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

[Joey D]

This happens a lot where people try to make an argument by ignoring the meanings of words and adding their own definitions instead
It’s not about you. You don’t get to unilaterally decide for yourself what words mean.
Your definition of safe might be building a home yourself. You might say gd govt bs building codes I’m doing the electrical and gas my way because I know better...
Your ignorance and negligence then leads to destructive fires that burn not only your own home but spread and destroy others.
This is one reason we have laws man.
You do not exist independently of everyone else and just do whatever you want and redefine terms unilaterally according to your whim.
Law exists for reasons you can’t simply just wave your hand at it like a magician.
Look at this, it could happen..

I thought you were done with this thread?

If I build a home and it catches fire because I did something poorly and it burns my neighbor's house down, then my neighbor has every right to sue me for damages. This is why we have civil courts. Regulations and laws don't stop people from doing things anyway.

As for defining government, people are going to have different definitions of it, of course, but at the heart of it, a government's responsibility is to protect the rights of its citizens. This means all citizens, not just the ones who can throw money at something. When a government starts making laws and regulations that trample the rights of someone else, then it's a problem. Both Democrats and Republicans are doing this at a rather alarming rate and it's not good.

 

[McLaren]

For someone who has repeatedly acted like it's not about what the individual wants nor do they get to decide for others, there sure is a lot of talking down to others like their word is the way things go.

 

[Groundfish]

If I build a home and it catches fire because I did something poorly and it burns my neighbor's house down, then my neighbor has every right to sue me for damages. This is why we have civil courts. Regulations and laws don't stop people from doing things anyway

Lol sue me? That’s your solution?
No, in fact you broke the law and are a criminal. The hypothetical here could include a death or 2.
So in fact if convicted you could be imprisoned for a very long time, and thank goodness for those laws you dislike so much because your incarceration would prevent you from causing further damage or wrongful death.
Your position is it’s their right to try to get me to pay...smh

Ok I promise to let bygones be bygones
I won’t reply for a long time.

@EunosCosmo

Certain regulations of course. The environment is important, but people are also and they need jobs, tbh I am not sure, I certainly don’t have the answer to global warming!

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Certain regulations of course. The environment is important, but people are also and they need jobs, tbh I am not sure, I certainly don’t have the answer to global warming!

Am I correct to imply that means you don't agree with all regulation?

 

[Joey D]

Lol sue me? That’s your solution?
No, in fact you broke the law and are a criminal. The hypothetical here could include a death or 2.
So in fact if convicted you could be imprisoned for a very long time, and thank goodness for those laws you dislike so much because your incarceration would prevent you from causing further damage or wrongful death.
Your position is it’s their right to try to get me to pay...smh

Killing someone is different than burning their house down.

And those laws and regulations surrounding building codes don't stop anyone. In fact, many laws that are on the books don't stop anyone from doing something. It's not keeping anyone safe, they're just there to punish people after the fact, which does what exactly? It's not like throwing me in jail is going to bring that person's house back. Monetary compensation will allow those people to rebuild their house though.

 

[Tornado]

So you're for regulation & enforcement of building codes to prevent fires. What about environmental regulation?

I think there's a better question than that. "The law is the law and we must harshly punish those who break it" folks strangely never seem to be the same ones who jump over themselves to defend laws restricting firearms or condemn people who fall afoul of them.

 

[Groundfish]

And those laws and regulations surrounding building codes don't stop anyone.

You just learned why law enforcement is necessary, which is the very thing you tried to shoot down congrats welcome to the Republican Party!

 

[Joey D]

You just learned why law enforcement is necessary, which is the very thing you tried to shoot down congrats welcome to the Republican Party!

The same law enforcement that shows up after the fact? After the crime has been committed? Ya I'm not so sure about that.

And I'd rather flog myself with an extension cord than cast a vote for whatever the Republican party has become. There might've been a time when I would've voted for them but not now, especially since anti-2A, anti-economy, pro-corporate socialist, pro-big government president Donald Trump came along.

