3 ms·

In the US, we can acknowledge those "inconvenient facts", freely discuss them, educate people about them, push for accountability for those who did them and to

• dragonwriter 5y ago
  And then, quite often, the police at various levels of government infiltrate the groups seeking accountability, engage in provocations to discredit them publicly and frame them for unrelated crimes for which they are prosecuted and punished, and actively coordinate with and/or passively use non-enforcement to enable opposed non-police groups to carry out violence against their members. (Of course, we can then acknowledge those inconvenient facts, educate people about them, and push for accountability, if we are willing to start the cycle over again.) Is the US government less effectively repressive of dissent than the PRC? Sure. But it still does tend to violently repress dissent, especially when that is about conduct of policing or war.
• trasz 5y ago
  Nice theory, doesn't work. Weed was made illegal to suppress ethnic minorities and war protesters, 50 years later that law is still serving the same purpose. Meanwhile US lawmakers are busy denying voting rights to those same minorities, and making it illegal to teach inconvenient parts of american history.