Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man part II

[BugI02]

No. I’m just fascinated how some folks want to change the rules when things don’t go their way.

So, are you saying abolishing the electoral college, packing the court, abolishing the filibuster, trying to take federal control of elections and making voting less secure are wrong? Who knew?

 

[jamil]

Pretty big deal in martial arts and a number of philosophies, too

To me, they say "decenter" yourself, I think it means separate yourself from the individual and be of the collective.

They can **** all the way off. I ain't decentering ****.

 

[DadSmith]

Well, a good start would be stop calling everyone you disagree with a communist.

Democrats are communist

 

[JettaKnight]

Democrats are communist

That makes as much sense as calling Trumpers fascist.

 

[Expat]

That makes as much sense as calling Trumpers fascist.

Must be true then, because I heard this thousands of times from the official talking heads on TV.

 

[BugI02]

"The real communist" are few and far between, so labeling every liberal a communist just shows off one's penchant for hyperbole and own extreme partisanship.

As does acting like someone has to be a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA in order to be a 'real communist'. One only has to be a 'fellow traveler' to qualify

Let us not repeat some of the more egregious mistakes of the McCarthy era and focus too much on the messenger and too little on the message

"Even paranoids have real enemies"

 

[JettaKnight]

As does acting like someone has to be a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA in order to be a 'real communist'. One only has to be a 'fellow traveler' to qualify

Let us not repeat some of the more egregious mistakes of the McCarthy era and focus too much on the messenger and too little on the message

"Even paranoids have real enemies"

That makes me wonder whom I'm a fellow traveller of.

 

[BugI02]

That makes me wonder whom I'm a fellow traveller of.

Prolly Arthur Dent

 

[jamil]

In regards to the social media angle.

Lets just start with some hypotheses I have garnered from reading INGO posts

1. The MSM is a powerful outlet reaching large swaths of the population.
2. The MSM has a bias against conservative values.
3. The MSM downplays black on black crime.
4. The MSM holds up white on black crime to a national audience.

Bases on those hypotheses, a conclusion could simply be that because white on black crime is more prominent the national voices are also more prominent and the narrative the general population hears is driven by the MSM.

Could the voices ebb and flow? Sure. Mainstreaming? I don't buy it. It's just like until satellites, counting hurricanes was more difficult.

I have yet to see anything happening now that I can't read about happening in the Black Power movements in the 60s and 70s....except now Twitter, FB, and social media lets everyone know about it in real time. That includes Tombs dramatic city burning photos.

Okay, so you're saying that white on black crime is more prominent and that explains why the MSM downplays black on black crime while promoting white on black crime to a national audience.

By prominent I don't think you mean statistically, because that would simply be untrue to a degree where a reasonable person would call that "prominent". So I have to assume you mean of social prominence. So I have to ask you why it should be of any higher prominence if it is of no higher occurrence?

So then we're back to why that might be. I suspect it is because the people who operate media, are predominately progressives. Surely you can't disagree with that. Some are moderate left, but most are fairly progressive. I don't think the national voices are demanding the kind of coverage we're getting, althought I think a lot of it has to do with views and clicks. Say outrageous things because outrage sells. CNN was caught on video saying that. The bat **** crazy progressives are only about 20% of the general population so I doubt that the batshit crazy narrative is the one people want most, even though they tune in for, I guess the trainwreck. But, progressives occupy a large proportion of media/influencers.

The difference between now and the 70's is that now we're hearing this from places in the mainstream. All I heard in the 70's was the reports on the news that some radical left wing group has bombed another building. You'd have to dig pretty deep into ideological sources to know what they were saying. Just turn on the news and you'll see crazy people saying crazy things as if those things are already mainstream views.

 

[jamil]

Actually the title is poorly written. Nothing in the article draws parallels. The events are contrasted; with the only similarity drawn being that they called it a "lynching."

I wouldn't assume it's poorly written. Titles are chosen with a lot more strategic thought. Clickbait sells.

But, the title isn't that far from the article. They were drawing connections between the two. It's fair to categorize what I read as drawing parallels. And that's nonsense, of course. There isn't much connecting the two events at all. I think that overt real ass racism is in far greater demand than there is supply to meet it. We're not living in Jim Crow times, so we have to try to force parallels between now so that they can see the racism they imagine happening in real time. And that's just not helpful to a society that mostly wants to place race behind them.

The prosecution made no case at all that anything having to do with Chauvin's actions or Floyd's death was due to racism. But the media plays that up as if it were a fact of the case.

 

[jamil]

That makes as much sense as calling Trumpers fascist.

That's not actually true though. What Trumpers are real ass fascists? That's sort of antithetical to conservatives (though not necessarily antithetical to far right wing)

I'd wager that communists among Democrats is a lot more prevalent than fascists among Republicans.

 

[DadSmith]

Birds of feather flock together. Democrat Socialist party is just that if you consider that your party you are a communist/Marxist/Progressive whatever you want to call yourself it's all leading to the same thing communist.

 

[jamil]

Birds of feather flock together. Democrat Socialist party is just that if you consider that your party you are a communist/Marxist/Progressive whatever you want to call yourself it's all leading to the same thing communist.

I don't think that's true. I can go as far as saying communists in the US are far more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans. But the real ass communists don't really like the DNC. I've seen on social media recently that they're pissed at "the squad" now because they're supporting 0biden and his agenda. Yeah. They don't like 0biden because he's not progressive enough.