 

[DDastardly00]

You seem to be having a very hard time separating the individual players and teams, who are boycotting games on their own volition regardless of what the NBA thinks, from the NBA themselves. You have also claimed that you have noted this distinction, yet are also ignoring it.

The players initiated the boycott and the league supported it, they worked in conjunction. The distinction is noted but in the end doesn't make a world of difference or change the fact that the NBA has a horrible record on Human rights and players chose to remain silent rather than use their large platforms to speak out against them.

It comes across as you trying to de-legitimize a legitimate call to action (on an issue that probably hits a lot closer to home for these athletes/teams than whatever is going on in China) based solely on the people that write their paychecks, the two of which being completely separate issues. Actually, on that note, it's in these guys' best interests not to take such action, because it ultimately hurts their individual bottom line.

No, they are not separate issues, if I work for a company A, and let's say I find out Company A is running a sweat shop in say, Guatemala that is engaged in unsafe work conditions using slave labor. If I know about it and refuse to speak up that makes me complicit. And don't pretend for a moment that Millionaires forgoing a couple of paychecks actually hurts their bottom line in the same way it would if you or I were to forgo our own paychecks. They are not placing themselves in financial jeopardy by doing so. Oh and btw, the NBA resumes play on Friday, that was a rather short boycott and had no teeth to it whatsoever. If they are actually serious then they need to boycott the rest of the season.

Nevermind the fact that expecting someone to battle all injustices in the world before they can battle injustices that effect them is exhausting, nigh-impossible, and a frankly ridiculous roadblock to place before more immediate concerns. Currently, boycotting China is also nigh-impossible, given how much their products find their way into out everyday lives. The device that you're browsing with, be it a computer, phone or otherwise, likely uses individual parts manufactured in China, so by proxy, you're "supporting" the Chinese government and their injustices.

Stop moving the goalposts. I was quite clear in every one of my posts that I expect them to speak up on THIS issue, not all injustices. The fact is the NBA and it's players make about 4 billion a year in the Chinese market. They know about the abuses and did/said nothing. That makes them complicit, they are making money off of people's misery in China and they don't care enough to speak up about it.

Until there's actually a global effort to boycott China (because as @McLaren pointed out, that's the only realistic way an effective boycott will happen), people are going to choose the legitimate issues that are closer to home and have a greater potential to effect them, such as NBA players and teams (which was, last I checked, are predominately African-American) boycotting games as a call for justice for Jacob Blake.

I don't and simply can't accept the notion that because China is so powerful, unless an all-encompassing worldwide boycott is somehow organized, we may as well sit on our hands, say nothing and do nothing. It starts by saying something, it's starts by bringing awareness to an issue, highlighting the problem and then coming up with a solution. We don't need a boycott to start speaking up and neither does the NBA. It might take a boycott in the end to force real change in China, but we don't need one to start the process.

 

[huskeR32]

Stop moving the goalposts. I was quite clear in every one of my posts that I expect them to speak up on THIS issue, not all injustices. The fact is the NBA and it's players make about 4 billion a year in the Chinese market.

So what's the threshold? How much revenue does the NBA need to make in any given country or market before they're expected to publicly take stands against any wrongdoings in said country?

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

The players initiated the boycott and the league supported it, they worked in conjunction. The distinction is noted but in the end doesn't make a world of difference or change the fact that the NBA has a horrible record on Human rights and players chose to remain silent rather than use their large platforms to speak out against them.



No, they are not separate issues, if I work for a company A, and let's say I find out Company A is running a sweat shop in say, Guatemala that is engaged in unsafe work conditions using slave labor. If I know about it and refuse to speak up that makes me complicit. And don't pretend for a moment that Millionaires forgoing a couple of paychecks actually hurts their bottom line in the same way it would if you or I were to forgo our own paychecks. They are not placing themselves in financial jeopardy by doing so. Oh and btw, the NBA resumes play on Friday, that was a rather short boycott and had no teeth to it whatsoever. If they are actually serious then they need to boycott the rest of the season.



