The Murder of George Floyd & Subsequent Protests/Riots

[Jonny]

...spied on Trump...

Source?

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Do you really believe Russian interference is a conspiracy? Even though it was pretty much consensus across the intelligence community? And in spite of the information the intelligence committees have released (like, most recently, the notes about Flynn's phone calls)?

My point was people latched onto it and believed it well before all of the facts were available or anyone knew whether the allegations were founded or unfounded.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

And to be clear, there was ample evidence that Russia did actively work to support Trump's election. This is not a conspiracy theory, and if you read the Russia investigation report you'd see as much. I suspect after this is all over there will be ample evidence that Russia actively worked to stoke racial and other discontent in the United States. No doubt they benefit from our continued decline.

That said, I appreciate your uncertainty and openness on the matter.

I didn't say the Russia meddling was fake. See my reply to Z Buck for the point I was attempting to make. Many people tend to be selectively biased in how demanding they are of fact to back various theories, and in how patient they are about waiting for all of the available facts. This isn't a condemnation of the left, I see this everywhere. Everyone's guilty of it at least once in their lifetime, including myself.


And sorry if I unfairly lumped you in with other people.

 

[Maou]

Source?

Yeah, let me just find an unbiased newsource that supports my claim...oh wait. The only news source that does is right winged. Which you won't bother to even consider based on that fact.

Just wait till the Barr investigation comes to an end.

Barr claims Trump-Russia investigation was FBI attempt to 'sabotage' the president | US news | The Guardian

Anyways, enough about this. This is about the riots.

 

[Population: 1]

Conspiracy theories only apply to those you don’t agree with. Catch up people. It’s a useful term used by both sides of a conflict to discredit the other. It’s a convenient way to dismiss someone’s opinion. It’s right up there with labeling someone a derogatory term such as racist or phobic during an argument to deflect from the issue at hand. It’s part of the reason why so very few actual discussions or debates occur now. Everyone throws insults and accusations of believing in conspiracies and automatically discrediting the other’s sources because they’re not the “right” sources. It’s why I don’t even bother attempting to engage in intelligent discourse anymore. It’s a dead art form at this point.

 

[Jonny]

I didn't say the Russia meddling was fake. See my reply to Z Buck for the point I was attempting to make. Many people tend to be selectively biased in how demanding they are of fact to back various theories, and in how patient they are about waiting for all of the available facts. This isn't a condemnation of the left, I see this everywhere. Everyone's guilty of it at least once in their lifetime, including myself.


And sorry if I unfairly lumped you in with other people.

No worries. I didn't necessarily feel lumped in, but I wanted to make a clear distinction. I think there are people who promote conspiracy theories on both sides of the aisle, and that behavior can be used to invalidate the more evidence-based opinions. Hypocrisy exists within the individual to be sure, but it abounds when you start lumping people together with disparate opinions because...well...they're actually different people with different opinions.

Our society would be better served by highlighting the divisions between those who are well-informed and reasonable and those who peddle in conspiracy theories, rather than divisions in political party. My prejudice comes in play when I call out people on the other side but let some people on "my side" (i.e. those who oppose Trump) go unchecked. I won't say I'll ever change, because there is limited time in the day, countless falsehoods propagated, and I'm more viscerally compelled to fight pro-Trump nonsense. Of course I'll continue to occasionally correct someone who is anti-Trump, because I still think that falsehoods deserve to be confronted, but my focus will naturally be toward Trump's supporters. I think this is OK because there are plenty of conservatives who are agnostic on Trump and are happy to call out falsehoods from the anti-Trump folk.

I do feel, however, that Trump peddles in conspiracy theories at a level pretty much unprecedented in modern American politics, and I find him to be an affront to our national dignity. I think there is absolutely a right side to be on when it comes to him, even if that side is also imperfect.

 

[Schrödinger's Name]

I do think you're overly focused on something that is actually an insignificant detail...like who cares? You still get the point of what's being explained. Let it go...and no, the term is not racist itself. You're being kind of ridiculous.

That's questionable.
"Assumptions and stereotypes about white people are examples of racial prejudice, not racism. Racial prejudice refers to a set of discriminatory or derogatory attitudes based on assumptions deriving from perceptions about race and/or skin colour. Thus, racial prejudice can indeed be directed at white people (e.g., white people can’t dance) but is not considered racism because of the systemic relationship of power.
 When backed with power, prejudice results in acts of discrimination and oppression against groups or individuals."

