Trumps First week
Aug 16th 2017 | 3:30 pm
#376
Listen to the Music
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,420
From: Fraser Valley BC
Re: Trumps First week
But as I said before, this march had permission to procede, was legal and had it been ignored, as it should have been, then it would have attracted little attention. Assembling a counter demonstration was certain to end in trouble and the decision to do so was reckless and should shoulder some of the blame.
N Ireland demonstrates that where you have two groups holding irreconcilable views then conflict is certain without a significant security presence to keep the two groups apart and that was not in evidence here.
Trump may have not known what he was talking about but I still maintain that both sides contributed to the violence.
Aug 16th 2017 | 5:03 pm
#377
limey party pooper
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 10,000
Re: Trumps First week
Cromwell? That's your comparison even after you watched that video?
Were you moved by the cus
Oh ffs I've had a couple of drinks and any be arse correcting. Weren't you moved by that video, disturbed at the very least,? Upset? Chilled? What did the parade of torcges do for you? Nothing? Check your pulse.
It's time, now, stand up and oppose these fascists
Were you moved by the cus
Oh ffs I've had a couple of drinks and any be arse correcting. Weren't you moved by that video, disturbed at the very least,? Upset? Chilled? What did the parade of torcges do for you? Nothing? Check your pulse.
It's time, now, stand up and oppose these fascists
Aug 16th 2017 | 7:09 pm
#378
Listen to the Music
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,420
From: Fraser Valley BC
Re: Trumps First week
Well it's still pumping, but only just.
Forget the emotion. Examine what has actually happened.
A group of people who evoke immense hatred in the mainstream body of society plan a march to protest against the removal of a statue. Whether or not this is true the group applies for and is granted permission to hold a march and to make speeches. Permission is granted by a lawfully appointed body in a democratic society.
The march is publicised and other groups who find themselves unable to accept any expression associated with the beliefs of the marchers decide that they must act to prevent something that their elected leaders have decided to allow. Something I might suggest that indicates that the mob has decided to rule.
The result is inevitable. Each side will abuse the other and if no third force intercedes then violence will occur. Decisions will have been taken on both sides and by the law officers that will result in conflict and people will be hurt.
Responsibility for what will happen resides in all camps.
'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.' has been attributed to Edmund Burke and no doubt this could be used as a argument on behalf of those who oppose the march. But where the evil comprises such an insignificant proportion of society, is the reaction we saw justified and were there more peaceful means available to deal with such evil?
Like it or not, Decisions made on all sides resulted in the Charlotteville chaos and it need not have happened.
Forget the emotion. Examine what has actually happened.
A group of people who evoke immense hatred in the mainstream body of society plan a march to protest against the removal of a statue. Whether or not this is true the group applies for and is granted permission to hold a march and to make speeches. Permission is granted by a lawfully appointed body in a democratic society.
The march is publicised and other groups who find themselves unable to accept any expression associated with the beliefs of the marchers decide that they must act to prevent something that their elected leaders have decided to allow. Something I might suggest that indicates that the mob has decided to rule.
The result is inevitable. Each side will abuse the other and if no third force intercedes then violence will occur. Decisions will have been taken on both sides and by the law officers that will result in conflict and people will be hurt.
Responsibility for what will happen resides in all camps.
'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.' has been attributed to Edmund Burke and no doubt this could be used as a argument on behalf of those who oppose the march. But where the evil comprises such an insignificant proportion of society, is the reaction we saw justified and were there more peaceful means available to deal with such evil?
Like it or not, Decisions made on all sides resulted in the Charlotteville chaos and it need not have happened.
Aug 16th 2017 | 9:08 pm
#379
Lowering the tone
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 8,154
From: Here and there
Re: Trumps First week
'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.' has been attributed to Edmund Burke and no doubt this could be used as a argument on behalf of those who oppose the march. But where the evil comprises such an insignificant proportion of society, is the reaction we saw justified and were there more peaceful means available to deal with such evil?
