The 2020 George Floyd/BLM/Police Brutality Protests Discussion Thread

[eran0004]

didn't @ryzno mean defend in a court of law?

Highly unlikely, it doesn’t make much sense in the context.

 

[Scaff]

Speaking of different standards, what far-group do you think did the most damage to the society last few years.

In which country and define last few years and ‘damage’.

In the UK the police consider the far right the biggest danger in terms of terrorism

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...terrorist-threat-is-from-far-right-say-police

as does Germany

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/21/world/europe/germany-shooting-terrorism.html

while the US put the generic term extremists and white supremacy at the top

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/25/us/domestic-terrorism-laws.html

 

[Sander 001]

Speaking of different standards, what far-group do you think did the most damage to the society last few years.

I haven't seen one as insidious as the one outlined in this doc

 

[HenrySwanson]

Not sure about anyone else, but I can definitely state that @HenrySwanson's consistently coming out to bat for a bunch of old statues to the exclusion of all other topics of conversation on this thread hasn't changed my opinion of him in the slightest.

I think their existence in the public sphere is relevant to the thread, although I'm going to post in a bit about the statistics on police brutality.

Your trying to conclude something from a like now?

As you’ve not bothered to raise the question with the member that actually made the post I can only conclude this is something personal.

How is it personal?

What would someone conclude from your post and the subsequent post by another user that it was "moving the goalposts" to ask that?

Nope, he was a marathon runner.

It’s relevant because of your claim that we learn from statues, yet it would seem that more context is needed, almost as if a statue doesn’t actually do what you claimed.

But the statue may prompt me to learn about the runner.

If it wasn't there how would I be prompted to learn that and (possibly) attach meaning/have feelings towards it??

That would depend on my view of them to begin with.

Can you expand?

Do you disapprove of institutes making choices for themselves?

No.

But shouldn't Newton's statue logically be removed (or recommended for removal by the commission)?

Holy crap on a cracker. Why does this concern you so much? I hardly pay that much attention to "likes" under my own posts.

I'm not attributing more to the "like" system than what any other would.

But if you say something like:

Yep @UKMikey, it didn't take long for someone to do exactly what you said.

which was talking about:

Of course, as soon as one adjusts for proportionality people switch to the argument "but black people are more criminal".

and then like a picture of moving goalposts....

What do you logically conclude the user meant other than believing that question was moving the goalposts and not a valid query? By all means I'll welcome an alternative explanation from Scaff.

-------------

In the UK the police consider the far right the biggest danger in terms of terrorism

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...terrorist-threat-is-from-far-right-say-police

It's the fastest-growing, not the "biggest danger". According to your article:

The remainder were jihadist, which remains by far the biggest terrorist threat to the UK and has stabilised at a very high level after years of growth.

 

[Scaff]

How is it personal?

I've already explained that. Why ask me when I didn't raise the point in the first place, you're basing a need to ask me on a like, while you still haven't bothered to address it with the person who posted it.

What would someone conclude from your post and the subsequent post by another user that it was "moving the goalposts" to ask that?

You are free to conclude what you like from it.

But the statue may prompt me to learn about the runner.

If it wasn't there how would I be prompted to learn that and (possibly) attach meaning/have feelings towards it??

Which is no different to it being in a museum, in fact, a museum would be better as it would have all of that context attached to it.

Can you expand?

Yes

No.

But shouldn't Newton's statue logically be removed (or recommended for removal by the commission)?

That would be a question for the organisations involved.

I'm not attributing more to the "like" system than what any other would.

That it's being asked shows that you are attributing more to it.

What do you logically conclude the user meant other than believing that question was moving the goalposts and not a valid query? By all means I'll welcome an alternative explanation from Scaff.

And I see no reason to provide one to you.

It's the fastest-growing, not the "biggest danger". According to your article:

I provided examples of why it's not as straightforward as the vaguely posed question makes out, which is why I sought clarification from the member who posted it. The post (still to be clarified) also inferred a choice between far-left or far-right, neither of which Jihadi groups would fall into.

 

[novcze]

In which country and define last few years and ‘damage’.

in the US, say 5 years and damage to the society in terms of political polarization and radicalization

 

[Scaff]

in the US, say 5 years and damage to the society in terms of political polarization and radicalization

Again that would depend on how you would define the very subjective polarization and radicalization.

I suspect you already have a source to indicate one or the other, so why not just post it?

Now globally and historically far-left was the most dangerous (70s and 80s), while in more recent times the number of incidents from both sides is similar, with the far-right however being responsible for more deaths.

http://visionofhumanity.org/app/uploads/2019/11/GTI-2019web.pdf

 

[novcze]

Again that would depend on how you would define the very subjective polarization and radicalization.

what is subjective on increase in political polarization of society? ... btw. it's also subjective what are far-left or far-right policies, so it's hard to be objective about this matters. e.g. is Trump far-right?