"Ricky Sherover-Marcuse asserts that "we should not confuse the occasional mistreatment experienced by whites at the hands of people of color with the systematic and institutionalized mistreatment experienced by people of color at the hands of whites” (“A Working Definition of Racism," p. 2). While expressions of racial prejudice directed at white people may hurt the white person/people individually or personally, and are never to be condoned, they do not have the power or authority to affect the white person's social/economic/political location and privileges."
Myth of Reverse Racism — Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre

"Reverse racism is a myth because it tries to ignore the fundamental question of who holds more power/privilege between the individuals/groups involved; the myth of reverse racism assumes that racism occurs on a so-called level playing field. For example, Ricky-Sherover-Marcuse observes that claims to reverse racism are often made in regards to affirmative action programs. Zeba Blay explains how white people often "believe deserving white students are discriminated against while academically unqualified students are given highly coveted college or company positions ― just because they happen to tick the "ethnic minority" box" (article cited below). Sherover-Marcuse explains how, in actuality,"[a]ffirmative action programs are attempts to repair the results of institutionalized racism by setting guidelines and establishing procedures for finding qualified applicants from all segments of the population” (“A Working Definition of Racism," p. 2). In other words, these programs do not privilege people of colour but help to ensure that they are given equal consideration and opportunities."
(Still the same article.)

Definitions;

• Prejudice refers to irrational or unjustifiable negative emotions or evaluations toward persons from
other social groups, and it is a primary determinant of discriminatory behavior (Friske, Gilbert, &
Gardner, 2010).
• Discrimination refers to inappropriate treatment of people because of their actual or perceived group
membership and may include both overt and covert behaviors, including microaggressions, or
indirect or subtle behaviors (e.g., comments) that reflect negative attitudes or beliefs about a
nonmajority group.
• Racism refers to prejudice or discrimination against individuals or groups based on beliefs about
one’s own racial superiority or the belief that race reflects inherent differences in attributes and
capabilities. Racism is the basis for social stratification and differential treatment that advantage the
dominant group. It can take many forms, including explicit racial prejudice and discrimination by
individuals and institutions (e.g., Jim Crow laws after the Reconstruction) as well as structural or
environmental racism in policies or practices that foster discrimination and mutually reinforcing
social inequalities (e.g., attendance policies that favor a majority group). Racism can also take the
form of unconscious beliefs, stereotypes, and attitudes toward racial groups in the form of implicit
bias (e.g., assuming limited ability when students speak non-standard English; fearful responses to
verbal or physical behavior of non-White students; Staats, Capatosto, Wright, & Jackson, 2016).
Other forms of racism are modern symbolic racism in which individuals deny the continued
existence of racial inequality while contributing to discrimination and aversive racism through ingroup favoritism for the dominant racial group (Bailey et al., 2017; Friske et al., 2010).

But eh, definitions can be vague and change over time and racism takes place on multiple levels. On micro-level everyone can be racist no matter what their skin color is (though the term 'racism' should not be used lightly). But if you look at events that take place at meso- and macro-level (what this stuff is all about) in America you can not talk about white people facing racism.

However, I do not think that 'reverse racism' is an acceptable term to use. You can't compare the constant and longterm discrimination POC have been facing with POC talking shit about white people. I don't think it's okay to talk shit or to hate white people but it's understandable backlash. What imo, makes it pretty disrespectful to start talking about 'reverse racism' when it's about a subject that affects people's future and their daily life. A black person telling you they hate you simply because you are white could make you feel like shit for a day (maybe longer, depending on personal factors). However, you as a white person telling a black person you hate them because they are black does not have the same impact.
It's the "but everyone struggles!" sophism when someone is talking about their chronic problems faced by XYZ. Even though it's not relevant at all. People can complain about what they are facing at any given moment but for some reason many people prefer to do so when someone addresses their own personal struggles.
"Fibromyalgia makes my muscles hurt all day long and disturbs my day-to-day life,"
"Oh my god, everyone's muscles hurt once in a while. I had a rough workout yesterday. My muscles hurt so much I can't even touch them anymore!"
(I think you already knew what I was referring to, but to set an example. Note; this post is not only specifically directed at you. I am only quoting you since this is a reoccurring discussion and you happened to be the last person to respond to it.)

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Conspiracy theories only apply to those you don’t agree with. Catch up people. It’s a useful term used by both sides of a conflict to discredit the other. It’s a convenient way to dismiss someone’s opinion. It’s right up there with labeling someone a derogatory term such as racist or phobic during an argument to deflect from the issue at hand. It’s part of the reason why so very few actual discussions or debates occur now. Everyone throws insults and accusations of believing in conspiracies and automatically discrediting the other’s sources because they’re not the “right” sources. It’s why I don’t even bother attempting to engage in intelligent discourse anymore. It’s a dead art form at this point.