Out of the people on the left, the bat **** crazies are a minority. But they're a powerful minority. They're backed with a lot of cash, and they have a lot of candidates gaining public office. They're getting themselves in leadership positions in all our institutions. Education, business, media, entertainment (they've been there for a long time), religion. So while I'd not say every democrat is a communist, it's not like the ones that are aren't a problem.

I think there are a lot of Democrats/moderates are in a state of denial about the left. And when they no longer have free speech they'll claim it's always been that way.

 

[DadSmith]

Rep. James Comer (R-KY) spoke opposing the legislation. “Let’s be clear what H.R. 51 is all about,” he began. “It’s about Democrats adding two new progressive U.S. senators to push a radical agenda championed by the Squad to reshape America into the socialist utopia they dream about.”


The Soviet Union was a socialist republican.

 

[buckwacker]

Yeah, there's an increase, but as I see it, it's from "minuscule" to "small".


INGO seems to find the communist like a K9 smells weed at a traffic stop.


The media we consume acts like a great big magnifying glass, because that's what keeps our eyes glued to it. Facebook et al have extremely powerful computers that know what to show you to keep your eyes glued to it. Writers at new aggregation and opinion sites (what now passes at "news") know exactly how to exaggerate things to get clicks. Meme creators don't get dopamine hit from producing nuanced, thoughtful images, but from portraying things as black and white in a very visceral way. Politicians don't score points by telling constituents that issues are complicated and require a great deal of study and thought.

The increase is not miniscule to small. The percentage of the population maybe, but not the % increase in those who consider themselves communist and act as such. This is why I said you need to watch trajectories, not look at numbers at a point in time.

I realize today's sources of information sensationalize content to drive consumption, on the right and left. That realization has grown in parallel with or preceding my perception of the dangers we face from leftists, so I would argue that really has little to no bearing on my views. You can sit back and yawn at where we're headed, but you do that at your own peril. Unless of course living in a totalitarian commie utopia doesn't bother you that much.

 

[BugI02]

I don't think that's true. I can go as far as saying communists in the US are far more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans. But the real ass communists don't really like the DNC. I've seen on social media recently that they're pissed at "the squad" now because they're supporting 0biden and his agenda. Yeah. They don't like 0biden because he's not progressive enough.

Out of the people on the left, the bat **** crazies are a minority. But they're a powerful minority. They're backed with a lot of cash, and they have a lot of candidates gaining public office. They're getting themselves in leadership positions in all our institutions. Education, business, media, entertainment (they've been there for a long time), religion. So while I'd not say every democrat is a communist, it's not like the ones that are aren't a problem.

I think there are a lot of Democrats/moderates are in a state of denial about the left. And when they no longer have free speech they'll claim it's always been that way.

Curious. With respect to the big money behind the bat **** crazy leftists - do you think the end game actually is communism or to tear the system apart to make way for oligopoly? I just can't see a Soros type believing he would have more of whatever it is he wants in a communist system unless what he wants is pretty ****ed up.

 

[buckwacker]

I'd say those statements would be true on both side. I'd say that racists and communists are both very small groups who try to inflame emotions to gather support for their side.

So are you equating those who value liberty with fascists and racists. Otherwise you're not really making a lot of sense.

 

[buckwacker]

)

There is objective truth, but morality is very subjective. There is objective morality, but we might not define that the same way. To me objective morality is the set of moral principles or foundations that are generally true for across cultures and across time.

So then what is objectively moral is a layer of abstraction up from what is subjectively moral. For example, many American conservatives would think that failing to take proper care of the US flag is morally wrong. They sacralize the flag. Many progressives see George Floyd's place of death as sacred now. Not everyone sacralizes the same things. But humans have the moral capacity to sacralize things. That moral capacity is an objective moral. But the specific things they sacralize are subjectively moral.

Another example is moral harm. People objectively have morals around not harming people in specific ways. But people have different ideas about what is harm. And those specific things are subjective morality. To some people Abortion is not harm. To some people it is. People feel so strongly about morals, especially when they feel they're absolute, that they get quite upset when someone who doesn't share the same morals violates them.

For example, make a video of you pissing on a Glock and then shooting it with a 1911 45ACP, basically God's choice in personal sidearms. OMG. Look out. The Glock fanbois will be hopping mad. They are certain that is the unpardonable sin and you will go to hell for it.

This all may or may not be true. It depends on what is objectively true, which is not really possible to know unless one is omniscient.

 

[buckwacker]

I don't think that's true. I can go as far as saying communists in the US are far more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans. But the real ass communists don't really like the DNC. I've seen on social media recently that they're pissed at "the squad" now because they're supporting 0biden and his agenda. Yeah. They don't like 0biden because he's not progressive enough.

Out of the people on the left, the bat **** crazies are a minority. But they're a powerful minority. They're backed with a lot of cash, and they have a lot of candidates gaining public office. They're getting themselves in leadership positions in all our institutions. Education, business, media, entertainment (they've been there for a long time), religion. So while I'd not say every democrat is a communist, it's not like the ones that are aren't a problem.

I think there are a lot of Democrats/moderates are in a state of denial about the left. And when they no longer have free speech they'll claim it's always been that way.

Just because every 1940s German wasn't tossing Jews in ovens doesn't mean they bear nor culpability for putting into power those who did so.

 

[JettaKnight]

Just because every 1940s German wasn't tossing Jews in ovens doesn't mean they bear nor culpability for putting into power those who did so.

It was only a matter of time till this discuss devolved to this.




Please explain how this sort of rhetoric isn't like what I've heard from the left directed to Trump voters.
And for extra credit, please explain how it's helpful.