Stop moving the goalposts. I was quite clear in every one of my posts that I expect them to speak up on THIS issue, not all injustices. The fact is the NBA and it's players make about 4 billion a year in the Chinese market. They know about the abuses and did/said nothing. That makes them complicit, they are making money off of people's misery in China and they don't care enough to speak up about it.



I don't and simply can't accept the notion that because China is so powerful, unless an all-encompassing worldwide boycott is somehow organized, we may as well sit on our hands, say nothing and do nothing. It starts by saying something, it's starts by bringing awareness to an issue, highlighting the problem and then coming up with a solution. We don't need a boycott to start speaking up and neither does the NBA. It might take a boycott in the end to force real change in China, but we don't need one to start the process.

You seem to care a great deal about Guatemalans and Uyghur Muslims in China.

How do you feel about Guatemalans trying to escape violence & slavery and take refuge in the United States?
How do you feel about President Trump telling Xi that holding Uyghur's in re-education camps "exactly the right thing to do"?

 

[DDastardly00]

So what's the threshold? How much revenue does the NBA need to make in any given country or market before they're expected to publicly take stands against any wrongdoings in said country?

That is a very strange way to frame this issue.

They need better oversight of their own operations in China, something that Adam Silver himself has also said, that's the threshold to do business in China, something other corporations, like Apple for example, have pushed China for and had success.

You seem to care a great deal about Guatemalans and Uyghur Muslims in China.

How do you feel about Guatemalans trying to escape violence & slavery and take refuge in the United States?
How do you feel about President Trump telling Xi that holding Uyghur's in re-education camps "exactly the right thing to do"?

Uighur's (sp)

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

That is a very strange way to frame this issue.

They need better oversight of their own operations in China, something that Adam Silver himself has also said, that's the threshold to do business in China, something other corporations, like Apple for example, have pushed China for and had success.

About what I expected.

 

[DDastardly00]

About what I expected.

Me too, more goal post moving and misspelling of ethnic group's name while pretending to care.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Me too, more goal post moving and misspelling of ethnic group's name while pretending to care.

 

[DDastardly00]

Wikipedia in general sucks as an information source.

Uighur
people
WRITTEN BY
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
Encyclopaedia Britannica's editors oversee subject areas in which they have extensive knowledge, whether from years of experience gained by working on that content or via study for an advanced degree....
Last Updated: Aug 3, 2020 See Article History
Alternative Titles: Uyghur, Uygur, Weiwu’er

Uighur, Chinese (Pinyin) Weiwu’er, also spelled Uygur or Uyghur, a Turkic-speaking people of interior Asia. Uighurs live for the most part in northwestern China, in the Uygur Autonomous Region of Xinjiang; a small number live in the Central Asian republics. There were some 10,000,000 Uighurs in China and at least a combined total of 300,000 in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan in the early 21st century.



Britannica Quiz
Get to Know Asia
What is the capital of Indonesia?
The Uighur language is part of the Turkic group of Altaic languages, and the Uighurs are among the oldest Turkic-speaking peoples of Central Asia. They are mentioned in Chinese records from the 3rd century ce. They first rose to prominence in the 8th century, when they established a kingdom along the Orhon River in what is now north-central Mongolia. In 840 this state was overrun by the Kyrgyz, however, and the Uighurs migrated southwestward to the area around the Tien (Tian) Shan (“Celestial Mountains”). There the Uighurs formed another independent kingdom in the Turfan Depression region, but this was overthrown by the expanding Mongols in the 13th century.

The Uighurs are mainly a sedentary village-dwelling people who live in the network of oases formed in the valleys and lower slopes of the Tien Shan, Pamirs, and related mountain systems. The region is one of the most arid in the world; hence, for centuries they have practiced irrigation to conserve their water supply for agriculture. Their principal food crops are wheat, corn (maize), kaoliang (a form of sorghum), and melons. The chief industrial crop is cotton, which has long been grown in the area. Many Uighurs are employed in petroleum extraction, mining, and manufacturing in urban centres.