I think there's a lot of truth in this in that the phrase is often used as a pejorative to discredit. But fundamentally, there are also actual conspiracy theories. "The Holocaust never happened" is a conspiracy theory regardless of whose side a person is on. (And I think it's important not to lose sight of the fact that "conspiracy theories only apply to those you don't agree with" is only where actual dialogue is so compromised that it no longer rightly qualifies as dialogue per se).

 

[Z Buck McFate]

In regard to the convo about starting up a peacekeeping influence in lieu of law enforcement: why would starting up a whole new department be better than slowly shifting the existing pd into something more along peacekeeping/social services goals?

I 100% agree it's needed - cities where the police joined in instead of immediately enforcing crowd control are clearly doing better - I'm just wondering what benefits exist for it being a separate entity.

 

[Population: 1]

I think there's a lot of truth in this in that the phrase is often used as a pejorative to discredit. But fundamentally, there are also actual conspiracy theories. "The Holocaust never happened" is a conspiracy theory regardless of whose side a person is on. (And I think it's important not to lose sight of the fact that "conspiracy theories only apply to those you don't agree with" is only where actual dialogue is so compromised that it no longer rightly qualifies as dialogue per se).

“Conspiracy theories only apply to those you don’t agree with” was used partly with sarcasm. So much of what I say usually is. Perhaps it’s a personal failing but I rather enjoy it.

I also don’t believe reptilian aliens control the world’s governments. Every situation has to be met with a degree of skepticism when credible evidence isn’t immediately available. Some conspiracy theories, like the aforementioned, can be dismissed out of hand as the ravings of a madman. It really depends on how reasonable it sounds. People doing things for profit and power don’t sound too far fetched to me it happens constantly and throughout human history. People twisting a system to their advantage is as old as systems themselves. Some you may never be able to confirm but that doesn’t mean they’re consigned to the realm of fiction. UFOs or UAPs, whatever variant of the term the government is using nowadays, were constantly refuted to exist by authorities for decades. Yet now the government is releasing footage of them. Yesterday’s conspiracy theory is today’s news.

 

[FemMecha]

I think there's a lot of truth in this in that the phrase is often used as a pejorative to discredit. But fundamentally, there are also actual conspiracy theories. "The Holocaust never happened" is a conspiracy theory regardless of whose side a person is on. (And I think it's important not to lose sight of the fact that "conspiracy theories only apply to those you don't agree with" is only where actual dialogue is so compromised that it no longer rightly qualifies as dialogue per se).

I'll quote this one as well because I think your point provides a basis for my comment.

There is the issue of finding the correct conclusion, but I think it is valuable to emphasize the need for a reasoned process towards conclusions. Having lived for six years with a conspiracy theorist who spent hours every day making connections, finding patterns, reinforcing the ideas in a way that felt like it increased credibility, the main flaw was the process of reasoning. There wasn't a logical way of delineating facts and credibility, but more focus on repetition and sensationalism. The bigger the emotional impact combined with seeing the idea repeated over and over is what results in convincing. There needs to be more true analytical reasoning taught to people. If they have a good internal system for processing information, then even if they come to different conclusions, these will be reasoned conclusions which allow for debate. When this is missing, drama and repetition are then applied to the debating process as well because that is how that knowledge base was established in the first place.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

There needs to be more true analytical reasoning taught to people. If they have a good internal system for processing information, then even if they come to different conclusions, these will be reasoned conclusions which allow for debate.

This can't be understated.

I'm perpetually stunned by how conversations that I consider hostile, co-mingling echo chambers are considered "dialogue" by others simply because opposing viewpoints are participating. And it's disheartening how co-mingling echo chambers are the new norm, as if there's nothing better to strive for. We really need to actively teach "thesis + antithesis = synthesis" quality dialogue to kids. Or something.

eta: Also, I really like "self-soothe" as a way to describe why people latch onto theories or whatnot with (what appears to outsiders as) irrational zeal. Sometimes certainty in something disturbing is actually more comforting than uncertainty (because the condition of being human is *WEIRD*), and the emotional awareness required to cope with uncertainty (so that a person doesn't flee into conspiracy theories for comfort) would certainly be a good thing to teach kids as well.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

I don't know if this has been suggested but I think a good way to reform the police culture would be to implement some combination of draft/election. Those officers "drafted" would be from their own local communities. They could of course refuse if they didn't want the job. They would be selected/elected by a community panel based on whether they meet basic physical and psychological criteria. All would go through sensitivity training. If selected, once they violated any of those criteria, they would be out of the service. No second chances.

robot cops would be nice too, once the technology was there. I know that scares a lot of people, but given the choice, I'd rather deal with an impartial automaton than some roided up ex-marine with PTSD and a chip on his shoulder looking to crack skulls.

