US riots

[vardar]

Racism no longer holds them down, the effects of racism certainly have. There’s a difference.

Man I've read a lot of dumb things on this site, but this has got to be the dumbest thing yet. Bravo

Tell my why it is instead of saying “it just is.”

Headaches after headaches.

[fightinfrenchman]

Blacks do not get arrested because of the color of their skin nor does anyone now.

Wow you outdid yourself in the dumbest post rankings already. Incredible!

[vardar]

Yes keep them coming. You are really arguing your case.

And I did not say the right words. A very small percentage do now. It is not institutionalized racism

[vardar]

Cmon man. You read and you reply by saying:

“No”

“That’s false”

“That’s wrong”

“You are bad at this”

[fightinfrenchman]

Cmon man. You read and you reply by saying:

“No”

“That’s false”

“That’s wrong”

“You are bad at this”

Cmon man. You read and you reply by saying:

"Institultional racism doesn't exist"

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[vardar]

The Nazis made the media to be the enemy of the people by the way. Just like Trump. "the media is the enemy in covering police only when they fuck up" well no shit, that is what journalism is supposed to be?

Am I retarded?

Dude. You are saying you don’t trust the police at all because of these instances. You are making such broad generalizations because of a tiny fraction of police mistakes. Think about what I say. I agreed media should cover them but not then act like the whole police force is messed up like you do and you shouldn’t even call them

[princeofcarthage]

1) You can have peaceful protests. But at this point they have devolved into (). It is hard to distinguish who is a peaceful protester and who is not. As a consequence of protests turning violent and practical inability to distinguish one from another in it is necessary to shut down until such time where peaceful protests can be held again.

So your claim is that once protests move from a peaceful state to a mix of peaceful protests and rioting, the only way to move them back to a peaceful state is to violently suppress all protests until no more of them happen, and then to allow peaceful protesting again?

Well for one there is no generalized approach, in this case however yes. Police resources are spread too thin. As evident by past couple days police only arrive at business after its looted. It is practically impossible for them to defend public property unless: 1) Protests are in a limited area. 2) They are completely quelled. Police are unable to limit protesters currently to small areas and as such there is no option other than to quell them. Ofc there is the 3rd alternative of letting the country burn if that is what you want.

On earlier post, you are making a bad faith argument if you are saying "you said 5 there are 6". Its useless nitpicking. HK protests are going for over a year now. They have been largely peaceful with extremely limited amount of (). Pointing to some random stone pelting or couple times when police fired tear gasses to disperse people to avoid a situation potentially turning dangerous isn't violence.

[vardar]

Rosa Parks deserved to be arrested, now that I think of it.

So stupid. She had to sit in the back because of the color of her skin. That was the premise of the law and blatant racism. Blacks do not get arrested because of the color of their skin nor does anyone now. To discern these differences in law is a challenge to you and FightingFacism.

are you for real?

do you know what gerrymandering and voter suppression is? you honestly, sincerely believe that racism is still not present in our institutions? have you SEEN the elected politicians? the president? this discussion ends here then, because the foundation of it crumbled when we could not agree to a simple truth

Examples of voter suppression please.

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

Rosa Parks deserved to be arrested, now that I think of it.

So stupid. She had to sit in the back because of the color of her skin. That was the premise of the law and blatant racism. Blacks do not get arrested because of the color of their skin nor does anyone now. To discern these differences in law is a challenge to you and FightingFacism.

are you for real?

do you know what gerrymandering and voter suppression is? you honestly, sincerely believe that racism is still not present in our institutions? have you SEEN the elected politicians? the president? this discussion ends here then, because the foundation of it crumbled when we could not agree to a simple truth

Examples of voter suppression please.

I give up, you are just insanely dumb and awful.

[vardar]

There is racism but it is not institutionalized. I see racism in Iowa and call it out. My closest friends are the two Kenyans I live with and I will never stand people treating them like that. But your claims are out of proportion and think we need a new revolution and I say that is not right.

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[wardyb1]

Show hidden quotes

Rosa Parks deserved to be arrested, now that I think of it.

So stupid. She had to sit in the back because of the color of her skin. That was the premise of the law and blatant racism. Blacks do not get arrested because of the color of their skin nor does anyone now. To discern these differences in law is a challenge to you and FightingFacism.

are you for real?

do you know what gerrymandering and voter suppression is? you honestly, sincerely believe that racism is still not present in our institutions? have you SEEN the elected politicians? the president? this discussion ends here then, because the foundation of it crumbled when we could not agree to a simple truth

Examples of voter suppression please.

https://www.aclu.org/facts-about-voter-suppressionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_sup ... %80%932018https://www.votingrightsalliance.org/fo ... uppressionhttps://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/65978427 ... alist-says
That was a really tough google search

[vardar]

Show hidden quotes

Rosa Parks deserved to be arrested, now that I think of it.

So stupid. She had to sit in the back because of the color of her skin. That was the premise of the law and blatant racism. Blacks do not get arrested because of the color of their skin nor does anyone now. To discern these differences in law is a challenge to you and FightingFacism.

are you for real?

do you know what gerrymandering and voter suppression is? you honestly, sincerely believe that racism is still not present in our institutions? have you SEEN the elected politicians? the president? this discussion ends here then, because the foundation of it crumbled when we could not agree to a simple truth

Examples of voter suppression please.

I give up, you are just insanely dumb and awful.

Incog may get fired up but at least he has points and debates using his own thoughts

You’re a hype man at most but give nothing original.

[wardyb1]

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research- ... sentencing
Also if you wondered what institutional racism looks like. Check this out. Absolutely no explanation for it.

