5 ms·

[removed]

• ketzu 6y ago
  > A bit of an oxymoron there isn't it. How do you enforce a law without maintaining law and order. The point is just that the intent of applying the law is not maintaining law and order. Lika a policeman seeing 100 people jaywalking, but only arrests the rich/poor/black/white/foreign/blonde/girl/guy, not because they want to maintain law and order by policing jaywalking, but for some other reason. > Of course anything and everything is a sign of a "New Cold War" Unfortunately. The respective threads are also often emotional, light on facts and relatively unreflected.
• hedora 6y ago
  > A bit of an oxymoron there isn't it. How do you enforce a law without maintaining law and order. Perhaps you should read up on the root causes of the recent Black Lives Matter protests in the US.
• DangitBobby 6y ago
  This is a very uncharitable and pedantic reading of it. If there were a law to "kill political dissidents of party x" then enforcement of that law would technically be enforcement of the law, but it would certainly not be for the purposes of maintaining law and order in the manner that the term is commonly understood to mean.
  • knolax 6y ago
    [removed]
    • DangitBobby 6y ago
      Law and Order the euphemism is not the same thing as Law and Order as it's commonly understood, even if the euphimistic usage appears more often in modern politics than the common usage. It's unfortunate that euphemisms dillute meaning (and it's probably unfortunate that they must exist at all), but that doesn't mean the actual meaning no longer exists.
      • knolax 6y ago
        [removed]