it ain’t the same guys saying both.
Goomba fallacy
Keep in mind, the property damage after the murder of George Floyd was started by a white supremacist, too. “Umbrella man” smashed windows on an auto zone and spray painted it “free shit zone,” it would later be set on fire. Out of 20 people charged in Minnesota for rioting, only 4 were actually local to the state.
and msm and fox was showing mostly the looting and not the protest itself.
Um, all BLM has to do is wear merch and hold up a sign and the police start lobbing CS grenades.
The point of protest isn’t to riot, but to get the state to over-respond, brutally. Its why the entire world knows about and sympathizes with the BLM cause.
At least that’s the game, according to COIN. Hearts and minds. Though in the Civil Rights movement, we added lawsuits.
And Trump and the red states are quick with their riot squads. Left wing movements just have to represent and make booga-booga faces to trigger anti-riot shooting civilians with rubber bullets. (They’re plastic and steel, actually.)
And then two years later, the victims are awarded millions from the districts or the US treasury, depending on the department of the officer who decided it was time to bust heads.
Law enforcement in the US has already lost its legitimacy in the public eye, worldwide. We know they’re just thugs of the state, and their response to protest, especially minority protest, especially black protest, figures largely into that paradigm shift.
So, just because protesters in the US still carry signs instead of molotovs, doesn’t mean the protests are weak. It means the state’s responsers are incredibly easily trolled into initiating violence while camers are watching.
The point of protesting is not to provoke the state to kill you so that people will watch it.
There are many points to protesting. Provoking the opposition is one of them. We see this in civil disobedience protests and noncooperation actions.
Provocation of state responders is one of the effects of protest, regardless of whether it is intended. But it’s so consistent, especially in authoritarian regimes, that it is absolutely figured into the calculations of organizers. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., for instance, staged actions expecting casualties, but knowing they would ultimately further the cause by orders of magnitude.
It’s unlikely you (a specific person) will get killed at a protest, but we see casualties at protests all the time, and they are often honored, such as the Kent State victims, who have a folk song written about them. It also sparked a student strike four million strong, and helped to speed the end of the war.
Not all antagonistic responses have to be lethal or even injurious to to create a backlash in support of the cause. The No Kings Snapchat account shutdown by Meta is already resulting in backlash against the Trump regime, against Zuckerberg, and against the tech bro coalition in general.
But again, all a state really needs to do is manage a protest with grace. Authoritarian regimes just have a tendency to take visible dissent personally (or any criticism, really), and then more liberal states often fail to instill in their law enforcement a predisposition of deescalation. I suspect right-wingers just enjoy the notion of cracking dissenter heads so much they can’t help themselves.
During the BLM demonstrations right wing provocatours deliberately caused damage to discredit the demonstrations. Two were caught and prosecuted in Cleveland where i live. Don’t be a tool
Yep. Pretty much all of the negative issues from the BLM protests were off duty cops or non-local white supremacists trying to provoke violence.
Remember the conveniently placed pallets of bricks?
Here we had The Umbrella man https://abcnews.com/amp/US/man-helped-ignite-george-floyd-riots-identified-white/story?id=72051536 And another guy who set fire to a parking lot attendants booth
Ahh yes how could we forget those government-provided taxpayers’ bricks that mysteriously overnight appeared on city street corners.
Then after nobody used them to break windows or anything at all, the brick pallets mysteriously disappeared the next night.
All these people saying that Americans can’t protest forget that we literally host hometown hero Luigi. Arguably the best way to get the message across. Needs more consistency, but It’s certainly effective.
a lot of people somehow missed the fact that luigi’s actions worked to force change immediately.
“somehow” as in the media kept that part quiet as best they could.
I’ve said it before.
People are alive today that wouldnt be alive if someone hadnt shot that UHC CEO.
The entire insurance industry got so scared and so panicked that they stopped denying coverage for curable issues for like… the next year. Hundreds, thousands, possibly tens of thousands of people are alive today, and are in better health today, because one vile piece of shit got shot and died.
Thats an easy trade to make any day of the week.
And that change was the mass deployment of Flock cameras Nation-wide.
Temporarily IIRC. Didn’t they quietly revert their changes later, denying just as many claims again?
Makes me think of the UK:
Extinction Rebellion and just stop oil did a load of stunts that didn’t do any real harm and the press treated like they burnt a city down.
