10 ms·

If this moves you, follow Einstein's logic to today's world and join in the struggle. There are marches today, consider this your invitation! SF: https://www.f

If this moves you, follow Einstein's logic to today's world and join in the struggle. There are marches today, consider this your invitation! SF: https://www.facebook.com/events/675598982556580/ https://www.facebook.com/events/675598982556580/ Oakland: https://www.facebook.com/events/858052834217501/ https://www.facebook.com/events/858052834217501/ NYC: https://www.facebook.com/events/959630214065046/ https://www.facebook.com/events/959630214065046/ Boston: https://www.facebook.com/events/1559794327598726/ https://www.facebook.com/events/1559794327598726/ (and I'm sure there's one near where you live as well)

schimmy_changa 12y ago
I am not sure why this is being downvoted... People are asking above "What, however, can the man of good will do to combat this deeply rooted prejudice?". One prong of this prejudice is the structure of our justice system, and participating in these marches can help that.
- calibraxis 12y ago
  It's downvoted because it's currently the most serious and rational post on actually solving oppression. Rather than musing abstractly about some dead white scientist talking about blacks. (While taking a break from making money for investors/bosses.) Speaking of prominent white activist intellectuals, here's Chomsky's view on Einstein: "Compare Russell and Einstein, two leading figures, roughly the same generation. They agreed on the grave dangers facing humanity, but chose different ways to respond. Einstein responded by living a very comfortable life in Princeton and dedicating himself to research that he loved, taking a few moments for an occasional oracular statement. Russell responded by leading demonstrations and getting himself dragged off by the cops, writing extensively on the problems of the day, organizing war crimes trials, etc. The result? Russell was and is reviled and condemned, Einstein is admired as a saint. Should that surprise us? Not at all."
  - n72 12y ago
    "some dead white scientist" You do realize Einstein was a Jew who was forced to leave Germany because of Nazism, right?
    - oso2k 12y ago
      Judaism has and always will be a religion and not an ethnicity or race.
      - lostlogin 12y ago
        Many would disagree. I'd call it both. Can you further explain? Probably not the best source: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews Edit: down votes weren't mine.
      - themartorana 12y ago
        This old thing. It is wrong and has always been wrong. Quoth: "Race is a social concept used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. First used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations, in the 17th century, people began to use the term to relate to observable physical (i.e. phenotypical) traits." [0] But more importantly, they are an ethnoreligious group, defined by shared ethnicity and religion. [1] So, not all Jews are Jews, and not all Jews are Jews. But the classification is not always religious. [0] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification) http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification) [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group
      - EpicEng 12y ago
        Please describe the difference between racial and religious discrimination. In practice, how does it differ? It's all the same; some group doesn't like you because of who and what you are.
        12y ago
- smsm42 12y ago
  I share deep concern about police militarization and police brutality. These problems have been raised for years, particularly in the context of War on Drugs, but also in larger context of alienation of population from the government, and were largely ignored by the wide public, happy to be "tough on crime" and laughing at those libertarian idiots with their obviously exaggerated concerns. It is good thing that the topic finally starts to enter the public conscience and that people start to realize there should be strict limits to government power in general and the police power as the most frequently encountered one in particular. I share the sentiment expressed here: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6557 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6557 about the deep problems that exist and I think it's good people start to realize these problems exist. I think