 

[FemMecha]

[MENTION=19700]Officer Ed Powell[/MENTION]
It sounds like your concept of draft/election has the principle of direct accountability to the population being served. There is something important in this notion, although I don't know the specifics of best implementation.

 

[Mind Maverick]

That's questionable.
"Assumptions and stereotypes about white people are examples of racial prejudice, not racism. Racial prejudice refers to a set of discriminatory or derogatory attitudes based on assumptions deriving from perceptions about race and/or skin colour. Thus, racial prejudice can indeed be directed at white people (e.g., white people can’t dance) but is not considered racism because of the systemic relationship of power.
 When backed with power, prejudice results in acts of discrimination and oppression against groups or individuals."

"Ricky Sherover-Marcuse asserts that "we should not confuse the occasional mistreatment experienced by whites at the hands of people of color with the systematic and institutionalized mistreatment experienced by people of color at the hands of whites” (“A Working Definition of Racism," p. 2). While expressions of racial prejudice directed at white people may hurt the white person/people individually or personally, and are never to be condoned, they do not have the power or authority to affect the white person's social/economic/political location and privileges."
Myth of Reverse Racism — Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre

"Reverse racism is a myth because it tries to ignore the fundamental question of who holds more power/privilege between the individuals/groups involved; the myth of reverse racism assumes that racism occurs on a so-called level playing field. For example, Ricky-Sherover-Marcuse observes that claims to reverse racism are often made in regards to affirmative action programs. Zeba Blay explains how white people often "believe deserving white students are discriminated against while academically unqualified students are given highly coveted college or company positions ― just because they happen to tick the "ethnic minority" box" (article cited below). Sherover-Marcuse explains how, in actuality,"[a]ffirmative action programs are attempts to repair the results of institutionalized racism by setting guidelines and establishing procedures for finding qualified applicants from all segments of the population” (“A Working Definition of Racism," p. 2). In other words, these programs do not privilege people of colour but help to ensure that they are given equal consideration and opportunities."
(Still the same article.)

Definitions;

• Prejudice refers to irrational or unjustifiable negative emotions or evaluations toward persons from
other social groups, and it is a primary determinant of discriminatory behavior (Friske, Gilbert, &
Gardner, 2010).
• Discrimination refers to inappropriate treatment of people because of their actual or perceived group
membership and may include both overt and covert behaviors, including microaggressions, or
indirect or subtle behaviors (e.g., comments) that reflect negative attitudes or beliefs about a
nonmajority group.
• Racism refers to prejudice or discrimination against individuals or groups based on beliefs about
one’s own racial superiority or the belief that race reflects inherent differences in attributes and
capabilities. Racism is the basis for social stratification and differential treatment that advantage the
dominant group. It can take many forms, including explicit racial prejudice and discrimination by
individuals and institutions (e.g., Jim Crow laws after the Reconstruction) as well as structural or
environmental racism in policies or practices that foster discrimination and mutually reinforcing
social inequalities (e.g., attendance policies that favor a majority group). Racism can also take the
form of unconscious beliefs, stereotypes, and attitudes toward racial groups in the form of implicit
bias (e.g., assuming limited ability when students speak non-standard English; fearful responses to
verbal or physical behavior of non-White students; Staats, Capatosto, Wright, & Jackson, 2016).
Other forms of racism are modern symbolic racism in which individuals deny the continued
existence of racial inequality while contributing to discrimination and aversive racism through ingroup favoritism for the dominant racial group (Bailey et al., 2017; Friske et al., 2010).

But eh, definitions can be vague and change over time and racism takes place on multiple levels. On micro-level everyone can be racist no matter what their skin color is (though the term 'racism' should not be used lightly). But if you look at events that take place at meso- and macro-level (what this stuff is all about) in America you can not talk about white people facing racism.

