National Guard called into Minneapolis

[Houseman]

The idea that there is always an exception so empirical reality is less important than an overly literal and blunt logic is such a horrific way of understanding things.

An exception? Empirical reality? Every time someone made the point that All Lives Matter is being used in a White Supremacist way, I came up with a different example from twitter showing how it's not. The first two were the Jarayj and Fenix people, and the last two were the pro-police rally and now these black marchers.

How is it that everytime anyone asks, I'm able to show you a different example of the words being used literally, and yet I'm the one rejecting reality?

You do realise you have already been shown the evidence in the form of videos, articles and tweets throughout this thread, which you keep denying for whatever reason, do you really want me to re-post those videos again.

I don't know what you're referring to, so yes, please do, or just link to whatever post contains what evidence you want to show me.

They've also stated their dislike of the BLM movement

Who are "they"? The people in the video? No they haven't. They didn't say a single negative thing about BLM in that video. So what kind of arbitrary grouping are you making when you say "they"? Anyone who isn't on the side of BLM?

Also going by that logic a lot of people of the black lives matter have shown support by saying all lives matter

Well that must mean that they're infiltrators working for the White Supremacists, right?
If not, then that must mean that they're speaking literally, right? That's what I've been saying.

the guy in 0:25 mark claims that what's being reported in the news is fake news,

He says "absolutely crazy", and someone else shouts "fake news" while he says that, and he says "a lot of it is".
"a lot of what is being reported is fake news " is different from claiming "what is being reported in the news is fake news".
The latter statement implies that all of it is fake news.

these people are refusing to acknowledge the gravity of the violence being committed

And that's a fair criticism.

But they're not necessarily white supremacists who love police brutality, and them saying "all lives matter" is not proof of that, which was my point that you seem to agree with.

WOULD YOU BELIEVE THE COPS ARE LYING ABOUT IT?!?

What if it wasn't tear gas, but just a non-irritating smoke canister that people only ran from because they thought it was tear gas? Like a placebo?
#NotAllGas

 

[Revnak]

I'm getting this weird feeling that the "few bad apples" may be the whole bunch. Anyone else?

At some point, if every apple in the orchard tastes like piss, you must do something about the piss orchard.

 

[Revnak]

An exception? Empirical reality? Every time someone made the point that All Lives Matter is being used in a White Supremacist way, I came up with a different example from twitter showing how it's not. The first two were the Jarayj and Fenix people, and the last two were the pro-police rally and now these black marchers.

Because it’s not about random cases, it is about a thing taken as a whole. I can find chants of All Lives Matter at Unite the Right if I want to, but that’s irrelevant. It’s the broader scope of the thing.

What if it wasn't tear gas, but just a non-irritating smoke canister that people only ran from because they thought it was tear gas? Like a placebo?
#NotAllGas

I wrote something angrier here before editing because groups dealing with these kinds of traumas in a sensitive point to me, but do know that this was in horrifically poor taste.

 

[Asita]

I'm getting this weird feeling that the "few bad apples" may be the whole bunch. Anyone else?

It's perhaps worth noting here the supreme irony in trying to handwave the problem as just "a few bad apples", as the adage they're invoking actually preaches the opposite of what they're using it for. The saying is that "one bad apple spoils the whole bunch", that the rot in one will inevitably spread and cause the rest to rot as well.

 

[Houseman]

Because it’s not about random cases, it is about a thing taken as a whole. I can find chants of All Lives Matter at Unite the Right if I want to, but that’s irrelevant. It’s the broader scope of the thing.

If it's about the thing "as a whole", then shouldn't that mean that the majority, or maybe just a significant minority of people are using the slogan to be racist, therefore "polluting" the slogan and making it unusable?

Why can't I find any examples of people being racist while using the hashtag as I scroll through Twitter? I guess Twitter is just real good at deleting the racism?

I wrote something angrier here before editing because groups dealing with these kinds of traumas in a sensitive point to me, but do know that this was in horrifically poor taste.

I'm serious. What proof do you have that this gas was of the irritant variety?
How can you tell whether or not smoke contains irritants by looking at a video of it?

 

[Eacaraxe]

Meanwhile, in St. Louis...




Nothing says "conscientious gun owner exercising their 2nd Amendment rights" like accidentally mercing your own spouse.