The chief Uighur cities are Ürümqi, the capital of Xinjiang, and Kashgar (Kashi), an ancient centre of trade on the historic Silk Road near the border between Russia and China. The Uighurs have lacked political unity in recent centuries, except for a brief period during the 19th century when they were in revolt against Beijing. Their social organization is centred on the village. The Uighurs of Xinjiang are Sunni Muslims.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Alternative Titles: Uyghur

Not that it even matters because the English spelling is an approximation anyways. But don't let that stop you from deflecting.

I don't understand what was so hard about my original questions anyways. You either welcome refugees or you don't and you can say you would condemn Trump's comments about Uyghur's (or Uighur if you like) if he did in fact say it, or not condemn Trump's comments. That even allows you to maintain the position that you don't think Trump said that!

 

[DesertPenguin]

Please. Take that talk to a different thread

 

[NotThePrez]

The players initiated the boycott and the league supported it, they worked in conjunction.

Can you find something that specifically states that the NBA as a league supported the players and teams boycotts? All I'm finding are that some of the individual players and teams, not the NBA itself, are involved in the protest. It doesn't make sense for the NBA to willingly boycott themselves.

No, they are not separate issues, if I work for a company A, and let's say I find out Company A is running a sweat shop in say, Guatemala that is engaged in unsafe work conditions using slave labor. If I know about it and refuse to speak up that makes me complicit.

And that situation is the exact same as police using excessive force and shooting a guy in the back Mafia 3-style....how, exactly? Because that's actually what the teams are protesting.

Now, if it were your specific situation, and the players, teams or otherwise were speaking out against that while ignoring China, then yeah, I'd probably join you in calling them out.

And don't pretend for a moment that Millionaires forgoing a couple of paychecks actually hurts their bottom line in the same way it would if you or I were to forgo our own paychecks. They are not placing themselves in financial jeopardy by doing so.

It may not effect them the same way, but they're still willingly losing out on a couple paychecks with no real tangible reward for them later. There's not very many people I can think of anywhere on the net-worth ladder who would willingly miss out on a payday or two for any reason at all, let alone to protest. It doesn't mean I admire them, but I can at least respect such actions.

Also, why should someone need to potentially place themselves into dire straits for their protest to have weight?

Oh and btw, the NBA resumes play on Friday, that was a rather short boycott and had no teeth to it whatsoever. If they are actually serious then they need to boycott the rest of the season.

Except that the two Los Angeles teams (who, if I understand correctly, are two of the more popular teams in the NBA?) voted to cancel the season, but were outvoted by their colleagues.

Stop moving the goalposts. I was quite clear in every one of my posts that I expect them to speak up on THIS issue, not all injustices.

...while also aggresivley calling them out as hypocrites, as if that should somehow make their current protests illegitimate.

Again, I do think that the NBA as a league is something of a hypocritical entity, but that doesn't mean that their individual player's desire to speak against injustices in America (especially in regards to their fellow citizens of similar heritage) should hold less weight.

The fact is the NBA and it's players make about 4 billion a year in the Chinese market. They know about the abuses and did/said nothing. That makes them complicit, they are making money off of people's misery in China and they don't care enough to speak up about it.

And the threshold of this is...where, exactly? Is there a certain amount of money that should/shouldn't be made before they're expected to speak on such issues?

I don't and simply can't accept the notion that because China is so powerful, unless an all-encompassing worldwide boycott is somehow organized, we may as well sit on our hands, say nothing and do nothing.

Which is not what I said. What I actually said was:

Me:
...,people are going to choose the legitimate issues that are closer to home and have a greater potential to effect them,...

It's called picking your battles, and figuring out which ones are worth fighting at a particular moment.Speaking personally, the general police protests and calls for action on this issue, as well as whatever their subsequent results may bring, potentially effect me more, as both an American and an African-American, than the injustices faced by the citizens of China. Again, given that most NBA teams (from what I understand) are predominately black, I'd wager at least some of them feel the same way. That's not to say I don't care at all, but it's also not an immediate issue for me, nor will it realistically effect my life anytime in the near future, especially since I don't watch the NBA to begin with.