Like it or not, Decisions made on all sides resulted in the Charlotteville chaos and it need not have happened.
Like it or not, Decisions made on all sides resulted in the Charlotteville chaos and it need not have happened.
You give too much credit to the alt-right for 'just operating within the rules', but remember - they are using the law of the land as a shield while advocating policies which are absolutely immoral, never mind illegal or not. Of course decent people should protest, and protest loudly. It's interesting that a neo-nazi murdered a protester (luckily it wasn't dozens more) and yet they are the ones acting as victims.
Do they really deserve your sense of fair play?
Aug 16th 2017 | 11:01 pm
#380
Oscar nominated
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 55,309
From: Moncton, NB, CANADA
Re: Trumps First week
But they took them to the flippin' march.
And the fact they took their guns with them and demonstrated a willingness for "justified killing" of people they don't like perturbs you not? Not to mention it's just a tiniest bit illegal?
So then they would have stepped things up to the next level - something they already stated they were considering. What do you suppose that next level would be?
But as I said before, this march had permission to procede, was legal
and had it been ignored, as it should have been, then it would have attracted little attention.
Aug 16th 2017 | 11:35 pm
#381
Slightly Canadian
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,146
From: St. John's, Newfoundland
Re: Trumps First week
Aug 16th 2017 | 11:44 pm
#382
Assimilated Pauper
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 40,070
From: Ontario
Re: Trumps First week
Not in a heartbeat. There is no grey area when it comes to Nazi's. There was entertainment to be had yesterday in watching a loathsome shitbag cry over the trouble he has found himself in: 'I'm terrified': White nationalist Christopher Cantwell cries in video about Charlottesville protest
Aug 17th 2017 | 12:00 am
#383
Happy
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,942
From: Nova Scotia
Re: Trumps First week
OK, let's take this point by point, shall we?
Why were they gathering? Why is a statue of Robert E Lee (whom presumably the Trump camp would describe as "Such a loser," but that's beside the point) even there in the first place? It was erected in 1924, some sixty years after the end of the civil war, almost completely as a corollary to - and a symbol of the town's support for - the rise of the second Klan and the increasing oppression of black Americans at that time. It is, was, and always has been a statue in honour of racial prejudice... nothing more, nothing less. Neo-Nazis get upset when sensible people point this out and suggest that such racist homages have no place on public land in the USA.
this is into Martin Niemöller territory again. Doing nothing, standing idly by while disgusting people "strut their stuff," is not enough. They need to be called out, loudly and frequently, for the evil bigots that they are. This needs to be done up close and personal, since if it comes through any other medium it will likely be dismisses as "fake news." This is why the need to organize a counter-protest. Yes, he has. Because he did spread the blame beyond the blameworthy, and he has consistently failed to condemn the neo-Nazi thugs for the hate-filled terrorist bigots that they are. Perhaps that is because he actually agrees with them? Defending free speech has its limits. It is not OK to shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. It is not OK to incite violence or hatred - that is a specific exemption to free speech protections. In this instance, promoting views that encourage others to take up the agenda of anti-Black, anti-Jew, anti-Muslim, etc is not worthy of protection under the First Amendment.
Oh, and Hall's quote was summarizing Voltaire's views on one specific author of one specific work - it was never intended to be a reflection of a general philosophical position. But that's by the by. No. Trump was not right. He was weak, cowardly - craven even - and deserves every brickbat he gets for such an unconscionable lack of judgement.
Of course it's a minority view in Charlottesville. Do you really think the thugs marching down the street on the weekend were all locals? To ignote such bigotry is, in the eyes of the bigots, to give it tacit approval. Again, it must be called out for what it is, again and again and again and again.Yes, this has been covered above. It's not the statue (well, not specifically this statue, anyway) but the racism, oppression and racial prejudice that it represents. It's not about the General that lost the war, it's about suppression of black Americans and a wistful look back at a time when slave ownership was the thing.
