Kenosha shooting

[Roy]

16 minutes ago, Arcangelo said:

All lives matter.

Who feels offended by this?

It's not an inherently offensive term on the surface (obviously), however it does have a level of hidden maliciousness in it, even if the people saying it aren't aware of it.

Let's be honest here for a second - Nobody who is preaching this phrase is doing it because of a genuine humanitarian concerns for social justice. These people were nowhere to be fucking seen at all protesting or trying to consistently spark social change for all the decades leading up to what is happening now.

It's a reactive smart-ass response so they feel better about having been so passive, lazy, and deliberately ignorant to the real and existing racist and discriminatory problems that have been festering under the surface of society, and are now bubbling up. As well to one up the blacks for getting all "uppity" and wanting to be treated better (which is justified), and because they fundamentally misunderstand what BLM is about (not that it's a FLAWLESS movement).

I believe Joyner Lucas said it best in his song, "I'm Not Racist" which I recommend everyone listens to;

"Screaming All Lives Matter is a protest to MY protest, what the fuck is that?"

Edited August 28, 2020 by Roy

[Consept]

19 minutes ago, Arcangelo said:

All lives matter.

Who feels offended by this?

Its a context thing so obviously the statement all lives matter is true, all lives do matter. The issue is when its used to dismiss others fighting for equality. 

Its like if a child is being treated unfairly by his family, he has to do more housework than his siblings, he doesnt get as many treats etc. If he gets upset by this and complains that hes being treated unfairly it would be quite dismissive to tell them that all our kids are important. It doesnt actually solve the problem, if the parents cared they would look into whether he is actually being treated unfairly and even if he isnt try and understand why he believes that directly from him. His siblings may want to keep telling him that 'all siblings matter' because consciously or sub-consciously theyre aware that if he gets treated the same as them it might mean less for them, so theyre invested in making him feel stupid for complaining and making him believe that he is actually being treated fairly hes just overly sensitive or wants more. 

 

[Nahm]

Why are they even using guns and tear gas when we have amplifiers and country music? 

[Jennjenn]

44 minutes ago, Consept said:

theyre invested in making him feel stupid for complaining and making him believe that he is actually being treated fairly hes just overly sensitive or wants more

Yes, it's a selfish move. I also like how this pastor explained it, comparing it to Jesus when he said "bless be the poor" and people saying "no Jesus blessed be everyone".....

If people from Colombia, for example, were former slaves now entrapped in systemic racism, we would say "colombian's life matter". But there is so much self centeredness, and people with abandonment issues. It triggers a survival instinct of feeling left behind. 

And I like your example of the family members. If there is a family were one of the siblings is being mistreated and nobody has compassion for him, that is inherently a toxic family, and the other siblings know that at some level, they participate in that, they see their sibling struggling and decide to ignore it. That is a hostile environment, just like society. The other siblings may even feel that if the kid is not the scapegoat anymore they may be the next one. It's in their best interest to keep that kid as the scapegoat of that toxic family. 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by Jennjenn

[Danioover9000]

@Roy

2 hours ago, Roy said:

This case is the perfect example of the absurd depths of bad faith and ignorance people are willing to go to in the political divide while being totally unconscious of the fact they are participating in it.

Should a 17 year old have deliberately traveled to a volatile protest with a gun? NO, obviously that was an extremely poor decision and he should not have been there, despite whatever good intentions he displayed in the videos prior to the shootings. Let the buildings burn and have legitimate authorities like emergency response deal with it. He was clearly out of his lane, just like many of the protesters that want to abuse the opportunity of these riots/protests to get away with criminal juvenile behavior and hide behind the good people trying to spark genuine change. 

However he absolutely is justified in defending himself from charging attackers carrying weapons or not if he is trying to escape and retreat from the situations as it clearly appears he was doing in the available videos.

It's not like any of this should have been a surprise, he is openly carrying a large gun on his body in plain sight. Anyone who sees that and is still willing to attack him should be assumed to be willing to escalate the force against him to equal or greater than what his weapon is capable of. You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.

