Protestors storm capital




JimLes

Well-Known Member
Yes, one group had a way better reason to protest (a reason I stand by) but I'll be damned if I'd ever condone arson, looting, destruction and some of the **** show we saw. Some people have a hard time condemning it because they believe in the reason for the protest.

I don't know what kind of fantasy world you live in, but peaceful change doesn't usually happen because those in power generally don't want to agree to change out of the goodness of their hearts. I mean, you wouldn't condone arson, looting, destruction. How the **** do you think your country was created? Boston Tea Party involved the destruction of almost 2 millions dollars(in today's money) worth of private property.

Oh, but you stand by the reason, right? You agree with need racial justice? You just want to see it happen without anything unpleasant. And if it doesn't happen, what then? At which point is it okay to engage in violence, and how in the world do you figure that point hasn't been reached in the US?

Non-violent resistance is nice optics, but it hides an uglier reality. Dire Straits playing for Mandela and US college kids carrying placards saying "Divest from South Africa" looks nice on TV, but it was the deteriorating security situation that made the regime realize they needed to end Apartheid. That meant violence and destruction, else South Africa might still be minority ruled.

If you really, really believe that a cause is morally right, then you should support things a lot worse than looting in order to see it succeed. And perhaps not make moral equivalencies of the "there were good people on both sides" variety.
 

cowhide

Well-Known Member
I don't know what kind of fantasy world you live in, but peaceful change doesn't usually happen because those in power generally don't want to agree to change out of the goodness of their hearts. I mean, you wouldn't condone arson, looting, destruction. How the **** do you think your country was created? Boston Tea Party involved the destruction of almost 2 millions dollars(in today's money) worth of private property.

Oh, but you stand by the reason, right? You agree with need racial justice? You just want to see it happen without anything unpleasant. And if it doesn't happen, what then? At which point is it okay to engage in violence, and how in the world do you figure that point hasn't been reached in the US?

Non-violent resistance is nice optics, but it hides an uglier reality. Dire Straits playing for Mandela and US college kids carrying placards saying "Divest from South Africa" looks nice on TV, but it was the deteriorating security situation that made the regime realize they needed to end Apartheid. That meant violence and destruction, else South Africa might still be minority ruled.

If you really, really believe that a cause is morally right, then you should support things a lot worse than looting in order to see it succeed. And perhaps not make moral equivalencies of the "there were good people on both sides" variety.
Another point is that much of the violence during the BLM protests included pro-right groups coming in and stirring up trouble. What the right doesn't understand is there would be no need for BLM protest if they just afforded black people the same rights under the Constitution. Many GOP supporters only believe that constitutional right are for them. Any rights blacks have earned in the US has been through getting the crap beat out of them, murder, rape, vandalism, threats, burning crosses etc. The reality is a majority of GOP white people only believe the rights of the Constitution are meant for them. Blacks and other minorities who are citizens should have the same rights so whining about some vandalism and looting seems ridiculous especially after they have defended the traitors who attack the Capital.
 

leftyjace

Well-Known Member
I don't know what kind of fantasy world you live in, but peaceful change doesn't usually happen because those in power generally don't want to agree to change out of the goodness of their hearts. I mean, you wouldn't condone arson, looting, destruction. How the **** do you think your country was created? Boston Tea Party involved the destruction of almost 2 millions dollars(in today's money) worth of private property.

Oh, but you stand by the reason, right? You agree with need racial justice? You just want to see it happen without anything unpleasant. And if it doesn't happen, what then? At which point is it okay to engage in violence, and how in the world do you figure that point hasn't been reached in the US?

Non-violent resistance is nice optics, but it hides an uglier reality. Dire Straits playing for Mandela and US college kids carrying placards saying "Divest from South Africa" looks nice on TV, but it was the deteriorating security situation that made the regime realize they needed to end Apartheid. That meant violence and destruction, else South Africa might still be minority ruled.

If you really, really believe that a cause is morally right, then you should support things a lot worse than looting in order to see it succeed. And perhaps not make moral equivalencies of the "there were good people on both sides" variety.
You have heard of Martin Luther King and all he did to advance civil rights, yes?
Just saying.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
As powerful and important as his non-violent approach was, it was helped a lot by having Malcolm X in the movement as well. Allies were able to say "If you don't work with King, you'll have to deal with Malcolm."
At that, Malcom X only supported violence for self-defense, IIRC.
 

Lord Bullingdon

Well-Known Member
the police department is the biggest gang/organized crime operation in america, convince me otherwise...


for them its a matter of 'professional courtesy'
 

candrew

Well-Known Member
My favorite detail of this story is it's being said there was like 30 off duty cops involved....

flashing their badges...

There were many, many retired state and federal employees, including the retired, cops, firemen and military.