Now, I'm all for protesting Chinese overreach, and I'm also all for speaking out against their injustices against their own people, because those are issues that absolutely need to be addressed. But I'm not going to blame people for taking on issues that more readily effect them as a priority, either.

 

[huskeR32]

That is a very strange way to frame this issue.

I agree, but it seems to me to be the way you're framing it:

I was quite clear in every one of my posts that I expect them to speak up on THIS issue, not all injustices. The fact is the NBA and it's players make about 4 billion a year in the Chinese market.

I'm not sure how else you expect that to be interpreted; you seem to be clearly stating that the NBA doesn't need to address all injustices, but they need to address this one because of the revenue they get from China.

--

Wikipedia in general sucks as an information source.

Wikipedia can be a perfectly fine source of information, especially for something like how to spell a word. Should more complicated information be double-checked before being relied upon? Sure. But that applies to all sources of information. "Wikipedia is bad, m'kay" seems to me to really only be useful when people want to wave away information they don't like.

And your own source confirmed his spelling:

Uighur, Chinese (Pinyin) Weiwu’er, also spelled Uygur or Uyghur

I mean, in the same post that you criticize someone else's source, you'd think you'd take the time to read your own. And really, jumping on him about the way he spelled the word was ridiculous in the first place.

 

[DDastardly00]

Due to the cross posting of duplicate questions, rather than quote individually, I'll address them generally.

Regarding the threshold questions, I posted this already. It is also quite reasonable to expect this of a corporation operating in a foreign country, especially one with an egregious record on Human rights.

They need better oversight of their own operations in China, something that Adam Silver himself has also said, that's the threshold to do business in China, something other corporations, like Apple for example, have pushed China for and had success.

Furthermore if China is not willing to allow this, then simply don't do business in China.

Regarding the question about injustices, the players, and the league, I expect the NBA and it's players to address the issues of Slave labor and abuse at it's own camps. They have a platform to use and they should not let China bully them into not using it, that goes for commissioner, the teams, coaches and players. They need to have a Spine. Furthermore players frequently make stops in China to sell merchandise and sign new deals with Chinese retailers all while turning a blind eye to the sweatshops that made them.

Chinese apparel companies have also signed NBA players to endorsement deals: Klay Thompson and Gordon Hayward with Anta, CJ McCollum with Li-Ning and Lou Williams with Peak. Thompson's deal with Anta could reach $80 million over 10 years, according to ESPN. Williams has said he earns more from his endorsement deal than he does playing. This controversy comes against the backdrop of a much larger issue: the trade war between China and the United States and human rights abuses in China.
This controversy comes against the backdrop of a much larger issue: the trade war between China and the United States and human rights abuses in China.

On Monday, the U.S. blacklisted 28 Chinese entities because they have been “implicated in human rights violations and abuses in the implementation of China’s campaign of repression, mass arbitrary detention, and high-technology surveillance against Uighurs, Kazakhs, and other members of Muslim minority groups in the XUAR,” according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2019/10/09/nba-china-hong-kong-whats-at-stake/3912447002/

To NotThePrez regarding the question about the NBA's involvement in the boycott, I can't recall which sports publication I read that in, but I know the NBA supported the boycott, assisted with the rescheduling of the events and we're on board with it. It was initiated by the players and teams, that is correct.

I have no problem with the boycott as previously stated, In fact, I feel they should have taking it even further, but I'm not going to give the players, or the league a pass on their actions in China, nor am I going to stop calling them hypocrites, because that's exactly what they are.

 

[huskeR32]

Regarding the threshold questions, I posted this already.

You haven't. You've stated that the NBA should care about China, from which it earns revenue of $4 billion. You've also said it shouldn't be expected to speak up on all injustices everywhere. So we know the threshold is below $4 billion, but that's it.

 

[DDastardly00]

You haven't. You've stated that the NBA should care about China, from which it earns revenue of $4 billion. You've also said it shouldn't be expected to speak up on all injustices everywhere. So we know the threshold is below $4 billion, but that's it.