However, I do not think that 'reverse racism' is an acceptable term to use. You can't compare the constant and longterm discrimination POC have been facing with POC talking shit about white people. I don't think it's okay to talk shit or to hate white people but it's understandable backlash. What imo, makes it pretty disrespectful to start talking about 'reverse racism' when it's about a subject that affects people's future and their daily life. A black person telling you they hate you simply because you are white could make you feel like shit for a day (maybe longer, depending on personal factors). However, you as a white person telling a black person you hate them because they are black does not have the same impact.
It's the "but everyone struggles!" sophism when someone is talking about their chronic problems faced by XYZ. Even though it's not relevant at all. People can complain about what they are facing at any given moment but for some reason many people prefer to do so when someone addresses their own personal struggles.
"Fibromyalgia makes my muscles hurt all day long and disturbs my day-to-day life,"
"Oh my god, everyone's muscles hurt once in a while. I had a rough workout yesterday. My muscles hurt so much I can't even touch them anymore!"
(I think you already knew what I was referring to, but to set an example. Note; this post is not only specifically directed at you. I am only quoting you since this is a reoccurring discussion and you happened to be the last person to respond to it.)

Ok I didnt know reverse racism was an actual term already and I was using it differently, so this is all a misunderstanding.

 

[The Cat]

to be fair, we were all on board with conspiracy theories about Russian intervention and meddling when the theories were coming from people on the left, even when we didn't have all of the facts available.

I don't see any factual evidence to necessarily support what she's saying, but given some of the shady shit US gov't agencies have been revealed to have been involved in in past decades, I would not be one bit surprised. I don't think the COVID-19 pandemic is fake, but I wouldn't be surprised if in 20 years the FBI or some other agency is revealed to have been involved in inciting violence at some of these protests. But I'm also not ruling out the possibility of white nationalists infiltrating said protests to instigate violence and blame it on Antifa. Hey, maybe it's both involved in stirring shit up to make the protesters look bad and turn public opinion against movements like BLM. Or maybe they wanted the protests to happen so the coronavirus would spread more quickly among the black and left wing communities.

To be equally fair the logo of four chan is a clover. "laying off the clover" is just fun word play.

 

[Jonny]

“The president did not fire him. He did not ask for his resignation,” Kelly, who was Trump's chief of staff when Mattis departed the administration, told the Washington Post. “The president has clearly forgotten how it actually happened or is confused.”​

 

[Maou]

To be equally fair the logo of four chan is a clover. "laying off the clover" is just fun word play.

History time:

Its not actually a clover, the leaves are not connected. It just looks like one. It's a reference to "Yotsuba" which is a manga, and it means "4 leaves" if I recall correctly. Futaba, its predecessor means "two leaves", or 2chan. The logo is based on this character's hair:

Yotsuba is also the mascot, and appears in site messages like 404. Gotta remember, 4chan has always been an anime otaku website before anything else. The founder was fond of this character.

Also, if you like live streams and faster than news, happenings around the world. It is the place to be. There is 1000s of people across the globe in all countries that post there, and give live upates days before things hit the news. There are generals for things like Covid 19 too, and all news related links dumped into a convenient list, as well as archives. News won't show the real shit going on. That is, if you can survive the abusive culture they have.

 

[ceecee]

I think there's a lot of truth in this in that the phrase is often used as a pejorative to discredit. But fundamentally, there are also actual conspiracy theories. "The Holocaust never happened" is a conspiracy theory regardless of whose side a person is on. (And I think it's important not to lose sight of the fact that "conspiracy theories only apply to those you don't agree with" is only where actual dialogue is so compromised that it no longer rightly qualifies as dialogue per se).

Bexar County GOP Chair Claims George Floyd's Killing Was a 'Staged Event' to Hurt Trump | The Daily

This is a conspiracy theory. Since this person is the Bexar County GOP Chair, I will just go ahead and assume many GOP members agree with her. They didn't pipe up when she said coronavirus pandemic is a Democratic hoax and that is the issue or other numerous lies.

Things like this are the reason conspiracy theories are suddenly getting the "good people on both sides" treatment. It doesn't diminish that there is so much right wing crazy in very standard, mainstream conservatism, which is rarely disputed by mainstream conservatives, people simply count them among the insane.

 

[The Cat]

History time:

Its not actually a clover, the leaves are not connected. It just looks like one. It's a reference to "Yotsuba" which is a manga, and it means "4 leaves" if I recall correctly. Futaba, its predecessor means "two leaves", or 2chan. The logo is based on this character's hair:

Yotsuba is also the mascot, and appears in site messages like 404. Gotta remember, 4chan has always been an anime otaku website before anything else. The founder was fond of this character.

Also, if you like live streams and faster than news, happenings around the world. It is the place to be. There is 1000s of people across the globe in all countries that post there, and give live upates days before things hit the news. There are generals for things like Covid 19 too, and all news related links dumped into a convenient list, as well as archives. News won't show the real shit going on. That is, if you can survive the abusive culture they have.

looks like they were fond of clovers.