So have a statue of him in a museum. Nobody's suggesting that he should not be commemorated - just not memorialized in a way that represents racism and bigotry, as this 1924 statue does.
Everything. Everything would have been wrong with ignoring it, and everything it stands for.
Why were they gathering? Why is a statue of Robert E Lee (whom presumably the Trump camp would describe as "Such a loser," but that's beside the point) even there in the first place? It was erected in 1924, some sixty years after the end of the civil war, almost completely as a corollary to - and a symbol of the town's support for - the rise of the second Klan and the increasing oppression of black Americans at that time. It is, was, and always has been a statue in honour of racial prejudice... nothing more, nothing less. Neo-Nazis get upset when sensible people point this out and suggest that such racist homages have no place on public land in the USA.
this is into Martin Niemöller territory again. Doing nothing, standing idly by while disgusting people "strut their stuff," is not enough. They need to be called out, loudly and frequently, for the evil bigots that they are. This needs to be done up close and personal, since if it comes through any other medium it will likely be dismisses as "fake news." This is why the need to organize a counter-protest. Yes, he has. Because he did spread the blame beyond the blameworthy, and he has consistently failed to condemn the neo-Nazi thugs for the hate-filled terrorist bigots that they are. Perhaps that is because he actually agrees with them? Defending free speech has its limits. It is not OK to shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. It is not OK to incite violence or hatred - that is a specific exemption to free speech protections. In this instance, promoting views that encourage others to take up the agenda of anti-Black, anti-Jew, anti-Muslim, etc is not worthy of protection under the First Amendment.
Oh, and Hall's quote was summarizing Voltaire's views on one specific author of one specific work - it was never intended to be a reflection of a general philosophical position. But that's by the by. No. Trump was not right. He was weak, cowardly - craven even - and deserves every brickbat he gets for such an unconscionable lack of judgement.
Of course it's a minority view in Charlottesville. Do you really think the thugs marching down the street on the weekend were all locals? To ignote such bigotry is, in the eyes of the bigots, to give it tacit approval. Again, it must be called out for what it is, again and again and again and again.Yes, this has been covered above. It's not the statue (well, not specifically this statue, anyway) but the racism, oppression and racial prejudice that it represents. It's not about the General that lost the war, it's about suppression of black Americans and a wistful look back at a time when slave ownership was the thing.
So have a statue of him in a museum. Nobody's suggesting that he should not be commemorated - just not memorialized in a way that represents racism and bigotry, as this 1924 statue does.
Everything. Everything would have been wrong with ignoring it, and everything it stands for.
Aug 17th 2017 | 12:03 am
#384
Oscar nominated
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 55,309
From: Moncton, NB, CANADA
Re: Trumps First week
This was a major difference for me.
Usually on counter protests and sometimes the protest itself, depending on the matter in hand, a lot seem to go for the mayhem (or fun) of maiming some authority figures, smashing windows or firebombing premises and police and make damn sure they are covered up.
One or two people on the counter protest may have thrown the odd punch but aside from that they were quite happy to be seen. Not that happy is the right word
Hopefully we don't see "that" crowd deciding to join in but I wouldn't put it past them
Usually on counter protests and sometimes the protest itself, depending on the matter in hand, a lot seem to go for the mayhem (or fun) of maiming some authority figures, smashing windows or firebombing premises and police and make damn sure they are covered up.
One or two people on the counter protest may have thrown the odd punch but aside from that they were quite happy to be seen. Not that happy is the right word
Hopefully we don't see "that" crowd deciding to join in but I wouldn't put it past them
Aug 17th 2017 | 12:03 am
#385
Happy
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,942
From: Nova Scotia
Re: Trumps First week
A (too) fair post overall dave_j, however I think it is misguided. "The evil" may comprise an insignificant proportion of society but there can be no doubt that the current Trump administration has sufficiently energised this small group and given them a sense of validation that endangers the wider American and global civilised society as a whole. Trump's attempt to run America like a business will create as many losers as winners, and this in turn creates the conditions for the alt-right to spread their hate agenda.