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

Rosa Parks deserved to be arrested, now that I think of it.

So stupid. She had to sit in the back because of the color of her skin. That was the premise of the law and blatant racism. Blacks do not get arrested because of the color of their skin nor does anyone now. To discern these differences in law is a challenge to you and FightingFacism.

are you for real?

do you know what gerrymandering and voter suppression is? you honestly, sincerely believe that racism is still not present in our institutions? have you SEEN the elected politicians? the president? this discussion ends here then, because the foundation of it crumbled when we could not agree to a simple truth

Examples of voter suppression please.

I give up, you are just insanely dumb and awful.

Incog may get fired up but at least he has points and debates using his own thoughts

You’re a hype man at most but give nothing original.

As opposed to the very original points you've given, that institutional racism and voter suppression don't exist.

[vardar]

How is stricter ID voter suppression? It’s to make sure you are a lawful citizen, as far as I’m aware. I wanted you to explain to and give examples to me on how voter suppression is specifically racist.

[fightinfrenchman]

How is stricter ID voter suppression? It’s to make sure you are a lawful citizen, as far as I’m aware. I wanted you to explain to and give examples to me on how voter suppression is specifically racist.

The moon isn't real, it's just the back of the sun.

If you don't spend time debating this point you are tacitly acknowledging that I'm right

[wardyb1]

How is stricter ID voter suppression? It’s to make sure you are a lawful citizen, as far as I’m aware. I wanted you to explain to and give examples to me on how voter suppression is specifically racist.

https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter ... fact-sheet
Here's a full read, but essentially they disproportionally affect African Americans.
Also you say it is to check you are a lawful citizen. Yet plenty of other countries around the world seem to do just fine without it. Here is Aus, you don't need it at all. You simply walk up, state your name, they ask for your address and you state it. They mark you off, and then after all is said and done, they go through the rolls and make sure no one was checked off twice.

[vardar]

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research- ... sentencing
Also if you wondered what institutional racism looks like. Check this out. Absolutely no explanation for it.

Read the highlights. Will read full report tomorrow. Don’t think what I said was fully true, considering this. Thanks. Wrote that in haste and in the moment, will admit. But some of which I say still stands true. Such as with wealth disparity and education disparity playing a very big role rather than institutional racism, outside of the criminal justice system.

[princeofcarthage]

can we rename this topic to US Riots May 2020 or something as it is no longer limited to minneapolis @Goodspeed

[vardar]

How is stricter ID voter suppression? It’s to make sure you are a lawful citizen, as far as I’m aware. I wanted you to explain to and give examples to me on how voter suppression is specifically racist.

https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter ... fact-sheet
Here's a full read, but essentially they disproportionally affect African Americans.
Also you say it is to check you are a lawful citizen. Yet plenty of other countries around the world seem to do just fine without it. Here is Aus, you don't need it at all. You simply walk up, state your name, they ask for your address and you state it. They mark you off, and then after all is said and done, they go through the rolls and make sure no one was checked off twice.

ID’s that prove US citizenship should honestly be mandatory. Because voting is a right of the citizen. That’s not racist inherently, but could be used to do that, fair. But, again, I think the fact that many minorities don’t have access to that is a wealth disparity problem. They should be allowed to get free access to some sort of ID. I would really not want that policy to be used for racial discrimination.

[Vinyanyérë]

Well for one there is no generalized approach, in this case however yes. Police resources are spread too thin. As evident by past couple days police only arrive at business after its looted. It is practically impossible for them to defend public property unless: 1) Protests are in a limited area. 2) They are completely quelled. Police are unable to limit protesters currently to small areas and as such there is no option other than to quell them. Ofc there is the 3rd alternative of letting the country if that is what you want.

In this case you would need to prove that (using the word "riot" here to denote violent acts by citizens and "protest" to denote nonviolent ones):

1. Acquiescing to demands by protesters would not reduce or eliminate the riots
2. Violently suppressing riots and protests won't have the reverse effect of emboldening both
3. It isn't possible to violently suppress only the riots and not the protests

Of course, this assumes that suppressing both wouldn't cause greater harm (both in terms of property and loss of life) than other measures, and assumes that rioting isn't an inevitable consequence of any sufficiently large protest (a position that I reject).

On earlier post, you are making a bad faith argument if you are saying "you said 5 there are 6". Its useless nitpicking. HK protests are going for over a year now. They have been largely peaceful with extremely limited amount of (). Pointing to some random stone pelting or couple times when police fired tear gasses to disperse people to avoid a situation potentially turning dangerous isn't violence.

I was hoping that it would be evident that my identifying more than five instances of violence by HK protesters was not meant to be an exhaustive list of instances of violence. The point was to show that it was possible to identify large numbers of specific instances of violence by HK protesters with a minimal amount of effort. Is your claim even falsifiable? How many instances of violence would be sufficient for you? Please don't accuse me of making bad faith arguments.

Pointing to some random stone pelting or couple times when police fired tear gasses to disperse people to avoid a situation potentially turning dangerous isn't violence.

Wait, let's take a closer look at this. Do you consider throwing stones at people and police firing tear gas at people to not be violent acts?

[fightinfrenchman]

Vardar refuses to engage with my moon/sun argument; clearly he has no legitimate points against it. Why is he covering up for the people spreading the evil lie that the moon and sun are different? What a troll

[vardar]

I’m ignoring you because debating you does nothing for me. It’s me stating my opinions you saying “that’s wrong.”

Wardy posted and actually made me realize what I said was very dumb and not concise.