as people realize that oh yeah, none of these ghouls actually give a shit about us
And while that's happening we're also like, cutting out the legs from under American fascism, but y'know, that's implied
i think it's a lot more likely if biden wins that a lot of liberals (especially ones who have clout and a platform to tell everyone their opinions) will bury their heads in the sand and pretend a lot of problems just went away now that their guy is back in. there's a huge amount of mistaking effect for cause going on right now where a whole lot of people genuinely believe that trump is the cause of all the shit we have going on and once he's out we'll be okay again. this is useful as far as it goes, having a lot of people angry about stuff is valuable in its own right even if they're not really angry for the right reasons, but if it all evaporates in the event biden gets in then that's really bad
plus i don't think there's any reason to believe that all the criticizing-biden-is-helping-the-GOP shit we're seeing now will go away if he takes office, especially if the democrats take the white house but not the senate
I think a lot of people have been radicalized in the last 4 years in a way that wont just go away. Partially because the shift started with the disappointment in Obama throwing the progressives under the bus combined with Biden being no Obama.
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
I should clarify I guess though a bunch of you put it pretty succinctly as well. Destruction of property belonging to those who aren't materially affected by the loss of the property, be it through sufficient wealth or insurance cannot be violence. If it doesn't cause pain or suffering or fear it's not violence, and things can't feel.
If you burn down a homeless encampment those who lived there suffer. If you burn down an unoccupied bank who is victimized?
My most sincere hope is that if Biden wins, it will act as its own bit of accelerationism, as people realize that oh yeah, none of these ghouls actually give a shit about us
And while that's happening we're also like, cutting out the legs from under American fascism, but y'know, that's implied
i think it's a lot more likely if biden wins that a lot of liberals (especially ones who have clout and a platform to tell everyone their opinions) will bury their heads in the sand and pretend a lot of problems just went away now that their guy is back in. there's a huge amount of mistaking effect for cause going on right now where a whole lot of people genuinely believe that trump is the cause of all the shit we have going on and once he's out we'll be okay again. this is useful as far as it goes, having a lot of people angry about stuff is valuable in its own right even if they're not really angry for the right reasons, but if it all evaporates in the event biden gets in then that's really bad
plus i don't think there's any reason to believe that all the criticizing-biden-is-helping-the-GOP shit we're seeing now will go away if he takes office, especially if the democrats take the white house but not the senate
I think a lot of people have been radicalized in the last 4 years in a way that wont just go away. Partially because the shift started with the disappointment in Obama throwing the progressives under the bus combined with Biden being no Obama.
you're totally right, but the number of radicals is still pretty small in comparison with the number of folks who just want things to be okay again and aren't willing/able to see the systemic rot for what it is
most importantly with a few notable exceptions the democratic party itself isn't really any more radical than it was this time four years ago, and they're the ones who set the tone. the liberal talking heads and columnists too, they're maybe even more conservative after the past bunch of years and while they're not as relevant/important as they think they are, they're still influential toward the opinions of regular people
there's kinda precedent for this happening too, for what it's worth. after obama beat mccain there was a huge number of people who thought we were suddenly in good shape again, bush is out and we have a competent dude in office and he's gonna fix everything just based on who he is, and then just kinda just ignored what was actually happening. this was basically my thought process for obama's whole first term before i realized it wasn't really adding up, but a lot of folks never came to that realization
Posts
I grew up with people who didnt make it to age 20! A few people!
Kinda depends who owns the property and who is doing the destroying.
Cops bulldozing homeless encampments = destruction.
Homeless people burning down a police station = correct, good, and proper.
I think the context around destruction of property can, in certain circumstances, be violence. If a white mob burns down a black-owned business as an act of intimidation, that intimidation is a form of violence.
But a trashcan going through a Starbucks window or people grabbing a flatscreen at Walmart, nah
People can be hurt, things and corporations can't.
Infuriating
Yang: "An army is an institution for violence, and there are two kinds of violence."
Julian: "Good violence and bad violence?"
Yang: "No, not quite. Violence to control and oppress, and violence as a means of liberation. You know what we call a national army is fundamentally the former example. It is a pity, but history does not lie. When those in power confront popular opposition, there are not many examples of the army siding with the people. Far from it, in the past in country after country, the army itself evolved into a power structure and came to control the people with violence."
- Legend of The Galactic Heroes
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
What about anti-semantic violence?
Though grammar nazis would try to have you believe otherwise, the phrasing of such an act does not effect the moral value of the result.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
but the supreme court has ruled that corporations are people, and furthermore end my suffering please
The story behind how that happened feels very modern. The Supreme Court is deciding a case on corporate law, and the sole surviving drafter of the 14th Amendment (a Republican with financial interests in the case) goes to the press saying that the original drafters of the Amendment meant for it to cover corporations, despite no letters, papers, or any other evidence supporting this.