 

[Houseman]

Nothing says "conscientious gun owner exercising their 2nd Amendment rights" like accidentally mercing your own spouse.

Those two are gonna become the next hot new meme.
They might even get their own costumes in games. Imagine playing Rainbow 6 and Pink Shirt M16 guy busts through the wall and headshots you.

 

[Revnak]

If it's about the thing "as a whole", then shouldn't that mean that the majority, or maybe just a significant minority of people are using the slogan to be racist, therefore "polluting" the slogan and making it unusable?

Why can't I find any examples of people being racist while using the hashtag as I scroll through Twitter? I guess Twitter is just real good at deleting the racism?

I uh, didn’t call it explicitly racist, just occasionally used by white nationalists. I called it an empty slogan meant to reinforce the beliefs of white moderates. While I would compare it to more obviously racist slogans, those racists will happily explain to you that even those slogans are not explicitly racist (nor are they intended to be). It also is used alongside the blue lives slogan, which is more explicitly an appeal to law and order above justice.

I'm serious. What proof do you have that this gas was of the irritant variety?
How can you tell whether or not smoke contains irritants by looking at a video of it?

I... the hundreds of people there who reacted as if it was tear gas. The full masks being worn by the police so as not to be affected by the tear gas. The fact that smoke that does not spread won’t disperse a crowd like that almost instantly did.
Finally, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HOLDING A PEACEFUL VIGIL FOR A DEAD ANEMIC TEENAGER MORE THAN THE COPS WHO KILLED HIM THEN BRUTALIZED HIS MOURNERS.
Edit- I mean, fuck, even if that grenade didn’t carry a chemical irritant, pepper spray is literally the same thing as one kind of tear gas grenade, they were firing off rubber rounds regularly, and IT WAS A VIGIL. WITH FUCKING VIOLINS.

 

[Terminal Blue]

So it's not because of anything they've explicitly said? Okay.

I mean, it's absolutely because of things they've explicitly said. There's a necessary element of context which you're deliberately choosing to ignore.

For one, if you can stand there and say with a straight face that cops are being punished for the actions of a single bad apple, then you are saying by necessity that the level of police abuse currently occurring in response to that incident, let alone unrelated police abuse, is acceptable and appropriate. All the abuses described and documented in this thread are appropriate and justifiable if it preserves "law and order".

If he didn't condone it, then he didn't believe it was necessary. Things being necessary are condoned. Nobody would condemn people who are stranded in the tundra and eat each-other in order to survive, because what they had to do was necessary.

What if they only thought it was necessary?

What if, immediately after they had finished eating their first corpse, they were rescued.

The moral equation isn't actually whether or not it was necessary, the action isn't retrospectively justified by whether or not they would have been rescued before starving, it's whether the material conditions under which they made the choice were desperate enough to warrant that action.

MLK understood why people perceive rioting as necessary. He gave variations on the same speech several times, not just to white media but to black audiences, and was quick to point out the injustice of condemning rioting while ignoring the conditions that led to rioting, conditions created (in part) by the same white moderates whose ancestors now use him to justify their indifference to those same conditions.

I didn't do any of that. I just said that 'his' slogans weren't specific to any one race.

Martin Luther King didn't produce slogans. He gave speeches and sermons and wrote books and letters which have subsequently been quoted a lot. We Shall Overcome is from a gospel song. I Am a Man is addressed to the particular dehumanisation of black people and asserts a claim to equal humanity. A strategically ignorant person could, of course, claim that the humanity of black people was never in question and thus the latter slogan is divisive, or worse that it implies that white men are not men. That is, however, a laughable concept and transparently easy to see through.

I'm curious, have people tried?

Probably. I doubt it ever got to court though.

In the UK, in order to be registered as a legal charity an organisation needs to have a charitable purpose, meaning it needs to be clearly defined what the charity is for and how it serves the common good. Any discrimination the charity needs to make will be defined in its charitable purpose, as well as the reason why such a discrimination is needed. If a charity works with LGBT homeless people, for example, its charitable purpose will state that there is a disproportionate need for such services. If a charity has an explicitly religious purpose and is not providing services on behalf of the state, it is also allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion or sexual orientation even though these are protected categories.