I'm gonna guess they all managed to sign their very generous pension checks that they get every month from the evil, lying government that they're looking to overthrow.
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
I'm reluctant to ask him if he knows this hijacked meaning. I'm afraid of what his answer would be, and I would prefer to continue liking him.

I agree with much of what you wrote above, except that you were only talking about the peaceful protesters in the Capitol riot and the non-peaceful ones in the racial riots. Not exactly a fair comparison. Both groups had people who believed in their cause, and both groups had some who took advantage of the situation to destroy. But only one of those groups of non-violent protestors had truth on their side.
Writing non-violent at the first part of my post was supposed to be violent. I'm not sure why I wrote non-violent. I was trying to compare both actions on each different protests as the same.

Thanks.
 

Archie Moses

Well-Known Member
I'm 95% in agreement. The main difference being that part of the reason the summer protests escalated (the initial protests were completely peaceful) was a response to police escalation, while the Capital protest was violent without police escalation.
I think the police escalated the protests in some places and sometimes, but certainly not always.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
Both sides are the same. Right?

The Republican Party has some folks who might make better democrats. No one knows why they are Republicans, except perhaps they like to pretend to be what they aren't.

I've been in here saing Mitch McConnel and his wife are not fit for pub lic office because of their financial ties to Chinese military interests, and saying also that a lot of specific dems are not either, for the same reasons.

I remember when our leaders opened up their loving arms to the Chinese mainland. I have connections with several Taiwanese or Nationalist sources, and was not overly impressed with the wisdom of all that China commie love.

But we were told they would change if we loved them, and would become great civil and bus;iness partners. But it has sorta gone the other way. As late as a few years ago, people like Maurice Strong still believed we could manage them with favors and incentives and some banking measures, but it has become fairly clear it's going the other way. They are managing us with favors and outright payola to our key leadership and our business leaders, while compromising every advantage we ever had.

Our politicians are so bought up we have no one who will stand up for our human rights.
 

Eenie-Meenie

Well-Known Member
Another point is that much of the violence during the BLM protests included pro-right groups coming in and stirring up trouble. What the right doesn't understand is there would be no need for BLM protest if they just afforded black people the same rights under the Constitution. Many GOP supporters only believe that constitutional right are for them. Any rights blacks have earned in the US has been through getting the crap beat out of them, murder, rape, vandalism, threats, burning crosses etc. The reality is a majority of GOP white people only believe the rights of the Constitution are meant for them. Blacks and other minorities who are citizens should have the same rights so whining about some vandalism and looting seems ridiculous especially after they have defended the traitors who attack the Capital.
Great post!
 

babe

Well-Known Member
The Republican Party has some folks who might make better democrats. No one knows why they are Republicans, except perhaps they like to pretend to be what they aren't.

I've been in here saing Mitch McConnel and his wife are not fit for pub lic office because of their financial ties to Chinese military interests, and saying also that a lot of specific dems are not either, for the same reasons.

I remember when our leaders opened up their loving arms to the Chinese mainland. I have connections with several Taiwanese or Nationalist sources, and was not overly impressed with the wisdom of all that China commie love.

But we were told they would change if we loved them, and would become great civil and bus;iness partners. But it has sorta gone the other way. As late as a few years ago, people like Maurice Strong still believed we could manage them with favors and incentives and some banking measures, but it has become fairly clear it's going the other way. They are managing us with favors and outright payola to our key leadership and our business leaders, while compromising every advantage we ever had.

Our politicians are so bought up we have no one who will stand up for our human rights.

I really think all the bloviating you guys are doing is ridiculous.

It's standard political manipulation of every crisis. The dems had a war game planned whichever way the election went. If Trump won after all, it would be civil unrest and burning cities and BLM and others storming the Capito.

You should know that a few agitators can suck up some fools outta any crowd or cause and guide them into stupid acts that can b e made out as insurrection or whatever.

Evidence is mounting that no one who was at the Trump speech actually made it to the capitol before the breach, that the security was told to stand back except for some few sites set up for cameras, for the news so to speak. Some of the agitators were at the speech, and seen to leave before the speech was over, saying to one another, "It's time to go."

So the whole thing was planned, in advance. The FBI even knew about it two days before it happened, but the security people under Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnel were told to stand down. "Bad optics" they said..

I know you folks believe facts are irrelevant to your purposes, and that you are pure propagandists. Period.

The world will not fall into the sea if you don't win one issue. Such unthinking perps I've known before. Nothing new. Dostoyevsky wrote novels about the committed change agents of his time.

He loved Russia and was a devout Orthodox believer in Christ, and he had a gift for illustrating the better nature in people who personally just tried to be good in their own conduct. Trying to fix the world without fixing yourselves first is a fool's cause.

I guess I can't fix you, I'd better pay more attention to things I can change.
 

Top