Minneapolis PD Suffocate Unarmed Black Man Who Later Dies in Hospital

[DownInFlames]

That black stuff is the melted remains of the soles of his shoes. Damn.

[MarchHare]

This video is hard to watch, but you should. Listen to their anguish! African Americans have been protesting about this BS for decades, and absolutely nothing has changed.

https://twitter.com/AntonioFrench/st...60975124717568

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

from that clip, how can we know it's for no reason? we have no idea what lead up to it.

This isn't the first video of cops doi g this for seamlessly no reason get real.

[SebC]

A judge has banned Denver police from using anti-riot tactics on peaceful protestors. If this doesn't result in catastrophic effects, it would serve to demonstrate that this could be a permanent policy.

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/new...uring-protests

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by troutman

A genius showed up at the protest in Toronto today in black face. He was arrested for disturbing the peace, or to save him from a beating.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/globalne...m-protest/amp/

Was it JT

[Barnet Flame]

It will be impossible to determine, but I wonder what proportion of peaceful demonstrations descended into full blown riots as a result of police actions?

[Yoho]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1269332225499238400

[Fuzz]

^Sigh. Just don't read the comments.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by nik-

It's not like fascists invented these tactics. There's roots in human psychology that make them effective.

They actually very literally did invent much of it. The early fascists are in some ways, IMO at least, underappreciated as political analysts who formed groundbreaking theories on how a modern democracy functions, and they created some very deliberate and effective strategies based on those theories.

Modern fascists in many places still take directions literally out of 30's Nazi writings for the purpose of manipulating the popular opinion and gaining power while protecting themselves from repercussions.

The other group that had a playbook on gaining power was communists, but their playbook is mostly quite different.

(In large part the differences come from where the left and the right see the legitimacy of their power comes from.

In socialist/communist theory the legitimacy of power must come from the masses. Their ideas depend largely on gaining mass popularity for their ideas. This is why left wing radicalists are generally extremely open (and loud) about their goals.

Fascist thinking on the other hand is based on an idea of the righteous moral and strong ruling class reigning over / protecting the weak (and kind of hopelessly stupid) masses. This is why right wing radicals consider it perfectly okay to lie about their actual political leanings and hide many of their true goals.

The other reason for the difference in their playbooks comes from the fact that when fascists try to seize power, they usually start working in a democracy, so undermining democracy is a prime part of their strategy. Also, see the part where fascists don't the general populace can be expected to rule themselves, thus democracy is their enemy.

A socialist revolutionary project on the other hand presumes a society which is already authoritarian or "democracy in name only", so to them democracy as such isn't an enemy as such. Election democracy is often just disbanded because well "they're too vulnerable to the influence of money" or what ever.)

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

There's absolutely nothing good about the rioting and looting, it's pointless and stupid.

Rioting actually isn't pointless. Looting is stupid, but the display and outcomes of both rioting and looting have their point in application of pressure against the entity in power.

Both Gandhi and King strongly believed in nonviolent resistance. Gandhi believed in nonviolent resistance and the use of tactics like protest, both symbolic and through organized disobedience. Organized disobedience can manifest through mechanisms such as sick-outs, sit-ins blocking traffic, or boycotts against specific products or services causing economic hardships against the elite. All mechanisms can be effective in achieving change, so long as you have appropriate media coverage to get your message across to the general population. Media plays a very important role in the success of any of these movements as they act as an amplifier to the cause.

Gandhi and King differed in that King believed in violent protest as a tactic. King recognized that many times protest does not capture the notice or imagination of the larger public. King recognized that violence was only useful to achieve momentary victories and non-violence was the means to a lasting accord.

In King's own words, “Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.

In a real sense nonviolence seeks to redeem the spiritual and moral lag that I spoke of earlier as the chief dilemma of modern man. It seeks to secure moral ends through moral means. Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. Indeed, it is a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it.

I believe in this method because I think it is the only way to reestablish a broken community. It is the method which seeks to implement the just law by appealing to the conscience of the great decent majority who through blindness, fear, pride, and irrationality have allowed their consciences to sleep.

The nonviolent resisters can summarize their message in the following simple terms: we will take direct action against injustice despite the failure of governmental and other official agencies to act first. We will not obey unjust laws or submit to unjust practices. We will do this peacefully, openly, cheerfully because our aim is to persuade. We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself. We will try to persuade with our words, but if our words fail, we will try to persuade with our acts. We will always be willing to talk and seek fair compromise, but we are ready to suffer when necessary and even risk our lives to become witnesses to truth as we see it.”

In essence, violent protest is a mechanism to draw attention to the cause and win immediate victories by garnering attention from the media and broadening the discussion on the issue. A spasm of violence followed by days of peaceful protest and open discourse is a strategy in achieving progress on systemic issues where discussion has come to halt. King knew this and employed the tactic many times, whether this meant actively engaging the police or allowing the police to strike first. Televised violence, especially that against protesters, can be a very strong driver to systemic change.

The violence of the riots brought violence against peaceful protesters initiated by the authorities, which greatly amplified the discussion to the point where there were million person marches in Washington and Philadelphia yesterday. This massive outpouring of support is certain to influence future outcomes. As was pointed out in a tweet, Trump won Pennsylvania by 44,000 votes. If yesterday's protests were a thermometer reading of public opinion, Trump is on life support.

[transplant99]

This is how you do it......but you have to be very concerned for the medical professionals moving forward as they are the ones that will have to deal with the fall out of it all.