Literal Nazis committed programs and riots in the streets and the press said they had “legitimate concerns”.
They only have an issue with disruption when it’s the left.
Well yeah liberals value property more than human life. That’s been true for all of liberalism. I’d say it’s the core tenet of liberalism. For liberalism private property is the most sacred belief they have.
As a liberal, I’m gonna need these rules in a paper copy if you don’t mind. Because I’m all for killing authoritarianism and budgening oppressors… And I care little about my own private property in my pursuit to do those things.
Property can be replaced. Murdering your oppressors is forever.
I’m assuming you aren’t a liberal? Or left of anything? On a scale of one to ten, how much do you love boots?
Are you sure you are a liberal? Cuz it sounds to me that you’re way to the left of liberals. I could be wrong though. Maybe you are a liberal. Maybe you’re one of that group of people that every single time it comes to supporting the the workers or supporting fascism you’ll support fascism. Cuz that’s what liberals do.
Liberals will always turn against the working class. We have 300 years of human history that backs this lesson up and I have no sympathy for people who have refused to learn from it.
Liberal has a completely different meaning in the US and has for about the last century. Wikipedia article on social liberalism in general and here’s one on modern liberalism in the US, but if you don’t want to read all that, here’s an excerpt:
Modern liberalism in the United States emerged with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s and is the prevailing version of liberalism in the country. It is most synonymous with the ideology known as social liberalism in much of the world, combining in the U.S. version elements of cultural liberalism, American progressivism, civil liberty and social equality with support for social justice and a mixed economy
and a bit later in the same article:
Economically, modern liberalism embraces a role for government to protect against market failures, ensure competition and prevent corporate monopolies, and supports labor rights through the strengthening of public- and private-sector labor unions, collective bargaining, unemployment insurance and minimum wage laws.
So I think perhaps you can see how the term means something completely different there. It’s really closer to socdem than classical liberal.
And as a kicker, the US “conservative” party is economically liberal, whereas much of the “liberal” party is not (unfortunately much of the old guard there are more liberal rather than liberal).
TL;DR: Yes, the economic term “liberalism” means “let corpos do whatever the fuck”. In the modern meaning of the word politically, it’s more “all people are created equal and all deserve to be free”.
I’ve seen this argument parroted a few times online. Unfortunately it just does not hold water whatsoever. We have 50, or closer to 60 now, years of liberal policy in America that flies in the face of this argument 100%. We have decades of anti labor, anti-regulation, Pro corporate, pro Wall Street, anti civil liberties and all around liberal policies to show us otherwise.
It’s no coincidence that we are where we are. Because as you alluded to it’s not just one party. Republicans are absolutely liberal, or they were before the last 10 years at least. As were Democrats. That’s the history of American politics basically since the beginning. Two liberal parties. One leaning slightly more conservative and one leaning slightly more Progressive. Or some might put it, the party of the grand bourgeoisie and the party of the petite bourgeoisie. But both fundamentally liberal. America was the first great liberal Revolution and it is something that gas guided us ever since. But it has not changed.
You mentioned the Old Guard of the Democratic party being “classical liberal” instead of your supposed new definition. However that Old Guard has been just the guard for a very long time. I would argue always. It’s not a remnant. It’s a feature. With the new arising of the new Democrats in the '80s. Clinton and Gore and their ilk. What did their rise to power bring about? Massive deregulation. The gutting of Labor. With their Republican allies they instituted an extremely liberal policy that tore apart any Progressive advances that had been made in the previous decades. Though it’s not like Jimmy Carter didn’t put his stamp on it either. Was Obama old guard? I wouldn’t argue so certainly, yet there’s a very good reason why when he tried to implement his liberal free trade policies he had all of the Republicans and about half the Democrats behind him. Certainly his expansion of their surveillance state and protecting big Banks like Wells Fargo were extremely liberal policies of a classical nature.
We could go on and on. The point is It doesn’t hold up. This concept of a new definition of liberal just doesn’t coincide with reality. Because the reality of what the Liberals in America vote for what they support what they legislate is the exact same definition of what liberals world over do. So when people tell you that liberalism is a different word in America understand that that’s a psyop. Because liberals and conservatives in America would love you to think that liberalism is as far left as you can go. They would love you not to have a actual Progressive Party. Which is what the Democratic party pretends to be but it’s actually a liberal party with a few progressives chained up in the bowels of the boat.