The NBA should care about who they are doing business with (China) but more importantly the treatment of people in their slave labor camps. You can either agree or disagree with that statement, or you can continue to insert a false narrative of a dollar amount threshold, which is not what I said at all. If that's the case, I'll put you on ignore and move on because it doesn't seem like you want to have a genuine, actual conversation about China's Human right abuses and the fact that the NBA is in bed with that, but rather you want to play word games which I don't care to make time for. Good day.

 

[huskeR32]

The NBA should care about who they are doing business with (China) but more importantly the treatment of people in their slave labor camps. You can either agree or disagree with that statement, or you can continue to insert a false narrative of a dollar amount threshold, which is not what I said at all. If that's the case, I'll put you on ignore and move on because it doesn't seem like you want to have a genuine, actual conversation about China's Human right abuses and the fact that the NBA is in bed with that, but rather you want to play word games which I don't care to make time for. Good day.

I didn't put those two sentences together, you did. I'm simply trying to get you to clarify. If it's not about the dollar amount at all, then why do you not expect the NBA to also speak out about injustice elsewhere? (And why did you bring up the dollar amount in the very next sentence?)

At least two of us had the same question after reading your post. So perhaps consider that, no matter what you intended, it came off that way. And I genuinely want to know what you intended to say, but you aren't answering.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

The NBA should care about who they are doing business with (China) but more importantly the treatment of people in their slave labor camps. You can either agree or disagree with that statement, or you can continue to insert a false narrative of a dollar amount threshold, which is not what I said at all. If that's the case, I'll put you on ignore and move on because it doesn't seem like you want to have a genuine, actual conversation about China's Human right abuses and the fact that the NBA is in bed with that, but rather you want to play word games which I don't care to make time for. Good day.

So this is what it looks like to me. It looks like you are trying to delegitimize the agency of NBA players to protest one thing because they are not vocal about protesting another. It's a fair statement to say that the NBA is not doing enough to voice disagreement with China and their treatment of ethnic minorities. However, what others are trying to say is that the NBA is not the same thing as NBA players, and I think I would forgive NBA players, largely American, for being less overtly concerned about people in foreign countries than people who come from very similar backgrounds as them being shot in the back by police in their own country. Both are not good, to be clear, but one is a little more immediately pressing for Americans. Do you see what I'm getting at? Trying to offer some perspective here.

 

[UKMikey]

So this is what it looks like to me. It looks like you are trying to delegitimize the agency of NBA players to protest one thing because they are not vocal about protesting another. It's a fair statement to say that the NBA is not doing enough to voice disagreement with China and their treatment of ethnic minorities. However, what others are trying to say is that the NBA is not the same thing as NBA players, and I think I would forgive NBA players, largely American, for being less overtly concerned about people in foreign countries than people who come from very similar backgrounds as them being shot in the back by police in their own country. Both are not good, to be clear, but one is a little more immediately pressing for Americans. Do you see what I'm getting at? Trying to offer some perspective here.

 

[eran0004]

If this is the effort you are going to put in to replying to my posts then I will ignore you from now on, have a good day.

I didn’t realise how much effort it took to type the word “hypocrite”. I’m sorry if I offended you.

 

[killerjimbag]

I just watched this. I want to hear some opinions on his thoughts.

 

[Keef]

Somehow I missed the "not".

I wonder why it's ok for private sector employees to extort and not public sector.

Implying that an employer accepting a union contract could be extortion is like implying that an employer accepting a capital contract could be extortion. If purchasing an expensive machine is extortion because the other option is not getting the machine, then I guess we're all a bunch of extortionists.

Government has the power to extort public funds because not only do they legislate it but they also enforce it. Private sector employers are free to accept or not accept a union contract - the contract is not legislation and neither party has the power to enforce its acceptance. It's just a contact. Law is not merely a contract.

 

[novcze]

I just watched this. I want to hear some opinions on his thoughts.

Exactly what I think except his little digression into christianity.