The Official Racism Thread Social • Page 20

I'd categorize "violence" as inherently being the actions of the aggressor (in this case, the police), and what Dom is suggesting as simply "self-defense" against said aggressor

 

I'm not too interested in the semantical argument. I think it comes down to "do you believe what is happening to poc is right," followed by "why have our attempts to change it not been successful heretofore and what makes you think continuing in them will help."

 

The civil rights movement wasn't just MLK, it was composed of many movements. They were backed up by the radicals. I suggest you read the book Guns Made Civil Rights Possible. It was people defending themselves that was an important component of the movement.

On Ghandi:

"Strictly speaking, as a Nationalist, he was an enemy [of the British], but since in every crisis he would exert himself to prevent violence–which, from the British point of view, meant preventing any effective action whatever–he could be regarded as "our man." In private this was sometimes cynically admitted. The attitude of the Indian millionaires was similar. Gandhi called upon them to repent, and naturally they preferred him to the Socialists and Communists who, given the chance, would actually have taken their money away.9"


On the other examples, they're not worthless, but the vastly simplify actual history. When you say that the Soviet Union fell with non-violence, you are omitting the scores of people that were murdered through proxy conflicts conducted by the west and its allies. Think of the death squads Nicaragua, or the support of the Taliban in Afghanistan and, in order to give them their Vietnam, and tell me it was brought down through non-violence. To your points about Isis and Ireland, no, it hasn't yielded anything because the oppressed were still being oppressed. Isis is a product of US foreign policy and its continual murderinng of civilians. In any case, your points make no sense. You are essentially saying turn the other cheek, whilst they brutalize you. You are asking people to organize according to an objective morality that corresponds to your sensibilities, the sensibilities of someone who isn't under assault every goddamn day. I refuse that paradigm. We cannot articulate our pain is a way that is legible any longer but through violence. John Brown knew this, as did Nat Turner. One can bear so much, but eventually, when the marches yield nothing, Clinton triangulates, the president signs legislation ensuring the safety of those who murder, there is no discourse left to have. You don't want the conversation. Or, rather, there is no conversation to be had, aside from those on our terms and for our terms to be made manifest in this world, violence is the only thing you all recognize.

 

I'm not sure I see where Dom is advocating the killing of all cops. He says all cops participate in and implicitly support an oppressive force, which is true. And he says that poc should respond in kind when they are murdered, which given the mishandling of justice and slaps on the wrist, if anything, extended to the murderers of Garner, Rice, Gray, Martin, etc, I understand as it does not seem anything done so far has made the slightest difference. Indeed, the mere concept "black lives matter" baffles white people, and I understand why Dom and other poc feel that they have no choice but to respond in kind to protect themselves and discourage the further murder of their people. I do not get the impression that that is through indiscriminate killing every living cop, but Dom can clarify further before we find ourselves misunderstanding.

 

I don't see violence as opposed to intellect. In fact, pacifism is something I consider both unrealistic and foolhardy on the grounds that it makes a principle out of a tactic. To your last point about mass shootings, I wonder how many times a black person has been called crazy or something similar when he has rejected the premises laid out by white civil society. I refuse to do so. Fetishize non-violence all you like. I'm not going to engage in random violence for the sake of violence. I do, however, believe that violence is a necessity and it should be organized in such a way as to destabilize and destroy the power structures that confer the luxury of thinking about pacifism in the safety of your home upon you.

 

"When I say, “abolish the police,” I’m usually asked what I would have us replace them with. My answer is always full social, economic, and political equality, but that’s not what’s actually being asked. What people mean is “who is going to protect us?” Who protects us now? If you’re white and well-off, perhaps the police protect you. The rest of us, not so much. What use do I have for an institution that routinely kills people who look like me, and make it so I’m afraid to walk out of my home?

My honest answer is that I don’t know what a world without police looks like. I only know there will be less dead black people. I know that a world without police is a world with one less institution dedicated to the maintenance of white supremacy and inequality. It’s a world worth imagining."

Abolish the Police. Instead, Let’s Have Full Social, Economic, and Political Equality.

 

A part of me thinks just the threat of organised black violence/retaliation would be enough to bring about, at the very least, more change than what usually happens after events such as this (protests etc.) would bring. Never forget that, above all, white people fear the black man - that is why police are so quick to draw weapons & use them in any situation that doesn't go their way - they fear them so they must "act first to protect themselves"; white fears black so must oppress it etc. The correct harnessing of that fear, and the right targets (not innocents, but people who could be seen as 'decision makers' in communities) could bring about a certain level of change for the better, without resorting to violence that could result in change for the worse?
That part of me could be naive and hopeful, though...

 

The American public is pathetic right now. I love hearing people say how the blm movement is useless because murders are still happening.

 

But would dark bodies be better off? When white supremacist groups will just vie for power to protect white interests, it will be like reconstruction era south all over again.

 

That assumes that the police act in our interests in the first place. The project that would attempt to achieve the world described would require the decimating of those groups and the police who, more often than not, agree with them in their acts.

 

If you aren't anti-police / anti-prison yet then I don't see your humanity.

 

Anti the concept of police and prisons, or anti the current police and prison establishments?

to clarify, by "concept of police" I mean a sector of the workforce that deals with protecting society from criminals, and by "concept of prisons" I mean a place to rehabilitate criminals that we deem a threat to society

 

isnt the simplest, easiest change in all of these instances is that justice is achieved? If more of these policemen were held accountable for their actions, wouldn't that help?

 

the court system has failed to hold them accountable though. The only way for that to happen now is for the people who are affected by them to hold them accountable and if that means violence they have every right to employ it. I don't think it's fair to dissuade violence when it's not your life which is at stake

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/loca...deaths-of-alton-sterling-philando-castile.ece

 

Can't wait to see how this gets spinned...

Details still coming in, but this might've just been someone taking advantage of the protest in order to shoot people; shooter apparently in "survival gear." Rally was supposedly peaceful with cops even posing for photographs with protestors.

 

honest question because i don't understand politics and how the intricacies of all these things work, but why do people protest and / or want governors and alike politicians to resign after these shootings? i don't know what connection a governor has to the police force and / or how police officers act. also, i don't get what having them resign would do / fix. i get wanting the main sheriff or police lieutenant to resign, but other people in office confuse me.

 

4 officers shot, 1 deceased.

 

because you want to go to the people who employ those lieutenants and sheriffs and failed to hold THEM accountible for their non-action. it's a systematic failure all around. We can go on and on about why their are racist, hateful, dumb, violent cops...but to me the biggest travesty is how so many of these tragedies end up with no justice in the end.

If we as people assumed that the cops in both these instances would be held accountible i dont think there would be as much as an outrage.

 

Holy shit

 

Snipers? Shit.