Moderator: Community Team
mrswdk wrote:tbf Little Britain wasn't even funny at the time
The ram wrote:mrswdk wrote:tbf Little Britain wasn't even funny at the time
Aye true, they should have had a character called Shimmy the incel. He could have been an internet troll that masquerades as a female and constantly praises China, even though it's quite apparent that he doesn't fit in there, or anywhere for that matter. Actually that character would be thoroughly boring.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Jdsizzleslice wrote:let's come together and see how we can better a society
London rioter wrote:I’ll always remember the day that we had the police and the government scared. For once they were living on the edge, they like felt how we felt. They felt threatened by us. That was the best three days of my life.
mrswdk wrote:Jdsizzleslice wrote:let's come together and see how we can better a society
Think you'll find the people who go out burning things down have already tried the peaceful approach and found it got them nowhere.
mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Jdsizzleslice wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Maybe in communist China, where if you aren't in favor of the government, and speak out about your disapproval, you get thrown off of buildings and BRUTALLY MURDERED.
mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Dukasaur wrote:Jdsizzleslice wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Maybe in communist China, where if you aren't in favor of the government, and speak out about your disapproval, you get thrown off of buildings and BRUTALLY MURDERED.
Is this relevant? One of the first moral lessons I learned in school is that "the other kids are doing it" is not a defense.
Yes, there are vicious dictatorships out there are incredibly cruel to their people. Does that mean we should be?
I try to measure myself against those who are better than me and rise to their level; not congratulate myself because others are worse. So should nations. We should ask, "how can we become more like Denmark?" and not say, "hey, at least we're better than China!"
saxitoxin wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Agree with mrswdk. We can outlast and ignore most peaceful and lawful protests. But tumult eventually forces our hand or our destruction.
This is why protests seeking systemic change should be met with overwhelming and absolute force by those invested in the system. The system can't facilitate its own destruction, this goes against the iron laws of nature. (Though protests merely seeking a redress of grievances can be met with negotiation and compromise.)
Jdsizzleslice wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Jdsizzleslice wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Maybe in communist China, where if you aren't in favor of the government, and speak out about your disapproval, you get thrown off of buildings and BRUTALLY MURDERED.
Is this relevant? One of the first moral lessons I learned in school is that "the other kids are doing it" is not a defense.
Yes, there are vicious dictatorships out there are incredibly cruel to their people. Does that mean we should be?
I try to measure myself against those who are better than me and rise to their level; not congratulate myself because others are worse. So should nations. We should ask, "how can we become more like Denmark?" and not say, "hey, at least we're better than China!"
I disagree that the US is cruel to it's people. Every society has bad people, but this doesn't mean that a nation is inherently cruel to it's people just because an extreme fringe are truly horrible people. The US is the most free nation that has ever existed, and people have the choice to become whatever they want to be. The US in large part doesn't do things because other people are doing it. Other countries do things because we do them first.
And become more like Denmark? Denmark is an extremely socialist nation, with a relatively small population (just under 6M people) that is ethnically almost all the same (85% Caucasian), with a 55% (sometimes higher in certain jurisdictions) tax rate. Thanks, but I'll pass.saxitoxin wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Agree with mrswdk. We can outlast and ignore most peaceful and lawful protests. But tumult eventually forces our hand or our destruction.
This is why protests seeking systemic change should be met with overwhelming and absolute force by those invested in the system. The system can't facilitate its own destruction, this goes against the iron laws of nature. (Though protests merely seeking a redress of grievances can be met with negotiation and compromise.)
Literally protest and reform are how we have changed as a country since it's inception in 1776... via Amendments to the Constitution...
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Jdsizzleslice wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Maybe in communist China, where if you aren't in favor of the government, and speak out about your disapproval, you get thrown off of buildings and BRUTALLY MURDERED.
saxitoxin wrote:mrswdk wrote:The point being that peaceful and lawful protests do not achieve meaningful change.
Agree with mrswdk. We can outlast and ignore most peaceful and lawful protests. But tumult eventually forces our hand or our destruction.
This is why protests seeking systemic change should be met with overwhelming and absolute force by those invested in the system. The system can't facilitate its own destruction, this goes against the iron laws of nature. (Though protests merely seeking a redress of grievances can be met with negotiation and compromise.)
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
Jdsizzleslice wrote:The US is the most free nation that has ever existed
Jdsizzleslice wrote:
Do I agree with the movement "Black Lives Matter?" No.
They advocate that there is systemic racism in the United States (and in other countries as well). Systemic racism doesn't exist in the United States (and for that matter, basically most Western-style countries), because individuals are free to make choices as to how they want their life to be shaped.
jimboston wrote:Jdsizzleslice wrote:
Do I agree with the movement "Black Lives Matter?" No.
They advocate that there is systemic racism in the United States (and in other countries as well). Systemic racism doesn't exist in the United States (and for that matter, basically most Western-style countries), because individuals are free to make choices as to how they want their life to be shaped.
Maybe you don’t wanna call it systemic racism... fine.
There absolutely is systemic bias.
You can’t debate it. Math is math, facts are facts.
You can debate the CAUSE(S) of this systemic bias.... but you can’t debate its’ existence.
... of course if you wanna put all the blame for the causes on “individual choices” or “the black community” or “lack of black family values”... well that’s just ignorant. I might agree there are contributing or multiplying factors... or I might say some of those things are themselves symptoms and not causes... but if those do not encompass the full picture.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=241668&start=200#p5349880
Jdsizzleslice wrote:jimboston wrote:Jdsizzleslice wrote:
Do I agree with the movement "Black Lives Matter?" No.