Ah the great lie of American politics. That Liberals are somehow different in America than the rest of the world. But it’s funny. When you look at the things that American liberals vote for and support it sure seems like the exact same fucking things they do in the rest of the world doesn’t it?
There is an enormous amount of evidence to disprove the idea that liberals will always support fascism. Fascism explicitly rejected liberal democracy, individual rights, and political pluralism. Liberals were among those persecuted by fascist regimes, and liberal democracies were instrumental in defeating said fascist regimes.
Never understood the lengths some Lemmy users go to describe liberalism in these ways. It’s just as bad when people do the same thing towards ideologies such as communism
What private property do you have? Do you have like a factory or a own a forest or a mine or something? You sure you’re not talking about personal property?
My house? My acres of farmland? My acres of forest I own? That property?
Yes, I do own part of a forest on my property.
Also for the record I’m not American. Your definition may vary wildly from mine.
Well your house is personal property, but as for the rest sure. I was wrong. You are a capitalist. Congrats on that I guess.
You’re throwing a lot of words around without knowing the meaning of any of them. How is the government deciding where my property line starts and ends, how the county taxes my property where it starts and ends, makes me a capitalist because I pay into taxes that help people in my community, I don’t commercialize my land, I keep my woodlands open for public hunting every year, and let people camp on my property as long as they let me know they’re there?
Don’t forget order. Order is the other guiding principle of liberalism. Although I guess you could say that order exists to protect property. So maybe it’s a 1B kind of thing.
I’d be fine with burning down the government buildings and harassing politicians who’re responsible for the problems. I don’t see a point in destroying regular people’s jobs or the places they’re going to purchase the things they need. It’s not going to get people on your side.
If normal people can’t work because of government decisions, hey just go vote.
If normal people can’t work because of a protest about government decisions, oh no let’s stop all of this!
What is the government doing that’s preventing people from working?
Have you been living under a rock sir?
Wrecking the economy
And looting and burning businesses in your community is going to fix that?
You’re going to hate this answer, but yes. Believe it or not, countries hate when civil unrest starts to manifest as damage to GDP.
Would lighting up politicians offices and police stations not be a far quicker effect than waiting for damage done to uninvolved 3rd parties to trickle up?
yeah this meme is being intentionally dishonest. nobody is upset about a fucking fast food chain burning down.
I wouldn’t call this meme wrong. It’s definitely wrong but it’s more revealing how much media controls the narrative.
People genuinely believe both that the riots were more violent than they were and that they were riots at all, because the media told them.
Most people’s perspective of the US is through media, then they claim the same media is bullshit. Yet that’s where they get their information from. It doesn’t make sense.
If it was one of the 3 that are close enough to my job to get lunch I’d be a little pissed.
I see the problem. You heard something from leftists, and then brought up something said by liberals.
Easy mistake in the bullshit US discourse
Yeah the monolithing OP is doing is honestly impressive. Here, let me try another:
“Americans say trans rights are human rights, but then they also say trans people should be banned from public restrooms. Wtf lol???”
Knock off all this fascism! Seriously, don’t make us slowly walk around downtown in a slowly circle again…
It is one of the more proven methods to onramp liberals to leftism, at any rate.
I will never forget when the neighborhood Facebook was alight about the hoards that were going house by house through the suburbs. That was almost 10 miles of suburban sprall…my nerd brain can’t fathom the logistics of that and where that force would have come from.
Return2ozma: posts accurate meme
Americans: (insert excuse or bad reaction here)
Always happens
But if the protests are supposed to go against the status quo why are they worried about whether those status quo liberals are angered by the protests that would be going on against them?
If we try to do a proper protest, we’ll get killed by subpar gun laws and a shot by some members of the official Kyle Rittenhouse fan club.
I feel like the most effective form of protest will make life miserable for the people causing the problems, rather than making life miserable for the people affected by the problem.
I’m not really thinking about the protests in France, though. I’m thinking about all the times in my area when highways have been shut down by people wanting police reform, and it feels like nothing has changed. Granted, when this was happening on a nationwide basis, we got body cams for most police departments, and that’s created a lot of accountability.
I still remember when students at the local high school organized a BLM march from the school to the police station (a 30 minute walk) I saw so many posts from people in this town itching to shoot them if they even looked at their house weird.
One day the world will come together and form an army of therapists and send you guys the humanitarian aid you deperatly need.