As long as the grounds for discrimination are described and clearly justified in the charitable purpose, which again is necessary to even be a legal charity, then charities are very well protected from anti-discrimination claims.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Those two are gonna become the next hot new meme.

"Are gonna"? O ye of little faith,

They might even get their own costumes in games. Imagine playing Rainbow 6 and Pink Shirt M16 guy busts through the wall and headshots you.

For what, teamkilling?

 

[Houseman]

I... the hundreds of people there who reacted as if it was tear gas

If someone throws an exploding canister of gas at you, what are you gonna do, take a cautious sniff and let it waft around your eyes to check if it contains irritants or not?
No, you're going to run away from it, just in case it is tear gas, which is what most of those people did.

People running away from something doesn't necessarily mean that the thing is dangerous, it means they think the thing is dangerous.

The fact that smoke that does not spread won’t disperse a crowd like that almost instantly did.

all smoke spreads, to a degree. Are you saying that you can identify a smoke grenade from a tear gas grenade based on how it spreads?

I mean, maybe there's a difference between the kind used to signal aircraft, which is supposed to go up, and the kind used to blanket an area, which is supposed to be heavier than, or as heavy as, air, but it's not as if you can't just make a non-irritant blanket version as well.

Finally, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HOLDING A PEACEFUL VIGIL FOR A DEAD ANEMIC TEENAGER MORE THAN THE COPS WHO KILLED HIM THEN BRUTALIZED HIS MOURNERS.

I'd believe them too. Have any of them reported the symptoms that tear gas causes? If you can show me something like "I was there, I inhaled the gas, it was definitely tear gas and not regular white smoke." then I'd believe them.

I mean, it's absolutely because of things they've explicitly said. There's a necessary element of context which you're deliberately choosing to ignore.

For one, if you can stand there and say with a straight face that cops are being punished for the actions of a single bad apple, then you are saying by necessity that the level of police abuse currently occurring in response to that incident, let alone unrelated police abuse, is acceptable and appropriate. All the abuses described and documented in this thread are appropriate and justifiable if it preserves "law and order".

Who's saying that? I didn't hear anyone saying that in the video.

What if they only thought it was necessary?

What if, immediately after they had finished eating their first corpse, they were rescued.

Nothing would change. They couldn't have known that.

Martin Luther King didn't produce slogans.

Yeah, that's why I put 'his' in quotes.

 

[Trunkage]

It IS being used that way. Like I said, go search twitter for #AllLivesMatter. Look at all these black people marching and chanting All Lives Matter:


But this doesn't count for some reason because, what, they're all white supremacists?

Your argument is the equivalent of saying "A gun was used to murder someone once, so all guns are being used to murder people", or "Nazis used the swastika, so therefore, nobody can ever use one in any context, ever again", and yet...

You are ascribing motives and arguments to people based, not on what they say, but on the opinions of people who've said the same words at an earlier point in time.
In other words, to you, it's not about the words themselves, but the opinions held by the people who first said those words.

White supremacist, 3 months ago: "I love eggs!"
Black person, today: "I love eggs!"
You: "You're a White Supremacist because you said that thing that the White supremacist said three months ago!"

No, he meant what he said, he just loves eggs.

Nah. My argument is like this: Obama is a shit president. Trump is a shit president. But Trump is way shitter. It’s not even close. I’m going to have to pick Obama. BLM maybe shit in some respects, but it’s way less shit than ALM.

But these guys seem to be trying to reappropriate ALM. Good on them. I hope it works. How about, instead of hating on BLM because you gotta get that fake outrage in, why do you just follow these guys? Complaining about BLM wont change my mind. Fixing ALM will

It would be great if you stopped pretending that when someone says that ‘ALM is used by White Supremacists‘, to means ‘ONLY White Supremacists use ALM.’ No body has climbed that here and your argument completely falls down once you get rid of that assumption. It’s why your line of thinking isn’t winning converts here

 

[Eacaraxe]

"Are gonna"? O ye of little faith,

Cont'd,

 

[Revnak]

If someone throws an exploding canister of gas at you, what are you gonna do, take a cautious sniff and let it waft around your eyes to check if it contains irritants or not?
No, you're going to run away from it, just in case it is tear gas, which is what most of those people did.

People running away from something doesn't necessarily mean that the thing is dangerous, it means they think the thing is dangerous.



all smoke spreads, to a degree. Are you saying that you can identify a smoke grenade from a tear gas grenade based on how it spreads?