His vested interest was clearly in survival like anyone else's would have been if they were in his shoes. To say he should have submitted himself to an angry armed mob out of some appeal to higher virtues is fucking absurd. Anybody who actually thinks they would override their survival instincts and do the opposite of what he did in that situation is either being dishonest or massively overestimating themselves. It's just easy to say because you're in the safety vacuum of being behind a screen. If you actually would do it I guess have fun being beaten close to death or executed by the mob pussy???

There is no other way to interpret this situation given all the evidence. It's just stupidity in every direction from all parties involved and a shitty set of circumstances, once again fueled by rampantly incompetent police. What's making it even worse is the inability of so many to be impartial and honest about these events, it just adds gasoline to the fire because everyone is so scared to think for themselves and wants to be nestled in the comfortable and delusional warmth of doubling down on one side of the isle or the other.

   Best post.

[Jennjenn]

18 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

It's not like any of this should have been a surprise, he is openly carrying a large gun on his body in plain sight. Anyone who sees that and is still willing to attack him should be assumed to be willing to escalate the force against him to equal or greater than what his weapon is capable of. You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.

If you're having a big party in a backyard, and all of a sudden a guy comes inside the party with a rifle with an air that he dislikes everyone in that party, what are people in the party supposed to do?

Most will run, others will attack him and that’s exactly what happened. 
 

But he can’t claim self defense, when he went with a rifle to party were no one invited him and he hates all the guests.

Edited August 28, 2020 by Jennjenn

[Opo]

2 hours ago, Roy said:

Should a 17 year old have deliberately traveled to a volatile protest with a gun? NO, obviously that was an extremely poor decision and he should not have been there, despite whatever good intentions he displayed in the videos prior to the shootings. 

However he absolutely is justified in defending himself 

He is a stupid kid that put himself in a situation where he was forced to defend himself. 

If he was competent he either wouldn't have provoked the crowd to charge him or he would have stopped them before they came so close he got scared and went into survival mode. 

That is why 17 year old kids can't run around with guns playing cops. Because they are too immature to see 2 steps ahead. 

Edited August 28, 2020 by Opo

[Danioover9000]

@Jennjenn

33 minutes ago, Jennjenn said:

If you're having a big party in a backyard, and all of a sudden a guy comes inside the party with a rifle with an air that he dislikes everyone in that party, what are people in the party supposed to do?

Most will run, others will attack him and that’s exactly what happened. 
 

But he can’t claim self defense, when he went with a rifle to party were no one invited him and he hates all the guests.

   I think you're misquoting me from another user, because I don't think I ever wrote that post, so I'm not interested in what you're replying back, and not interested in being exploited, thanks.

[Rajneeshpuram]

2 hours ago, Jennjenn said:

If you're having a big party in a backyard, and all of a sudden a guy comes inside the party with a rifle with an air that he dislikes everyone in that party, what are people in the party supposed to do?

Most will run, others will attack him and that’s exactly what happened. 
 

But he can’t claim self defense, when he went with a rifle to party were no one invited him and he hates all the guests.

Bad analogy . The streets, the cars parked, and the shops are not property of the rioters, so people defending their goods is legit.

[Consept]

28 minutes ago, Rajneeshpuram said:

Bad analogy . The streets, the cars parked, and the shops are not property of the rioters, so people defending their goods is legit.

That's cool except it wasn't his property and most people aren't damaging property. The actual incident was nothing to do with property damage 

 

[Zega]

@Consept  people still like to bring that up as a point though. Rioters and anti-Americans they say, that's how they justify murder like this.

[Leo Gura]

Guys, just to remind you, keep in mind that our objective here is not to get stuck in political content but to do Conscious Politics, which means going meta and observing how your own mind plays out its biases with political content and how it gets attached to its own positions and all the defense mechanisms it uses to justify them.

The real game here is to not get stuck at the level of content and opinions, but to realize that it's all games your mind is playing in order to feel superior.

In the big picture, it doesn't matter who kills whom. What matters is how your mind thinks about such things and how aware it is of its own biases and attachments.

When you start taking sides and getting defensive, that's when you've lost the game.

