Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

77. Clashes Following the Murder of George Floyd (Patreon)

Published:
2020-05-28 20:40:29
Edited:
2020-05-28 20:57:21
Imported:
2022-02

Downloads

Files

Comments

Charles P

Thanks for posting this. As I've said before I appreciate your coverage of things that happen in the US (where I live) and how you treat them with the same sort of objectivity as you would anything going on in any other part of the world. The "boogaloo" boy part is interesting. I can identify with their point of view somewhat, and I really want to say I highly doubt they're some sort of fascist infiltration, but you can never be too sure. My own perception is the US media will try to paint any private citizen with a firearm as a bad actor since that supports their narrative and their agenda, however you really can't tell these days. One thing I'm curious of though is how the Black individuals in these communities who are the ones being victimized would view them. I have a feeling they're at best ambivalent and and worst see them as making things worse or trying to co opt the movement into something it's not. My perception these people are fighting for simple equality and human dignity, not a revolutionary change to the system.

Camille (edited)

Comment edits

2022-02-25 13:45:09 "My own perception is the US media will try to paint any private citizen with a firearm as a bad actor since that supports their narrative and their agenda" --> Yes, you are correct. There was a lot more I was going to write, but I can sum most of it up by saying a lot of US political and cultural issues are partly a rural vs. urban divide. (I grew up in a rural area, lived in an urban area for about 9 years, moved back to the rural area.) From what I've read of history, this is not a new problem: tension between rural vs. urban areas is an issue in modern China, it was an issue in 18th century England, medieval Germany, and I think even the late Western Roman empire. Civilian ownership and use of firearms is one of these rural vs. urban differences, and it's also a proxy war for the larger philosophical debate of individual liberty vs. safety for society. If the actions an individual are allowed to take can potentially harm other people, where does an individual's liberty and rights stop and where does society's safety begin? An analogy is a situation I saw when I worked in a cubicle farm years ago: one person downloaded a computer screensaver with a virus and the company's IT department announced no one in the company could download any program without written permission and IT would keep a copy of company-IT-approved screensavers for someone wanting a screensaver; the Engineering department said 'fine,' submitted a written request for every single program they wanted to download, and within a week the company's IT department quietly told Engineering the requirement for written permission no longer applied to them. This same knee-jerk reaction of "a small group misused or abused something they were allowed to do and someone else got hurt, let's take it away from everyone so that can never happen again" (and the follow-on that the regulation is quietly removed from a higher-status group that gripes a lot, but not from everyone else) shows up in civilian firearm ownership, computer security research and penetration testing, free speech, agriculture, and private citizens' access to public lands, just to name a few things off the top of my head. Separately, I don't know if it's true of all riots, but I've heard Tim Pool mention on his podcast multiple times that he did some on-the-ground reporting during the Ferguson, Missouri (US) riots and was told by locals that many of the rioters and looters were NOT locals, but people from out of the area who had come in to take advantage of the unrest. I wish that had gotten more mainstream coverage, as "local rioters unhappy about injustice burn down and loot their own neighbors' homes and businesses" is often the way these riots are presented in the press nationally, and it doesn't help the cause of anyone involved. In the few cases where the neighbors who own the homes and businesses defend their own property, with either hand-to-hand weapons or firearms, it's either not covered in the press or the people doing the defending are criticized for "escalating the violence" or "acting like vigilantes."
2020-05-29 19:03:26 "My own perception is the US media will try to paint any private citizen with a firearm as a bad actor since that supports their narrative and their agenda" --> Yes, you are correct. There was a lot more I was going to write, but I can sum most of it up by saying a lot of US political and cultural issues are partly a rural vs. urban divide. (I grew up in a rural area, lived in an urban area for about 9 years, moved back to the rural area.) From what I've read of history, this is not a new problem: tension between rural vs. urban areas is an issue in modern China, it was an issue in 18th century England, medieval Germany, and I think even the late Western Roman empire. Civilian ownership and use of firearms is one of these rural vs. urban differences, and it's also a proxy war for the larger philosophical debate of individual liberty vs. safety for society. If the actions an individual are allowed to take can potentially harm other people, where does an individual's liberty and rights stop and where does society's safety begin? An analogy is a situation I saw when I worked in a cubicle farm years ago: one person downloaded a computer screensaver with a virus and the company's IT department announced no one in the company could download any program without written permission and IT would keep a copy of company-IT-approved screensavers for someone wanting a screensaver; the Engineering department said 'fine,' submitted a written request for every single program they wanted to download, and within a week the company's IT department quietly told Engineering the requirement for written permission no longer applied to them. This same knee-jerk reaction of "a small group misused or abused something they were allowed to do and someone else got hurt, let's take it away from everyone so that can never happen again" (and the follow-on that the regulation is quietly removed from a higher-status group that gripes a lot, but not from everyone else) shows up in civilian firearm ownership, computer security research and penetration testing, free speech, agriculture, and private citizens' access to public lands, just to name a few things off the top of my head. Separately, I don't know if it's true of all riots, but I've heard Tim Pool mention on his podcast multiple times that he did some on-the-ground reporting during the Ferguson, Missouri (US) riots and was told by locals that many of the rioters and looters were NOT locals, but people from out of the area who had come in to take advantage of the unrest. I wish that had gotten more mainstream coverage, as "local rioters unhappy about injustice burn down and loot their own neighbors' homes and businesses" is often the way these riots are presented in the press nationally, and it doesn't help the cause of anyone involved. In the few cases where the neighbors who own the homes and businesses defend their own property, with either hand-to-hand weapons or firearms, it's either not covered in the press or the people doing the defending are criticized for "escalating the violence" or "acting like vigilantes."
>>37745692