I mean, maybe there's a difference between the kind used to signal aircraft, which is supposed to go up, and the kind used to blanket an area, which is supposed to be heavier than, or as heavy as, air, but it's not as if you can't just make a non-irritant blanket version as well.


I'd believe them too. Have any of them reported the symptoms that tear gas causes? If you can show me something like "I was there, I inhaled the gas, it was definitely tear gas and not regular white smoke." then I'd believe them.

I... I’m not getting caught up in pedantic stupidity here. There’s plenty more reason to believe the people saying it was tear gas (including the slight cough and crying in the video) than the cops and pepper spray is literally the same shit when used as widely as they were anyway, they still shot off rubber or pepper rounds, THIS WAS STILL A FUCKING PEACEFUL VIGIL.

 

[Houseman]

Complaining about BLM wont change my mind. Fixing ALM will

I'm doing my part, right here. Hearts and minds. Convincing people that ALM isn't a White Supremacist slogan.

But that's the thing with these sorts of slogans and movements that anyone can enter and be a part of. You can't "kick people out" of it. If people want to claim to be a part of it, and then want to start looting a store or commit acts of violence or tweet their genitalia with the hashtag, there's nothing anyone can do about it. There's no hashtag police.

The only real tool anyone has to change public perception about what a hashtag means is the mainstream media. Whatever they report on, that's what it becomes. If they say your movement is a alt-right nazi grooming op, that's what everyone believes, instantly and uncritically. Because otherwise, who are you going to believe, alt-right nazi groomers?

So the only thing I can do is talk to people, one at a time. A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

It would be great if you stopped pretending that when someone says that ‘ALM is used by White Supremacists‘, to means ‘ONLY White Supremacists use ALM.’ No body has climbed that here and your argument completely falls down once you get rid of that assumption. It’s why your line of thinking isn’t winning converts here

That's fair. I only started saying it when *looks* you started saying it in post #1,674

But what's my argument that falls down? That people are innocently using ALM to mean exactly what it says? Haven't I posted sufficient evidence of that by now?

There’s plenty more reason to believe the people saying it was tear gas (including the slight cough and crying in the video)

Like I said, just find me ONE PERSON who inhaled the alleged irritants and I'll be on your side that the cops lied. Surely one of those people have twitter. Maybe the person with the slight cough would know more about it, provided he isn't just a smoker.

 

[Revnak]

Like I said, just find me ONE PERSON who inhaled the alleged irritants and I'll be on your side that the cops lied. Surely one of those people have twitter. Maybe the person with the slight cough would know more about it, provided he isn't just a smoker.

I’m not doing this bullshit. The spray and shots are bad enough.

 

[Kwak]

Jesus fucking christ.

 

[Hawki]

Just had a Facebook message saying "Police Lives Matter" and daring people to share it.

Strange world.

The campaign against modern slavery is "divisive and exclusionary" because it only focuses on ending modern slavery?

I've actually seen variants of that, that the discussion of modern slavery in the context of historical slavery is a red herring.

Similarly, I've seen the argument that discussion of the Holocaust to the extent that it has been, has minimized the horrors of other genocides.

 

[lil devils x]

Just had a Facebook message saying "Police Lives Matter" and daring people to share it.

Strange world.



I've actually seen variants of that, that the discussion of modern slavery in the context of historical slavery is a red herring.

Similarly, I've seen the argument that discussion of the Holocaust to the extent that it has been, has minimized the horrors of other genocides.

I only use my facebook to sell things I do not want easily and keep nothing personal on there because I Trust Zuckerberg as far as I can throw him.. SO I only have local groups and related added to my facebook. Even then, My facebook groups are FULL of a constant barrage of " Blue lives Matter" "ALL lives Matter" " Obama is a muslim" "Bernie is a Nazi" Hillary was putting hits out on people" " Trump was chosen by god" "Praying for Trump" posts. There is a reason I haven't even logged into FB in like a year.. I am afraid of what awaits me.

 

[Seanchaidh]

I'm doing my part, right here. Hearts and minds. Convincing people that ALM isn't a White Supremacist slogan.

Convincing people of that isn't what needs to happen. Making that true is what needs to happen.

Hillary was putting hits out on people

That one's probably true, though.