Recent Political Violence in America

[Karha of Honor]

Of course not. I'm not denying that some people (cough-Dick Cheney-cough) wanted war.

What I am saying is that terrorism gave them a pretext to gain public support for things they otherwise could not have. Because we the people, for the most part, reacted like frightened herd animals.

I could see it happenning regardless.

[The Romulan Republic]

The danger of that sort of thinking: "The elites are plotting, and they'll do what they do regardless of circumstances" is that it feeds peoples' feelings of powerlessness, and encourages them towards either apathy or extremism in the belief that any attempt to actually influence the course of events is pointless. It pretends that events are predestined as the result of some master plan, ignoring the realities of cause and effect.

[Karha of Honor]

The danger of that sort of thinking: "The elites are plotting, and they'll do what they do regardless of circumstances" is that it feeds peoples' feelings of powerlessness, and encourages them towards either apathy or extremism in the belief that any attempt to actually influence the course of events is pointless. It pretends that events are predestined as the result of some master plan, ignoring the realities of cause and effect.

I always felt that the political trends will go toward where we are minus for the fact taht i did not expect someone as inconsistent as Trump to bed the burn the establishment president.

[The Romulan Republic]

Certainly, trends do tend to gain momentum and build to a point where they are difficult to reverse. But at the same time, their are points in history where events could have gone either way, and an unexpected cataclysm or a particularly charismatic individual can shift the direction somewhat.

Like, suppose, hypothetically, Joe Biden's son had not died of cancer, and Biden had felt up to running for President. That could have played out a number of ways.

He might have won and, without Hillary's baggage, gone on to win the election.

It might have split the Democratic establishment vote, allowing Bernie Sanders to take the nomination.

And so on.

Edit: I think that the trick, in part, is seeing the larger trends coming while they're still getting started and heading them off early. However, for the general public to do that would require a level of historical awareness most people lack.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

No, I'm not saying that the two are equivalent, and if I gave that impression, I apologize.

But I'm talking about public perception here. It is very important that the Left not come to be seen as aggressors, or equally guilty, by the mainstream of America.

Its not about winning over the Nazis, Rocketboy1313. Its about the majority who are neither Nazis or Antifa.

And I do recognize that sometimes force is necessary (though not nearly as often as its advocates tend to claim). But I would prefer, whenever possible, that that force be strictly defensive, or at least in the hands of trained professionals, rather than in the hands of militias and vigilantes. For reasons both moral and pragmatic.

And, for reasons both moral and pragmatic, it can't just be left in the hands of trained professionals, because the trained professionals who use force in this country are largely content to defend the status quo.
Sometimes they will attack peaceful protestors who want social progress. Sometimes they will defend Nazis. Sometimes they just stand back and let it all happen.

The lesson of history is that, when fascism rises in power, you can't trust the police to have your back.

[Darth Wedgius]

The lesson of history is that, when fascism rises in power, you can't trust the police to have your back.

That's the problem with "the." Well, that's a problem with "the". History has more than one lesson for us, if we are attentive enough. There have been many movements on the left responsible for millions of deaths, and the police helped carry many an innocent victim to the grave on their behalf.

So antifa or BLM, both of which have a history of being on the left and which have been tied to violence or calls for it, are also targets, except saving the political biases of those doing the targeting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... paign=1490

Is it time for us all to grab our bats and just go at it? Or is that a privilege only for the left, who are, after all, blessed with destiny, being on "the right side of history" and all that?

Your moral certitude, your clarity of purpose as you decide who gets to bash whom into silence, is truly a force to behold. No worries. I'll just sit quietly while those who insist they are on the side of tolerance beat down those who are not. Could you make it quick and painless? I know I don't deserve it, after all, even though objective reason supports neither of us.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Alright. There are many different lessons of history.

I still maintain the problem is that police forces have a recurring pattern of doing fuckall to confront white supremecists, and sometimes actively aiding them.

Black Lives Matter is LITERALLY a movement built upon a group of people who can be murdered with impunity, whom the police are still regularly murdering with zero consequences. If you're going to paint Black Lives Matter as violent and dangerous, then there's very little chance I can have meaningful discourse with you.

[Antiboyscout]

The lesson of history is that, when fascism rises in power, you can't trust the police to have your back.

I'm sorry what? Where on earth do you get this "lesson" from. Do you recall Hitler's first attempted uprising? The Beer Hall Putsch? The one put down by the German police?

It wasn't until organizations like the SA and the SS started replacing all the officers with loyal group members that you could say the police became another arm of the Nazis.

This is not possible in the US with our decentralized police system. The mayor selects the chief of police. The chief of police hires the cops. If you don't like what the police are doing, don't look to the president, look to the mayor.

[Karha of Honor]

Alright. There are many different lessons of history.

I still maintain the problem is that police forces have a recurring pattern of doing fuckall to confront white supremecists, and sometimes actively aiding them.

Black Lives Matter is LITERALLY a movement built upon a group of people who can be murdered with impunity, whom the police are still regularly murdering with zero consequences. If you're going to paint Black Lives Matter as violent and dangerous, then there's very little chance I can have meaningful discourse with you.

Impunity? There is is no internal affairs? There were no inquiries multiple times this year?

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

And did it lead to any productive results? Any consequences?
We had a cop strangle a man to death, on camera, but that wasn't enough evidence to prove that he strangled a man to death. For that story, there are so many more like it.