An unnamed court clerk wrote this into the decision, and thereafter the vast majority of 14th Amendment cases involved corporate law.
maybe, but the semantics get important when we can't even agree as a society on what violence is based on who's doing it
hitting hot metal with hammers
Fuck this stupid old man
Voting won't save us
Black Lives Matter. At the same time,
though in his defense i don't know how he could have possibly predicted that he'd be slammed as a leftist extremist regardless of whether he stood by or sold out the left
http://www.audioentropy.com/
And while that's happening we're also like, cutting out the legs from under American fascism, but y'know, that's implied
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
I guess the only thing to see is how effective those blatantly garbage claims are. Like, is anyone other than Forever Trumpers actually believing that Biden is a leftist extremist?
EDIT: Decided I should check myself and at least back in August they were not very persuasive claims according to polls:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/08/13/biden-harris-seen-as-more-moderate-than-trump-in-poll-despite-radical-left-attacks/#513aec7e6f33
And in September, from the same Morning Consult poll:
https://morningconsult.com/2020/09/16/liberal-moderate-conservative-trump-biden-2020/
Looters are assholes, police actions historically lethal in mental health scenarios.
In 11 words, i addressed the morning and the police killing and maiming of the public with more force than the freaking vice president's campaign staff.
Cut me a check
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Nobody wants to be looting and protesting about this stuff.
But nobody is fixing any of the problems. If you stop cops from killing unarmed black people you'll stop the looting and protests. Its that fucking simple.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
Oh I sure as shit know there are people that want to loot. There are assholes enough that deserve none of the freedoms this nation affords them. But that is another conversation to tie subprime mortgage bonds to the bricks going through the window of that black woman's bakery in Ferguson.
As the nation marches forward and replaces the current America with an incrementally better one, the bottom feeders will scurry about to gorge themselves on what they can.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
[Interviewer] How would you define somebody who smashes in the window of a television store and takes what he wants?
[James Baldwin] Before I get to that, how would you define somebody who puts a cat where he is and takes all the money out of the ghetto where he makes it? Who is looting whom? Grabbing off the TV set? He doesn't really want the TV set. He's saying screw you. It's just judgment, by the way, on the value of the TV set. He doesn't want it. He wants to let you know he's there. The question I'm trying to raise is a very serious question. The mass media-television and all the major news agencies-endlessly use that word "looter." On television you always see black hands reaching in, you know. And so the American public concludes that these savages are trying to steal everything from us, And no one has seriously tried to get where the trouble is. After all, you're accusing a captive population who has been robbed of everything of looting. I think it's obscene.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a23960/james-baldwin-cool-it/
i think it's a lot more likely if biden wins that a lot of liberals (especially ones who have clout and a platform to tell everyone their opinions) will bury their heads in the sand and pretend a lot of problems just went away now that their guy is back in. there's a huge amount of mistaking effect for cause going on right now where a whole lot of people genuinely believe that trump is the cause of all the shit we have going on and once he's out we'll be okay again. this is useful as far as it goes, having a lot of people angry about stuff is valuable in its own right even if they're not really angry for the right reasons, but if it all evaporates in the event biden gets in then that's really bad
plus i don't think there's any reason to believe that all the criticizing-biden-is-helping-the-GOP shit we're seeing now will go away if he takes office, especially if the democrats take the white house but not the senate
hitting hot metal with hammers
Just from the campaign, I think this is going to be much harder under Biden than it was under Obama or Clinton. He's got all the bad qualities of old-school Democrats without the charm and self-awareness, especially once he stops being judged in comparison with Trump.
I think a lot of people have been radicalized in the last 4 years in a way that wont just go away. Partially because the shift started with the disappointment in Obama throwing the progressives under the bus combined with Biden being no Obama.
If you burn down a homeless encampment those who lived there suffer. If you burn down an unoccupied bank who is victimized?
**Several days later**
You can’t criticize Biden two years before a midterm election!
you're totally right, but the number of radicals is still pretty small in comparison with the number of folks who just want things to be okay again and aren't willing/able to see the systemic rot for what it is
most importantly with a few notable exceptions the democratic party itself isn't really any more radical than it was this time four years ago, and they're the ones who set the tone. the liberal talking heads and columnists too, they're maybe even more conservative after the past bunch of years and while they're not as relevant/important as they think they are, they're still influential toward the opinions of regular people
hitting hot metal with hammers
Tumblr | Twitter PSN: misterdapper Av by Satellite_09
hitting hot metal with hammers