Agreed, most people on the left do not seriously want to abolish the police or prisons (have I conveyed how achingly idiotic that idea is? I want to make sure I've conveyed that). But there are enough of them in the far left, and there are enough of them in serious power (especially at the city level where they actually have the means to do such a thing), that these ideas present a real danger.
-
Features
DeSantis signs bill requiring FL students, professors to register political views with state
- Thread starter ZiprHead
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,780
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Really? How many and where?
America's biggest cities to invest $450M more in police following 2020 defund movement
Social justice protests ushered in calls for police departments to be defunded. Many cities heeded those calls, only to reverse course a year later.
www.newsweek.com
Portland among U.S. cities adding funds back into police departments
The debate about public safety spending has also shifted for departments from New York City to Los Angeles. They are seeing their finances partially restored in response to rising homicides, an officer exodus and political pressures.
www.pbs.org
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 20,062
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
There is credible evidence that at least some of those instigating violence during the protests in Minneapolis were outside agitators—words I never thought I’d hear outside of some movie about 1960’s radicals and demonstrations.
TomC
Bless Your Heart!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2020
- Messages
- 9,378
- Location
- Midwestern USA
- Gender
- Faggot
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic deist
Hard to say what you mean by "kill" or "far left".
A few years back, I watched a video of a big BLM demonstration. The crowd was chanting:
What do we want?
DEAD COPS
When do we want them?
NOW!
A few weeks later those demonstrators got their prayer. In Dallas TX, BLM snipers killed 5 cops and seriously wounded a 6th.
Cops, while protecting a BLM demonstration, were killed by BLM supporters.
Of course, immediately afterwards a bunch of people who don't claim to represent BLM were on TV claiming that they did represent BLM enough to disown the snipers.
Reminds me of the TeaPartiers who also disavowed the Jan6 insurgency, when that was expedient.
Tom
I agree. If we think about it CRT if it was being taught in universities is now protected by the new law if universities so choose.
It would be protected, but as importantly, so would be the student who says in class "I think critical race theory has a lot of problems, and is informed by ideological commitment and not facts".
Yup, but they'd be ignored if they didn't back up that statement with proof.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,742
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
And that occurred in multiple places, with white nationalist instigators starting fires in Cleveland, Nashville, and causing destruction in other places. There are other videos showing either instigation from white nationalists or destruction by them.
Where do we even have far left areas to make a comparison?
As for the far right at protests--we see the repeated violence by the Proud Boys et al.
And there are enough snippets to make me think much of the violence during all the protests, not just Minneapolis, were outside agitators. I also think there was a substantial amount of non-political action done using the protests as cover.
Oy gevalt. You don't understand your asymmetry even when I've spelled it out.
Your asymmetric comparison:
far right going into leftist area vs left going into far right area
An example of a symmetric comparison:
far right going into leftist area vs far left going into rightist area
you described how the behaviour of the 'far right' is worse than 'the left'. Why did you not compare the far left to the far right?
I did not get your point either, but now it makes some sense.
This why, IMO. Because the US has no Far Left to speak of. Which means that Far Left in the US corresponds just plain Left, even moderate Left Social Democrats.
There is nothing, for example, like the Shining Path in the US. Or even the old Weatherrmen, of long ago, hippie days. Those truly Far Leftist indeed are cut from the same mold as those on the Far Right. A few of the modern so-called Antifa active in Portland, etcetera, might qualify as true Far Left. Those people are few.
This why, IMO. Because the US has no Far Left to speak of. Which means that Far Left in the US corresponds just plain Left, even moderate Left Social Democrats.
There is nothing, for example, like the Shining Path in the US. Or even the old Weatherrmen, of long ago, hippie days. Those truly Far Leftist indeed are cut from the same mold as those on the Far Right. A few of the modern so-called Antifa active in Portland, etcetera, might qualify as true Far Left. Those people are few.
Even if a few, that contradicts your earlier statement of 'no Far Left to speak of'.
If it is the case that there is no far left to speak of, then Loren's comparison makes even less sense. We don't know if the far left is as violent as the far right today, because there is no far left. It's unobserved. It's dividing by zero.
But your references to the Shining Path or Weatherman is interesting. It seems that your definition of far left is restricted only to ideologies, people or groups that promote or do violence. Yet, a number of people and groups in the US who do not advocate or do violence are called 'far right'.
None to speak of means that they are not a significant political force. A few thousand people are an insignificant force in the nation as large as the US. You did not address the issue of the many millions of Social Democrats who are falsely labeled as Far Left by the Right, mere 'liberals' who are not violent in any way.
How do you define what is Far Left and Far Right?
Do you have any stats, or only opinion, and if so, how reliable are your sources?
How do you define what is Far Left and Far Right?
Do you have any stats, or only opinion, and if so, how reliable are your sources?
As for stats, a brief google turned up this, which I have not yet fully digested and read. I am not sure how reliable it is. Do you have a better source to offer?
www.csis.org
Forgot the source. My pardon.
The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States
The United States faces a growing terrorism problem that will likely worsen in the next year, particularly around the 2020 presidential election. The most significant threat likely comes from white supremacists, though anarchists and religious extremists could also pose a threat.
Forgot the source. My pardon.
Who is a Social Democrat, and where do you think they are on the spectrum?
Are you saying that violence is a necessary feature to be 'far' on the spectrum? I do not. I believe you can be far left or far right without advocating or doing violence.
I'm not sure why you are capitalising these terms. In high school, I'd have said the far left includes anti-capitalists/communists/socialists. An example would be the Khmer Rouge. The far right I would have understood as fascists with an ultra-nationalist bent.
I'm sorry, what? What claim have I made that requires "stats"?
I didn't offer a source in the first place, because I made no claims about the prevalence of far-left vs far-right violence, except that far left violence exists.