You give too much credit to the alt-right for 'just operating within the rules', but remember - they are using the law of the land as a shield while advocating policies which are absolutely immoral, never mind illegal or not. Of course decent people should protest, and protest loudly. It's interesting that a neo-nazi murdered a protester (luckily it wasn't dozens more) and yet they are the ones acting as victims.
Do they really deserve your sense of fair play?
You give too much credit to the alt-right for 'just operating within the rules', but remember - they are using the law of the land as a shield while advocating policies which are absolutely immoral, never mind illegal or not. Of course decent people should protest, and protest loudly. It's interesting that a neo-nazi murdered a protester (luckily it wasn't dozens more) and yet they are the ones acting as victims.
Do they really deserve your sense of fair play?
Aug 17th 2017 | 3:05 am
#386
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,113
Re: Trumps First week
To me, the issue is not related to the statue. It is that for people to parade in the street bearing burning torches and carrying other Nazi regalia while chanting anti-Semitic slogans is beyond the realm of free speech. It is an incitement to hatred and likely to endanger lives and property. Such activity is, of course, unlawful in Canada. There's no equivalence in the behavior of the protestors.
I think you have nailed it there dbd33, this is where I see the issue too, its not the statue, it was the behaviour of the protestors, they were not making a peaceful, educated, free speech protests about preserving symbols of American history....it was simply an excuse to broadcast their racist rhetoric.
I believe this protest was given permission, but heavy law enforcement should have been on standby to shut this down, or at least contain it, knowing that it was likely going to be nothing but a racist march, it was pretty clear as soon as the torches, racist placards, flags etc appeared, that it had very little to do with the removal of the statue.
Aug 17th 2017 | 3:09 am
#387
Stand-up Philosopher
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,344
From: Regina Saskatchewan
Re: Trumps First week
I think you have nailed it there dbd33, this is where I see the issue too, its not the statue, it was the behaviour of the protestors, they were not making a peaceful, educated, free speech protests about preserving symbols of American history....it was simply an excuse to broadcast their racist rhetoric.
I believe this protest was given permission, but heavy law enforcement should have been on standby to shut this down, or at least contain it, knowing that it was likely going to be nothing but a racist march, it was pretty clear as soon as the torches, racist placards, flags etc appeared, that it had very little to do with the removal of the statue.
I believe this protest was given permission, but heavy law enforcement should have been on standby to shut this down, or at least contain it, knowing that it was likely going to be nothing but a racist march, it was pretty clear as soon as the torches, racist placards, flags etc appeared, that it had very little to do with the removal of the statue.
Aug 17th 2017 | 3:59 am
#388
Oscar nominated
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 55,309
From: Moncton, NB, CANADA
Re: Trumps First week
Words spoken by the mother at the service for the woman killed.
"My child's famous Facebook post was, 'If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention,'" she said. "[Heyer] paid attention. She made a lot of us pay attention."
Aug 17th 2017 | 7:41 am
#389
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 11,628
Re: Trumps First week
Not defending his comments, but what has years of diplomatic phrasing concerning North Korean resulted in ? Or in getting NATO countries to carry their own weight in defense expenditures ?
Aug 17th 2017 | 7:49 am
#390
Oscar nominated
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 55,309
From: Moncton, NB, CANADA
Re: Trumps First week
Barcelona attack:
How much more embarrassing can he get?
General Pershing on How to Stop Islamic Terrorists
Donald Trump responded by reviving an already debunked anecdote about a US general dipping bullets in pig’s blood to fight Islamic militants over a hundred years ago. “Study what General Pershing of the United States did to terrorists when caught,†the US president tweeted. “There was no more Radical Islamic Terror for 35 years!â€
General Pershing on How to Stop Islamic Terrorists