 

[Scaff]

what is subjective on increase in political polarization of society? ... btw. it's also subjective what are far-left or far-right policies, so it's hard to be objective about this matters. e.g. is Trump far-right?

Almost the entire question you posed, while interesting, is subjective. My view on Trump is that he’s an authoritarian opportunist who find the far right a useful base. I’m not convinced he is fully far right, I’m however quite convinced that he is racist (one legal case in point is strong evidence).

 

[polysmut]

in the US, say 5 years and damage to the society in terms of political polarization and radicalization

The White House?

 

[CTznOfTime]

I think she speaks very well:

Props to her!

.

 

[DesertPenguin]

.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Why is Johnson calling for another commission into inequality? Surely now is the time for action and to actually start, you know, implementing the findings of previous reviews?

Just some of the results found in recent years:

• The Race Disparity Audit, published by then Prime Minister Theresa May in 2017, showed inequalities between ethnicities in educational attainment, health, employment and treatment by police and the courts
• The 2017 Lammy Review found evidence of bias and discrimination against people from ethnic minority backgrounds in the justice system in England and Wales
• Also in 2017, the McGregor-Smith Review of race in the workplace found people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds were still disadvantaged at work and faced lower employment rates than their white counterparts
• An independent review of the Windrush scandal, published in March, found the Home Office showed "institutional ignorance and thoughtlessness towards the issue of race"

 

[Scaff]

Why is Johnson calling for another commission into inequality? Surely now is the time for action and to actually start, you know, implementing the findings of previous reviews?

Just some of the results found in recent years:

• The Race Disparity Audit, published by then Prime Minister Theresa May in 2017, showed inequalities between ethnicities in educational attainment, health, employment and treatment by police and the courts
• The 2017 Lammy Review found evidence of bias and discrimination against people from ethnic minority backgrounds in the justice system in England and Wales
• Also in 2017, the McGregor-Smith Review of race in the workplace found people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds were still disadvantaged at work and faced lower employment rates than their white counterparts
• An independent review of the Windrush scandal, published in March, found the Home Office showed "institutional ignorance and thoughtlessness towards the issue of race"

Bloody hell, we agree.

 

[ShiftingGears]

Whats the end goal of these protests at this point?

Especially in England?

From the outside it looks like if State actors like Russia interfered with US elections they sure as hell can and are trying to keep protests perpetuating as long as possible.

 

[Danoff]

Just a gentle reminder folks, racism is not illegal in the US. It's protected under the 1st amendment. No this doesn't mean that cops get to be behave in a racist manner at work, but people absolutely do get to be racist.

 

[Scaff]

Whats the end goal of these protests at this point?

Especially in England?

From the outside it looks like if State actors like Russia interfered with US elections they sure as hell can and are trying to keep protests perpetuating as long as possible.

What's the point of Black Lives Matter protests in the UK?

The country that once ruled over a 1/4 of the planet and has never worked to educate people about its past role in innumerable atrocities, instead hand-waving it away to the point that racial inequality is pretty much ingrained in every part of the country?

The country that has within the last few years been deporting people who have a legal right to be in the country back to the Caribbean without due process?

Nah, can't think of a single reason why people would be angry enough to protest based on that at all and want that to change.

 

[Dotini]

What's the point of Black Lives Matter protests in the UK?

The country that once ruled over a 1/4 of the planet and has never worked to educate people about its past role in innumerable atrocities, instead hand-waving it away to the point that racial inequality is pretty much ingrained in every part of the country?

The country that has within the last few years been deporting people who have a legal right to be in the country back to the Caribbean without due process?

Nah, can't think of a single reason why people would be angry enough to protest based on that at all and want that to change.

Can you bring yourself to admit that reparations are in order?

 

[UKMikey]

Just a gentle reminder folks, racism is not illegal in the US. It's protected under the 1st amendment. No this doesn't mean that cops get to be behave in a racist manner at work, but people absolutely do get to be racist.

I think this requires some context. Is your government planning to outlaw racism? People don't get to be racist and be free from criticism or censure by private individuals, let alone in non US countries where the 1st amendment doesn't apply.

 

[Danoff]

I think this requires some context. Is your government planning to outlaw racism? People don't get to be racism and be free from criticism or censure by private individuals, let alone in non US countries where the 1st amendment doesn't apply.