also here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/03/framing-for-light-instead-of-heat/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/03/framing-for-light-inste... it outlines some of the problems people need to be aware of when looking for solutions. But when I read recent reports about arson, looting, windows smashed, trash cans overturned and lit on fire, businesses destroyed, police officers assaulted with rocks, explosives and firebombs, millions of damages caused, when I read about "burn that bitch down" - I think maybe this particular instance is not what I want to be part of at all. Maybe associating with this wouldn't do as much to combat either public perception of police needing to be tough or any particular prejudices. And then I read something like this: http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/10/a-college-president-had-to-apologize-for http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/10/a-college-president-had-to... and this https://twitter.com/onekade/status/543202210516303872/photo/1 https://twitter.com/onekade/status/543202210516303872/photo/... and honestly, I don't know what to think.
  - Xeoncross 12y ago
    Every time there is a legitimate concern about a possible current/future problem, it seems something happens to either dismiss - or divide those against it. It's really an interesting phenomenon. Most people believe truth is relative though, so I guess it's not logically surprising that there is no consensus.
    - smsm42 12y ago
      I'm not sure what "the truth is relative" means. Do you claim that some event may have happened or not happened depending on your point of view - I mean, really happened or not happened, not just our knowledge of it could be possibly wrong or incomplete? I'd say "citation needed" on the claim that most people believe in such thing.
5F36B5F62640 12y ago
Garner, from what we know, seems to be a man who did nothing seriously wrong during his encounter with the police. It is quite disturbing that this encounter resulted in his death. It's not even clear that he should have been having an encounter with the police in the first place. We can look at Garner, and see that a great injustice happened to him. Compare to Brown. The police had a very good reason to stop him (walking in the middle of the street, matches description of person who had just robbed a nearby store and assaulted the shop keeper), and he attacked the police officer and tried to take the officer's gun. The only thing it appears that the police officer did wrong was letting Brown approach the car while the officer was inside with his gun still holstered, which allowed Brown into a position to attack. Looking at Brown, we see a man who did something really stupid, and suffered pretty much the same outcome that we'd expect for anyone in that situation. Lumping Garner and Brown together, like these protestors are doing, seems to me to be an insult to the memory of Eric Garner.
- sillysaurus3 12y ago
  he attacked the police officer and tried to take the officer's gun. I wish this single sentence was underscored and repeated every time this issue comes up. Physical evidence confirms this sequence of events: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/24/ferguson-grand-jury-deliberations/19474907/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/24/ferguso... There would not be blood inside the police car if Brown hadn't been reaching into the car. In what scenario was it reasonable for Brown to reach inside the police car? Are people seriously suggesting that Brown was casually leaning into the cruiser, and the officer pulled out his gun and shot him? Why is there blood inside the car if Brown wasn't wrestling for his gun? But, no, we can't let a little thing like evidence and due process stop us. Why people have chosen to make a violent individual who just robbed a store into a martyr is beyond me. That store he robbed has now been looted, by the way.
  - trhway 12y ago
    They all were killed because police had the right and executed it at will, not because it was necessary. That execution being allowed by the law to go unpunished is what infuriates people. If somebody is guilty of minor offense, to use it as an excuse to execute them that is what infuriates. Remember video of Oskar Grant executed in cold blood? Minor excuse - oy! I thought it was taser - allowed to avoid murder charge clearly due there.