They advocate that there is systemic racism in the United States (and in other countries as well). Systemic racism doesn't exist in the United States (and for that matter, basically most Western-style countries), because individuals are free to make choices as to how they want their life to be shaped.
Maybe you don’t wanna call it systemic racism... fine.
There absolutely is systemic bias.
You can’t debate it. Math is math, facts are facts.
You can debate the CAUSE(S) of this systemic bias.... but you can’t debate its’ existence.
... of course if you wanna put all the blame for the causes on “individual choices” or “the black community” or “lack of black family values”... well that’s just ignorant. I might agree there are contributing or multiplying factors... or I might say some of those things are themselves symptoms and not causes... but if those do not encompass the full picture.
Absolutely incorrect. There is no systemic racist bias. Are you suggesting there is only a systemic bias against black people? What about the many other ethnicity groups that are in the US?
What about the fact that black people commit more violent crimes, and therefore have more violent encounters with law enforcement?
What about the fact that close to 70% of black children are raised by single parents, and don't have the support of both a mother and father to help teach them the difference between wrong and right?
What about the fact that in a majority all of the cities that have large violent crime percentages, 30% to 50% of the population is black?
What about the fact that a majority of these violent crimes are committed in cities that are essentially have all Democrat control in every aspect of politics, and have been for decades (Chicago, New York, Detroit, Baltimore, Los Angeles, etc.)?
There is no systemic bias if nearly half of the violent crime is committed by an ethnicity that makes up only 10% to 15% of the population. These percentages come directly from the US Census and the FBI Crime Report statistics. Political breakdown of the largest cities is public knowledge.
We can agree that there needs to be police reform, to some degree. However, to claim that there is a systemic bias for or against any single ethnicity is factually untrue. Personal responsibility is how you either progress or regress as an individual. It saddens me to see such a high percentage of a community that lack a normal family structure. Families need fathers in the home. If fathers leave their homes or do not help raise their children, they contribute to the regression of society, as depicted in the above questions.
Together, let's work to change the US culture as a whole, for all ethnicities, and promote a healthy upbringing for children by advocating that fathers and mothers NEED to help raise their children to better society. The breakdown in the family will become the breakdown of a society.
Dukasaur wrote: That was the night I broke into St. Mike's Cathedral and shat on the Archibishop's desk
mookiemcgee wrote:I was more or less with you on the first post but I'm not really with you on this one. While I don't think those who say their is systematic racial bias in the USA have an easy case to make, there are at least some concrete examples of systemic racial bias. The main one I see pointed to most often is 'redlining'. Do you believe redlining is fake news, or what's your position on that subject?
mookiemcgee wrote:"What about the fact that black people commit more violent crimes, and therefore have more violent encounters with law enforcement?" This is a chicken and egg argument imo. Both sides will point to the 'over' incarceration of African Americans in their arguments, and both would see the reasons for this differently. Areas that have alot of police presence will discover more crime than areas where there is a lax/loose policing.
mookiemcgee wrote:If your premise here is blacks are more predisposed to commit crimes, then I'm sure you can point to some statistics from 'majority black wealthy neighborhoods' having really high crime rates compared to wealthy white neighborhoods in the same zip but the stats don't support that. Areas like Ladera Heights, have similar (or lower) crimes rates to 'the rest' of Beverly Hills. The real trigger to crime is poverty, not race. There are some very strong arguments that are worth considering about how African Americans have for generations had a harder time escaping poverty (here is where things circle back to redlining and policies like it)
mookiemcgee wrote:"What about the fact that close to 70% of black children are raised by single parents, and don't have the support of both a mother and father to help teach them the difference between wrong and right?"
The African American community would point to this and say they are raised by single parents because the dad is in jail, maybe for something incredibly minor and getting 10 years because of mandatory minimums which have disproportionately affected them as a minority community.(Again in their minds and example of systemic racism in both policing and in society/banking/gov't.)
mookiemcgee wrote:I'm not saying all the AA community arguments are rock solid, and I'm not saying any of your arguments are dead wrong... but you are a reasonable and intelligent person and you should at least consider that the very high incarceration rates of AA people isn't solely because they are commit more crimes but rather that they are arrested/prosecuted more frequently for the same behaviors that wealthy folks aren't. The answer falls somewhere in between, where maybe there is more crime in their neighborhood because of poverty but the police in some cases do consciously or unconsciously make that very association that blacks are more likely to commit crimes or hate the police or whatever and therefore treat them more harshly than they might a white kid in the suburbs. I digress a bit here, because I sort of see all of this as a big missed opportunity with what going on. Instead of saying pov't begets crime, and blacks have been stuck in a pov't loophole, this whole thing has turned into cops are bad, and cops and blacks hate each other... which is both unproductive and frankly bad for all Americans (blacks,cops,75 year old white antifa protesters)
mookiemcgee wrote:On a tangent of sharing my own opinion, I'm pretty solidly against the federal gov't doing much of anything about all of this. Policing isn't (for the most part) and shouldn't be (Imo) a federal issue. I think qualified immunity is one of the few things that could have my support if they wanted to take a look at this at the federal level, but most policing issues are local/state issues that require local/state solutions. Personally I don't really support the national registry idea for cops with complaints about them, though I think that is going to be the first thing that gets passed in regards to all this.
Users browsing this forum: mookiemcgee