As far as I know my government is not planning to outlaw racism, but the demands and complaints of activists are starting to edge in that direction and I wanted to remind folks that racism is legal and protected in the US. Equality of outcome, in particular, seems to demand that racism be eliminated. I wasn't directing it at any post or complaint in particular. Just seemed like folks were forgetting.

 

[UKMikey]

Just seemed like folks were forgetting.

Context still badly needed here in my opinion. Which racists need protection under the law and are they not receiving this?

 

[Scaff]

Can you bring yourself to admit that reparations are in order?

In some cases, reparations have already been paid, sometimes to the wrong people (the UK paid reparations to slave owners when it was abolished), in others, the UK had to be sued to manage it (atrocities in Kenya for example).

An apology for past actions and honest teaching of colonial past would be the first much-needed step, however.

 

[UKMikey]

In some cases, reparations have already been paid, sometimes to the wrong people (the UK paid reparations to slave owners when it was abolished), in others, the UK had to be sued to manage it (atrocities in Kenya for example).

An apology for past actions and honest teaching of colonial past would be the first much-needed step, however.

I think Tony Blair has already officially apologised for Britain's role in the transatlantic slave trade.

https://www.antislavery.org/tony-blair-apologies-britains-role-slave-trade-2/

 

[Danoff]

Context still badly needed here in my opinion. Which racists need protection under the law and are they not receiving this?

All racists need equal protection under the law, and the implication that equality of outcome is required suggests that the government should intervene until racism is abolished. I thought that was clear from my previous post.

I'm all for preventing unequal treatment from police, and ending police brutality for all. I'm not in favor of chasing equality of outcome, in part because racism is still legal and protected speech in the US.

 

[DesertPenguin]

I think if we all educate on racism and slavery as much as Germany does for the Holocaust, we'd all be better off.

https://www.euronews.com/2020/01/27...y-how-is-the-holocaust-taught-in-your-country

In Germany, the teaching of the Holocaust is the one educational matter on which each of the 16 federal states, which set their own curricula, collaborate. It is mandatory in history and civics classes, and will most likely also be covered in literature and religion lessons, and possibly in biology, art and music. Most schoolchildren will at some point visit a concentration camp – although this is not compulsory, except in Bavaria.

On the subject of Holocaust education in Germany, the IHRA says: “Germany knows the magnitude of its responsibility for the worst crimes in European history and strives to come to grips with this legacy. If there is anything Germany can share from its own experience, it is this: facing up to the grim truth of what took place is the only path to reconciliation. A past that is not examined fully and honestly will remain a burden for the future.”

 

[UKMikey]

All racists need equal protection under the law, and the implication that equality of outcome is required suggests that the government should intervene until racism is abolished. I thought that was clear from my previous post.

I'm all for preventing unequal treatment from police, and ending police brutality for all. I'm not in favor of chasing equality of outcome, in part because racism is still legal and protected speech in the US.

Erm, okay, it just seemed that this came totally out of nowhere as far as this thread was concerned. It sounds like a strange thing to get worked up about to me unless there are specific examples of it not happening which so far haven't been forthcoming as far as I can see.

 

[Danoff]

Erm, okay, it just seemed that this came totally out of nowhere as far as this thread was concerned. It sounds like a strange thing to get worked up about to me unless there are specific examples of it not happening which so far haven't been forthcoming as far as I can see.

Here's an example, which I didn't want to post, since it doesn't say that racism should be illegal.

Why is Johnson calling for another commission into inequality? Surely now is the time for action and to actually start, you know, implementing the findings of previous reviews?

Just some of the results found in recent years:

• The Race Disparity Audit, published by then Prime Minister Theresa May in 2017, showed inequalities between ethnicities in educational attainment, health, employment and treatment by police and the courts
• The 2017 Lammy Review found evidence of bias and discrimination against people from ethnic minority backgrounds in the justice system in England and Wales
• Also in 2017, the McGregor-Smith Review of race in the workplace found people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds were still disadvantaged at work and faced lower employment rates than their white counterparts
• An independent review of the Windrush scandal, published in March, found the Home Office showed "institutional ignorance and thoughtlessness towards the issue of race"

Equality of outcome should not be the goal of the government.

 

[UKMikey]

Here's an example, which I didn't want to post, since it doesn't say that racism should be illegal.



Equality of outcome should not be the goal of the government.

Not sure where the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution applies here.

 

[Danoff]

Not sure where the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution applies here.

I'm not sure what you're trying to do. The 1st amendment applies to racism.

 

[UKMikey]

I'm not sure what you're trying to do. The 1st amendment applies to racism.

Not in the UK. If your point is to say this wouldn't happen in the US then fair enough. As far as I can tell the reprts say that institutional racism should be reduced, not individual racism.