LogFAQs > #949204387

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, Database 7 ( 07.18.2020-02.18.2021 ), DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Right wing rioters storm Capitol in an attempt to stop Biden certification
CyborgSage00x0 01/06/21 11:34:33 PM #230:	adjl posted... For starters, regardless of any questions about the morality of protesting violently, it's generally a lot more acceptable to protest police brutality, systemic racism, and a lack of accountability for law enforcement than it is to protest with the aim of undermining the entire democratic process by overturning election results that are - by every available measure - perfectly legitimate. Straight out of the gate, one protest is for a justifiable cause, the other is not (a subjective assessment, to be sure, but one which most reasonable people will agree with). More significantly, though, calling last summer's unrest "acceptable" is grossly oversimplifying the situation and misrepresenting people's positions on it. The vast majority of people in support of BLM do not condone the looting, rioting, and other violence that has been attached to the protests, as much as far-right pundits would like to suggest they do. For the most part, the only time you'll see people being sympathetic toward violent BLM protests is when that violence has been instigated by police (and there's no shortage of videos out there of police assaulting obviously peaceful protesters), but even then the general consensus is "looting and rioting is bad, but I agree with the cause." The vast majority of BLM protests were in fact peaceful, as much as the media liked to fixate on the exciting violent ones. Many have been very quick to latch onto the violence for the sake of discrediting the movement as a whole, but those perpetrating the violence represent a very small portion of those protesting, many of which were only there for the sake of causing trouble and not because they feel any sort of affiliation with the cause. Basically, BLM protests=good, BLM riots=bad, conflating riots with all of BLM=also bad. To add, it has been proven that nearly all the looting and riot were NOT done by the actual BLM protestors, but random opportunists, taking advantage of the chaos. Plus, the amount of crocodile tears is ridiculous. None of these people actually cared about looting and rioting. The Target CEO literally didn't give a fuck one of his stores burned down, and supported BLM all the same. Why should anyone give more of a fuck than the damn CEO? --- PotD's resident Film Expert. <cite>CyborgSage00x0 posted [p:949204387] in Right wing... [t:79222252]...</cite> <quote>adjl posted... </cite> <quote>For starters, regardless of any questions about the morality of protesting violently, it's generally a lot more acceptable to protest police brutality, systemic racism, and a lack of accountability for law enforcement than it is to protest with the aim of undermining the entire democratic process by overturning election results that are - by every available measure - perfectly legitimate. Straight out of the gate, one protest is for a justifiable cause, the other is not (a subjective assessment, to be sure, but one which most reasonable people will agree with). More significantly, though, calling last summer's unrest "acceptable" is grossly oversimplifying the situation and misrepresenting people's positions on it. The vast majority of people in support of BLM do not condone the looting, rioting, and other violence that has been attached to the protests, as much as far-right pundits would like to suggest they do. For the most part, the only time you'll see people being sympathetic toward violent BLM protests is when that violence has been instigated by police (and there's no shortage of videos out there of police assaulting obviously peaceful protesters), but even then the general consensus is "looting and rioting is bad, but I agree with the cause." The vast majority of BLM protests were in fact peaceful, as much as the media liked to fixate on the exciting violent ones. Many have been very quick to latch onto the violence for the sake of discrediting the movement as a whole, but those perpetrating the violence represent a very small portion of those protesting, many of which were only there for the sake of causing trouble and not because they feel any sort of affiliation with the cause. Basically, BLM protests=good, BLM riots=bad, conflating riots with all of BLM=also bad.</quote>To add, it has been proven that nearly all the looting and riot were NOT done by the actual BLM protestors, but random opportunists, taking advantage of the chaos. Plus, the amount of crocodile tears is ridiculous. None of these people actually cared about looting and rioting. The Target CEO literally didn't give a fuck one of his stores burned down, and supported BLM all the same. Why should anyone give more of a fuck than the damn CEO? --- PotD's resident Film Expert. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1