schimmy_changa 12y ago

I am not sure why this is being downvoted... People are asking above "What, however, can the man of good will do to combat this deeply rooted prejudice?". One prong of this prejudice is the structure of our justice system, and participating in these marches can help that.

calibraxis 12y ago
It's downvoted because it's currently the most serious and rational post on actually solving oppression. Rather than musing abstractly about some dead white scientist talking about blacks. (While taking a break from making money for investors/bosses.) Speaking of prominent white activist intellectuals, here's Chomsky's view on Einstein: "Compare Russell and Einstein, two leading figures, roughly the same generation. They agreed on the grave dangers facing humanity, but chose different ways to respond. Einstein responded by living a very comfortable life in Princeton and dedicating himself to research that he loved, taking a few moments for an occasional oracular statement. Russell responded by leading demonstrations and getting himself dragged off by the cops, writing extensively on the problems of the day, organizing war crimes trials, etc. The result? Russell was and is reviled and condemned, Einstein is admired as a saint. Should that surprise us? Not at all."
- n72 12y ago
  "some dead white scientist" You do realize Einstein was a Jew who was forced to leave Germany because of Nazism, right?
  - oso2k 12y ago
    Judaism has and always will be a religion and not an ethnicity or race.
    - lostlogin 12y ago
      Many would disagree. I'd call it both. Can you further explain? Probably not the best source: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews Edit: down votes weren't mine.
    - themartorana 12y ago
      This old thing. It is wrong and has always been wrong. Quoth: "Race is a social concept used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. First used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations, in the 17th century, people began to use the term to relate to observable physical (i.e. phenotypical) traits." [0] But more importantly, they are an ethnoreligious group, defined by shared ethnicity and religion. [1] So, not all Jews are Jews, and not all Jews are Jews. But the classification is not always religious. [0] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification) http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification) [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group
    - EpicEng 12y ago
      Please describe the difference between racial and religious discrimination. In practice, how does it differ? It's all the same; some group doesn't like you because of who and what you are.
      - 12y ago
smsm42 12y ago
I share deep concern about police militarization and police brutality. These problems have been raised for years, particularly in the context of War on Drugs, but also in larger context of alienation of population from the government, and were largely ignored by the wide public, happy to be "tough on crime" and laughing at those libertarian idiots with their obviously exaggerated concerns. It is good thing that the topic finally starts to enter the public conscience and that people start to realize there should be strict limits to government power in general and the police power as the most frequently encountered one in particular. I share the sentiment expressed here: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6557 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6557 about the deep problems that exist and I think it's good people start to realize these problems exist. I think also here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/03/framing-for-light-instead-of-heat/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/03/framing-for-light-inste... it outlines some of the problems people need to be aware of when looking for solutions. But when I read recent reports about arson, looting, windows smashed, trash cans overturned and lit on fire, businesses destroyed, police officers assaulted with rocks, explosives and firebombs, millions of damages caused, when I read about "burn that bitch down" - I think maybe this particular instance is not what I want to be part of at all. Maybe associating with this wouldn't do as much to combat either public perception of police needing to be tough or any particular prejudices. And then I read something like this: http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/10/a-college-president-had-to-apologize-for http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/10/a-college-president-had-to... and this https://twitter.com/onekade/status/543202210516303872/photo/1 https://twitter.com/onekade/status/543202210516303872/photo/... and honestly, I don't know what to think.
- Xeoncross 12y ago
  Every time there is a legitimate concern about a possible current/future problem, it seems something happens to either dismiss - or divide those against it. It's really an interesting phenomenon. Most people believe truth is relative though, so I guess it's not logically surprising that there is no consensus.
  - smsm42 12y ago
    I'm not sure what "the truth is relative" means. Do you claim that some event may have happened or not happened depending on your point of view - I mean, really happened or not happened, not just our knowledge of it could be possibly wrong or incomplete? I'd say "citation needed" on the claim that most people believe in such thing.

5F36B5F62640 12y ago

Garner, from what we know, seems to be a man who did nothing seriously wrong during his encounter with the police. It is quite disturbing that this encounter resulted in his death. It's not even clear that he should have been having an encounter with the police in the first place. We can look at Garner, and see that a great injustice happened to him. Compare to Brown. The police had a very good reason to stop him (walking in the middle of the street, matches description of person who had just robbed a nearby store and assaulted the shop keeper), and he attacked the police officer and tried to take the officer's gun. The only thing it appears that the police officer did wrong was letting Brown approach the car while the officer was inside with his gun still holstered, which allowed Brown into a position to attack. Looking at Brown, we see a man who did something really stupid, and suffered pretty much the same outcome that we'd expect for anyone in that situation. Lumping Garner and Brown together, like these protestors are doing, seems to me to be an insult to the memory of Eric Garner.

sillysaurus3 12y ago
he attacked the police officer and tried to take the officer's gun. I wish this single sentence was underscored and repeated every time this issue comes up. Physical evidence confirms this sequence of events: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/24/ferguson-grand-jury-deliberations/19474907/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/24/ferguso... There would not be blood inside the police car if Brown hadn't been reaching into the car. In what scenario was it reasonable for Brown to reach inside the police car? Are people seriously suggesting that Brown was casually leaning into the cruiser, and the officer pulled out his gun and shot him? Why is there blood inside the car if Brown wasn't wrestling for his gun? But, no, we can't let a little thing like evidence and due process stop us. Why people have chosen to make a violent individual who just robbed a store into a martyr is beyond me. That store he robbed has now been looted, by the way.
- trhway 12y ago
  They all were killed because police had the right and executed it at will, not because it was necessary. That execution being allowed by the law to go unpunished is what infuriates people. If somebody is guilty of minor offense, to use it as an excuse to execute them that is what infuriates. Remember video of Oskar Grant executed in cold blood? Minor excuse - oy! I thought it was taser - allowed to avoid murder charge clearly due there.