There's really no right or wrong in such cases, it's all a matter of difference in perspectives and being able to hold multiple perspectives at once.

[Forestluv]

45 minutes ago, Zega said:

Rioters and anti-Americans they say, that's how they justify murder like this.

Justification and denial are common ways the mind tries to reduce the discomfort of cognitive dissonance. It can be shocking how far the mind will go. 

[Danioover9000]

@Consept @Zega

1 hour ago, Consept said:

That's cool except it wasn't his property and most people aren't damaging property. The actual incident was nothing to do with property damage 

 

   It's true that he chose to arrive at the site of looting, yet some people were damaging property. Yes, the actual incident of the 17 year shooting and killing three of the protestors is a separate case, yet it's not isolated to that, but has some contexts that lead up to each death like the social dynamic of the blue lives matter people( the guys with the long rifles), the bystanders passing by, the few aggressive rioters verbally provoking. Also, each person's experience relevant to the situation. Overall, everybody loses, the boy that thinks he's on the right to defend property and defend his own life loses, the people that damaged some properties illegally loses, the other blue lives matter members that think they're equal to soldiers and swat in stress management loses, the police that arrive latter loses. It's an overall net lose for anybody in the area, caused by forces larger than individuals and direct causal chains.

26 minutes ago, Zega said:

@Consept  people still like to bring that up as a point though. Rioters and anti-Americans they say, that's how they justify murder like this.

      Yeah, that's a lazy way to justify the murders. Even if, say they lost the cases of charging him with those murders at first degree, they can still charge him for either second degree or manslaughter, reckless endangerment of firearm and illegal possession of a firearm. They said he lived 30-45 minutes away from the incident, they might charge him with illegal driving as well. Many ways for him to face jail time, yet also many ways for some people to venerate him. In my mind, it's clear he's justified in defending himself, because his survival was in danger, and those protestors were justified in provoking the group, harassing him and chasing him, because they're fed up.

[Lyubov]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Guys, just to remind you, keep in mind that our objective here is not to get stuck in political content but to do Conscious Politics, which means going meta and observing how your own mind plays out its biases with political content and how it gets attached to its own positions and all the defense mechanisms it uses to justify them.

The real game here is to not get stuck at the level of content and opinions, but to realize that it's all games your mind is playing in order to feel superior.

In the big picture, it doesn't matter who kills whom. What matters is how your mind thinks about such things and how aware it is of its own biases and attachments.

When you start taking sides and getting defensive, that's when you've lost the game.

There's really no right or wrong in such cases, it's all a matter of difference in perspectives and being able to hold multiple perspectives at once.

Some good points here. I'm thinking of doing a complete news/politics detox. Makes me too grumpy. 

[Mel B]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There's really no right or wrong in such cases, it's all a matter of difference in perspectives and being able to hold multiple perspectives at once.

I get that pepole have there perspective.
But a kid walks down the road with an assault style weapon which is illegal for a minor ( according to local laws ) and gets encouragement from law enforcement. He actually ends up killing pepole.

While a father gets shot in the back multiple times infront of his kids for allegedly possessing a knive.

Which seems to me that equal justice doesn’t truly exist ( which it probably never will but we can definitely make it more fair for everyone). I guess im trying to say racial justice is a deep rooted problem that needs some serious overhauls.

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, Mel B said:

I guess im trying to say racial justice is a deep rooted problem that needs some serious overhauls.

Yes! And THAT is a consequence of differences in perspective.

[Arcangelo]

''It's unclear from this footage who fires the shots.''

If you listen carefully 2 different guns are being shot, in the first shooting. 0:59-1:01

[BLACKHOLE]

Do you think that BLM essence has been completely lost because all of the looting, arson, violence, rioting and destruction in so many Cities ? Seems to be the perception for many Americans who are not used to this type of violence. What’s your feedback ?

[Arcangelo]

2 minutes ago, BLACKHOLE said:

Do you think that BLM essence has been completely lost because all of the looting, arson, violence, rioting and destruction in so many Cities ?

You forgot harassment on that list. Type BLM harassment in the youtube search box. This shit is beyond crazy.