4 ms·
This is still false equivalence. BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. Quite the opposite they were consistently attacked by police dressed up like t
by virtual_void 6y ago
This is still false equivalence.
BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. Quite the opposite they were consistently attacked by police dressed up like the army, heaving people off the streets.
Where were the police in DC?
This wasn’t a protest it was a violent attempt to overthrow.
Call it what it is indeed.
- adnzzzzZ 6y ago>BLM Didn't use violence to achieve their goals. I don't know how you can reconcile cities being burned, statues toppled, police stations being overtaken, parts of a city being declared an autonomous zone with "violence wasn't used" but whatever, discussion is clearly pointless. I will re-state my claim: this is a battle, and in a battle all that matters is punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends. When you defend the BLM riots yet condemn this one you're engaging in that behavior. You can disagree with me all you want but that's the truth to anyone who has any sense.
- virtual_void 6y agoPerhaps saying there was no violence is overstating it but it was a very different scale with very different intent abhorrent in either case. People are undoubtedly angry because they are seeking to be treated equally. To not be murdered by the police. There’s still such an astonishing amount of injustice and yet they didn’t try to overthrow the government. The crux of my argument is that these two groups are not comparable. One seeks equality and the other seeks to go against democracy and attempt a coup. This is what i mean by false equivalence.