"My own perception is the US media will try to paint any private citizen with a firearm as a bad actor since that supports their narrative and their agenda" --> Yes, you are correct. There was a lot more I was going to write, but I can sum most of it up by saying a lot of US political and cultural issues are partly a rural vs. urban divide. (I grew up in a rural area, lived in an urban area for about 9 years, moved back to the rural area.) From what I've read of history, this is not a new problem: tension between rural vs. urban areas is an issue in modern China, it was an issue in 18th century England, medieval Germany, and I think even the late Western Roman empire. Civilian ownership and use of firearms is one of these rural vs. urban differences, and it's also a proxy war for the larger philosophical debate of individual liberty vs. safety for society. If the actions an individual are allowed to take can potentially harm other people, where does an individual's liberty and rights stop and where does society's safety begin? An analogy is a situation I saw when I worked in a cubicle farm years ago: one person downloaded a computer screensaver with a virus and the company's IT department announced no one in the company could download any program without written permission and IT would keep a copy of company-IT-approved screensavers for someone wanting a screensaver; the Engineering department said 'fine,' submitted a written request for every single program they wanted to download, and within a week the company's IT department quietly told Engineering the requirement for written permission no longer applied to them. This same knee-jerk reaction of "a small group misused or abused something they were allowed to do and someone else got hurt, let's take it away from everyone so that can never happen again" (and the follow-on that the regulation is quietly removed from a higher-status group that gripes a lot, but not from everyone else) shows up in civilian firearm ownership, computer security research and penetration testing, free speech, agriculture, and private citizens' access to public lands, just to name a few things off the top of my head. Separately, I don't know if it's true of all riots, but I've heard Tim Pool mention on his podcast multiple times that he did some on-the-ground reporting during the Ferguson, Missouri (US) riots and was told by locals that many of the rioters and looters were NOT locals, but people from out of the area who had come in to take advantage of the unrest. I wish that had gotten more mainstream coverage, as "local rioters unhappy about injustice burn down and loot their own neighbors' homes and businesses" is often the way these riots are presented in the press nationally, and it doesn't help the cause of anyone involved. In the few cases where the neighbors who own the homes and businesses defend their own property, with either hand-to-hand weapons or firearms, it's either not covered in the press or the people doing the defending are criticized for "escalating the violence" or "acting like vigilantes."

Charles P
>>37745692

Thanks for the response. I was trying to be diplomatic when I couched my language with “my perception”. :) I know first hand about what you’re talking about. Ultimately I feel like humanity is reaching an inflection point of even more centralization of society or a point when decentralization will start occurring as little pockets of people break away from established institutions. I tend to see most things, firearms ownership, police brutality, through that lens.

Anonymous

@Jake - Can you please take a look at reporting on the armed protester responses and the "boog boys" within the protests? Have they had an effect, what are their political alignments, etc? It's been surprising and interesting that it seems like the boog boys are showing up, but siding against the cops.