4 ms·

Also, beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being. They will use the word "violence

Also, beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being. They will use the word "violence" to describe both, rather than get into a definition war with them, just keep the distinction clear.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
> beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being Ok so I guess economic circumstances can never be oppressive. So if a thieve steals all your stuff and you starve...that's not violence!
- spoonjim 6y ago
  Here is a curated selection of the logical failures in your two line comment: * saying that economic circumstances are "oppressive," then trying to draw this to "violence" * a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff * implying that being in a situation where you are "starving" is the same as actually being violently attacked, i.e. shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, etc.
  - nec4b 6y ago
    >>* a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff You are 100% sure that nobody who lost a job because his place of work was destroyed in riots is not starving? Not everybody is so privileged to have enough savings to support himself after loosing a job.
    - spoonjim 6y ago
      Of course I'm not 100% sure of that, but there is a long sequence of events between smashing a window and getting to that outcome, unlike bashing a guy's face in with a crowbar where the consequence is guaranteed within milliseconds. The two acts are not equal and attempts to equate them are either idiotic or in bad faith.
      - nec4b 6y ago
        Once upon a time in Germany there was a special night, it was called "Crystal Night"[1]. It got it's name because of all the glass from the smashed windows lying on the ground. There were some people arguing that it was violence, but some said that those people were either idiotic or arguing in bad faith. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
        kemayo 6y ago
        I'd have gone with the hundreds of Jews murdered that night and subsequent tens of thousands sent to concentration camps in the aftermath as the important violence there, honestly.
        cycrutchfield 6y ago
        No, but think of the property that was destroyed!
        nec4b 6y ago
        You are right, some people just fail to see that the broken windows were just the beginning and what followed was even more vile. The mental gymnastics some people do to downplay violence only because it might look bad for their side is astonishing. The value of a human life for them is nothing more than a sacrificial pawn on their ideological chessboard.
        jakelazaroff 6y ago
        Kristallnacht was a pogrom in which people specifically targeted Jews with the full backing of the state. Surely the more apt analogy is the systemic violence our state inflicts on Black people, rather than the protests that arose in response to it.
        nec4b 6y ago
        No, mask wearing people (supported by a large part of the political elite) destroying property of a specific social-economic class is the more apt analogy today in the USA.
h_anna_h 6y ago
I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  That's a strange view to hold. For most people there's a significant cognitive difference between being willing to destroy objects and being willing to attack people.
  - h_anna_h 6y ago
    We are not talking simply about destroying objects but about a specific act of vandalism that often happens during rioting.
    - johnchristopher 6y ago
      Attacking a human being, smashing a window, and attacking a human being in order to smash the window behind him are three very different things.
      - h_anna_h 6y ago
        I never claimed otherwise.
        johnchristopher 6y ago
        > I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows. Unless I misunderstood it this statement implies that a window smashing person would as well attack another humane being. It's not true. These acts are different, require different motivations and a different mentality/personality traits to follow through.
        6y ago
lenkite 6y ago
You mean like this: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-lives-matter-before-viciously-attacking-white-victims/ https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-l...
- spoonjim 6y ago
  Yes, that is what I am talking about. That is actual violence.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

> beware the false equivalence between smashing a store window and stealing some crap vs. actually attacking a human being Ok so I guess economic circumstances can never be oppressive. So if a thieve steals all your stuff and you starve...that's not violence!

spoonjim 6y ago
Here is a curated selection of the logical failures in your two line comment: * saying that economic circumstances are "oppressive," then trying to draw this to "violence" * a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff * implying that being in a situation where you are "starving" is the same as actually being violently attacked, i.e. shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, etc.
- nec4b 6y ago
  >>* a claim that if a thief steals all of your stuff, you "starve" -- please give an example of one person who "starved" because BLM looters stole their stuff You are 100% sure that nobody who lost a job because his place of work was destroyed in riots is not starving? Not everybody is so privileged to have enough savings to support himself after loosing a job.
  - spoonjim 6y ago
    Of course I'm not 100% sure of that, but there is a long sequence of events between smashing a window and getting to that outcome, unlike bashing a guy's face in with a crowbar where the consequence is guaranteed within milliseconds. The two acts are not equal and attempts to equate them are either idiotic or in bad faith.
    - nec4b 6y ago
      Once upon a time in Germany there was a special night, it was called "Crystal Night"[1]. It got it's name because of all the glass from the smashed windows lying on the ground. There were some people arguing that it was violence, but some said that those people were either idiotic or arguing in bad faith. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
      - kemayo 6y ago
        I'd have gone with the hundreds of Jews murdered that night and subsequent tens of thousands sent to concentration camps in the aftermath as the important violence there, honestly.
        cycrutchfield 6y ago
        No, but think of the property that was destroyed!
        nec4b 6y ago
        You are right, some people just fail to see that the broken windows were just the beginning and what followed was even more vile. The mental gymnastics some people do to downplay violence only because it might look bad for their side is astonishing. The value of a human life for them is nothing more than a sacrificial pawn on their ideological chessboard.
      - jakelazaroff 6y ago
        Kristallnacht was a pogrom in which people specifically targeted Jews with the full backing of the state. Surely the more apt analogy is the systemic violence our state inflicts on Black people, rather than the protests that arose in response to it.
        nec4b 6y ago
        No, mask wearing people (supported by a large part of the political elite) destroying property of a specific social-economic class is the more apt analogy today in the USA.

h_anna_h 6y ago

I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
That's a strange view to hold. For most people there's a significant cognitive difference between being willing to destroy objects and being willing to attack people.
- h_anna_h 6y ago
  We are not talking simply about destroying objects but about a specific act of vandalism that often happens during rioting.
  - johnchristopher 6y ago
    Attacking a human being, smashing a window, and attacking a human being in order to smash the window behind him are three very different things.
    - h_anna_h 6y ago
      I never claimed otherwise.
      - johnchristopher 6y ago
        > I really do not think that most willing to smash a bunch of windows would hesitate to attack you if you stand between them and said windows. Unless I misunderstood it this statement implies that a window smashing person would as well attack another humane being. It's not true. These acts are different, require different motivations and a different mentality/personality traits to follow through.
        6y ago

lenkite 6y ago

You mean like this: https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-lives-matter-before-viciously-attacking-white-victims/ https://www.cleveland19.com/story/32814897/men-chant-black-l...

spoonjim 6y ago
Yes, that is what I am talking about. That is actual violence.