3 ms·

> Like you realise the protests were sparked off by a murder, right? And since then they've resulted in 17 deaths. Tit for tat? Were those 17 people guilty in

> Like you realise the protests were sparked off by a murder, right? And since then they've resulted in 17 deaths. Tit for tat? Were those 17 people guilty in that murder? Yes that initial act was wrong and we should address that, vandalizing businesses and setting federal property on fire has nothing to do with that original offense. > it’s ridiculous to think the main authoritarian crisis in the US right now You keep asserting this. You don't show evidence for this. What's the authoritarian crisis? That cops have qualified immunity? That's not new. Is it that you think poorly of the president? I think poorly of him too but he's not Mussolini. You can't vaguely claim there's something wrong with a system and use that as an excuse for violence and destruction - especially when the violence and destruction isn't even targeted at the people you're accusing. > you didn’t mention a single thing the police did wrong in your list of grievances No I didn't because it's not relevant. You're creating a strawman when the reality of the situation is complicated. This isn't cops versus protesters and attempts to cast it as a binary problem is partisanship. If you're interested in solving problems instead of stirring up anger then your interest should be in understanding the problem and not polarizing sides. > This is not a view supported by the evidence. 1. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-education-police-behavior https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa... 2. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-police-performance/ https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol... > The US has more prisoners per capita than any society at any point in history in the world That has nothing to do with this topic. Like, I agree that's a problem and we should address that by considering how we treat low level drug offenses, but it has nothing to do with police brutality and cancel culture. > The police are armed and violent. Police brutality has decreased mindbogglingly since the 1960s. Yes the police have more gear and we can talk about why it makes sense to do things like remove camo from their inventory and the pros/cons of using APCs, but that has nothing to do with canceling people and ruining their careers. > But maybe you should tell me more about how these systems work so well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_politicians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_... > proud history of violent protest so quickly Violence is not something to be proud of. A violent victory for one person is a funeral for another. Violence is against justice and it deprives the accused of reasonable and rational defense. You talk so much against authoritarianism, but violence is the fundamental tool of it. Courts and ballot boxes are the tools of democracy.

oisdk 6y ago
> And since then they've resulted in 17 deaths. Wait---are you seriously not going to count the people the police have killed? What is wrong with you? Regardless, my point was not that the protests are justified (although of course they are: for someone who claims to work in "police reform" all you have been doing is defending the police and demonising protestors), but that to not identify the militarised police force brutalising protestors as a more important sign of authoritarianism than "cancel culture" is ridiculous. That's why I mentioned the protests were started by a murder. Because when you claim cancel culture is this huge problem, and mention a Harvard professor not having one of his duties renewed, I think it's relevant to show how grotesquely out of proportion it is with the George Floyd protests. > You keep asserting this. You don't show evidence for this. I'm sorry: in what capacity have you been "working for police reform"? I'm really getting the feeling that that is an extremely inaccurate description of your job. I haven't shown evidence for the police brutality in the US because I assumed you were aware of it. Are you not? Do you not understand that police officers murdering peaceful protestors is an authoritarian crisis? > If you're interested in solving problems instead of stirring up anger then your interest should be in understanding the problem and not polarizing sides. All of the "solutions" for how to stop police violence which come from American police amount to (surprisingly) giving the police more money. Kind of like how all of the "solutions" to gun violence involve giving more people guns (teachers, cops, etc.) The way to curb police violence is to defund and demilitarise the police. This is what has worked in places outside of the US, and this is the only realistic approach. > 1. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa.. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa.... > > 2. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol.. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol.... This is not evidence for the claim that defunding the police causes a spike in crime. > That has nothing to do with this topic. Mass imprisonment is absolutely relevant to the question of the authoritarian nature of the police. > Violence is not something to be proud of. You can't think of a single instance of violent protest that you'd be proud of? > You talk so much against authoritarianism, but violence is the fundamental tool of it. It's difficult to take you seriously on the issue of police violence when you have yet to even acknowledge the horrific and obvious police brutality during the protests.

oisdk 6y ago

> And since then they've resulted in 17 deaths. Wait---are you seriously not going to count the people the police have killed? What is wrong with you? Regardless, my point was not that the protests are justified (although of course they are: for someone who claims to work in "police reform" all you have been doing is defending the police and demonising protestors), but that to not identify the militarised police force brutalising protestors as a more important sign of authoritarianism than "cancel culture" is ridiculous. That's why I mentioned the protests were started by a murder. Because when you claim cancel culture is this huge problem, and mention a Harvard professor not having one of his duties renewed, I think it's relevant to show how grotesquely out of proportion it is with the George Floyd protests. > You keep asserting this. You don't show evidence for this. I'm sorry: in what capacity have you been "working for police reform"? I'm really getting the feeling that that is an extremely inaccurate description of your job. I haven't shown evidence for the police brutality in the US because I assumed you were aware of it. Are you not? Do you not understand that police officers murdering peaceful protestors is an authoritarian crisis? > If you're interested in solving problems instead of stirring up anger then your interest should be in understanding the problem and not polarizing sides. All of the "solutions" for how to stop police violence which come from American police amount to (surprisingly) giving the police more money. Kind of like how all of the "solutions" to gun violence involve giving more people guns (teachers, cops, etc.) The way to curb police violence is to defund and demilitarise the police. This is what has worked in places outside of the US, and this is the only realistic approach. > 1. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa.. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa.... > > 2. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol.. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol.... This is not evidence for the claim that defunding the police causes a spike in crime. > That has nothing to do with this topic. Mass imprisonment is absolutely relevant to the question of the authoritarian nature of the police. > Violence is not something to be proud of. You can't think of a single instance of violent protest that you'd be proud of? > You talk so much against authoritarianism, but violence is the fundamental tool of it. It's difficult to take you seriously on the issue of police violence when you have yet to even acknowledge the horrific and obvious police brutality during the protests.