Bad idea with great intent and execution?

https://twitter.com/user/status/1269337799523733504

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

It will be impossible to determine, but I wonder what proportion of peaceful demonstrations descended into full blown riots as a result of police actions?

Well given that there is Zero footage of police throwing rocks, smashing down businesses, setting fires or looting, it is pretty safe to say that the actions of the “protestors” and “demonstrators” escalated the riots.

[OMG!WTF!]

Well given that there is Zero footage of police throwing rocks, smashing down businesses, setting fires or looting, it is pretty safe to say that the actions of the “protestors” and “demonstrators” escalated the riots.

I'm not sure but I thought he was talking about police actions such as beating up peaceful protestors and arresting media crews etc. That stuff would make me want to riot.

[transplant99]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1269672114040250369

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by Derek Sutton

Well given that there is Zero footage of police throwing rocks, smashing down businesses, setting fires or looting, it is pretty safe to say that the actions of the “protestors” and “demonstrators” escalated the riots.

Your post isn’t even worthy of this response.

[PsYcNeT]

First they came for the cops, and I said nothing because I wasn't a cop.

Then they came for the landlords

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

There's absolutely nothing good about the rioting and looting, it's pointless and stupid.

Unless things change, in which case we will look back on it in 20 or 30 years the way we look back on the Stonewall riots as being a turning point in equality for the LBGT community or the Apprentice boys riots in London as the start of the Civil war and the foundation of democracy in the English speaking world, Peterloo as the start of votes for the non propertied.

In truth there has never been any democratic change in the world that hasn't needed riots to make it happen, the powers that be don't just hand over their power and wealth to ordinary people, it has to be forced out of them, a riot is basically a warning 'give us what we need or the next step is revolution'

[woob]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Semper Fi.




Story.

If anyone is interested in reading more on this, the Marine in this picture responded on a couple Reddit threads of this story. Really enjoyed reading his thought process and other comments he provided.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/commen...ith_i/ft8iyh5/

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by New Era

Rioting actually isn't pointless. Looting is stupid, but the display and outcomes of both rioting and looting have their point in application of pressure against the entity in power.

Both Gandhi and King strongly believed in nonviolent resistance. Gandhi believed in nonviolent resistance and the use of tactics like protest, both symbolic and through organized disobedience. Organized disobedience can manifest through mechanisms such as sick-outs, sit-ins blocking traffic, or boycotts against specific products or services causing economic hardships against the elite. All mechanisms can be effective in achieving change, so long as you have appropriate media coverage to get your message across to the general population. Media plays a very important role in the success of any of these movements as they act as an amplifier to the cause.

Gandhi and King differed in that King believed in violent protest as a tactic. King recognized that many times protest does not capture the notice or imagination of the larger public. King recognized that violence was only useful to achieve momentary victories and non-violence was the means to a lasting accord.

In King's own words, “Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.

In a real sense nonviolence seeks to redeem the spiritual and moral lag that I spoke of earlier as the chief dilemma of modern man. It seeks to secure moral ends through moral means. Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. Indeed, it is a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it.

I believe in this method because I think it is the only way to reestablish a broken community. It is the method which seeks to implement the just law by appealing to the conscience of the great decent majority who through blindness, fear, pride, and irrationality have allowed their consciences to sleep.

The nonviolent resisters can summarize their message in the following simple terms: we will take direct action against injustice despite the failure of governmental and other official agencies to act first. We will not obey unjust laws or submit to unjust practices. We will do this peacefully, openly, cheerfully because our aim is to persuade. We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself. We will try to persuade with our words, but if our words fail, we will try to persuade with our acts. We will always be willing to talk and seek fair compromise, but we are ready to suffer when necessary and even risk our lives to become witnesses to truth as we see it.”

In essence, violent protest is a mechanism to draw attention to the cause and win immediate victories by garnering attention from the media and broadening the discussion on the issue. A spasm of violence followed by days of peaceful protest and open discourse is a strategy in achieving progress on systemic issues where discussion has come to halt. King knew this and employed the tactic many times, whether this meant actively engaging the police or allowing the police to strike first. Televised violence, especially that against protesters, can be a very strong driver to systemic change.

The violence of the riots brought violence against peaceful protesters initiated by the authorities, which greatly amplified the discussion to the point where there were million person marches in Washington and Philadelphia yesterday. This massive outpouring of support is certain to influence future outcomes. As was pointed out in a tweet, Trump won Pennsylvania by 44,000 votes. If yesterday's protests were a thermometer reading of public opinion, Trump is on life support.

Disagree. there's no need for rioting. The marches and peaceful protests are the right way to do this. More violence is not the answer.

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Unless things change, in which case we will look back on it in 20 or 30 years the way we look back on the Stonewall riots as being a turning point in equality for the LBGT community or the Apprentice boys riots in London as the start of the Civil war and the foundation of democracy in the English speaking world, Peterloo as the start of votes for the non propertied.

In truth there has never been any democratic change in the world that hasn't needed riots to make it happen, the powers that be don't just hand over their power and wealth to ordinary people, it has to be forced out of them, a riot is basically a warning 'give us what we need or the next step is revolution'

the huge marches is enough to bring attention to the issues, things can be done peacefully. You thing throwing rocks at police officers does anything? iy's just pointless.

Posters on the sit are bizarre, irrational hatred of guns and law abiding gun owners but are pro actual violence and law breaking.