American Riots, Michael Brown....is it justified ?

[Guard Dog]

 

 

You should be thankful that the price of this pent up social aggression is no more than a few buildings. If you ever see the reality of an uprising or a civil war along class and/or racial lines you'll realize what real destruction looks like.

Oh I've said there will be another civil war in the US. All the ingredients are there. I don't know how the lines will break out or how far in the future it is... but it's coming. Not for a long time I think, but it's coming.

 

 

If Stiglitz is right, and he's been doing political economy for a long time, the top 1% (irrespective of party allegiance since they effectively control both) have been squeezing the system for all its worth for the past 30+ years. The middle class has lost the most, but everyone has lost something barring those at the very top who've increased their income many times over. 

 

As a rule, things take a drastic turn for the worse at the point where it doesn't make any difference whether a person will die due to starvation or to being shot. On one hand, the US is far off from that point due to cheap food and the availability of basic sustenance with any paying job, on the other, the 21st century individual has higher basic demands than a 19th century worker. "Clothes on your back, bread on the table and a roof over your head" don't really cut it anymore.

 

One thing is for sure, as long as neo-liberal dogma is controlling the distribution of wealth policy and allowing for uncontested accumulation of capital at the top - the part of the cake available to the rest gets smaller and smaller.

 

This is where I could post a wall of text explaining how in the US economy zero sum economics just does not apply. But no one would read it, it's OT anyway, and I just don't have the energy.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Guard Dog

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

 

 

You should be thankful that the price of this pent up social aggression is no more than a few buildings. If you ever see the reality of an uprising or a civil war along class and/or racial lines you'll realize what real destruction looks like.

Oh I've said there will be another civil war in the US. All the ingredients are there. I don't know how the lines will break out or how far in the future it is... but it's coming. Not for a long time I think, but it's coming.

 

 

If Stiglitz is right, and he's been doing political economy for a long time, the top 1% (irrespective of party allegiance since they effectively control both) have been squeezing the system for all its worth for the past 30+ years. The middle class has lost the most, but everyone has lost something barring those at the very top who've increased their income many times over. 

 

As a rule, things take a drastic turn for the worse at the point where it doesn't make any difference whether a person will die due to starvation or to being shot. On one hand, the US is far off from that point due to cheap food and the availability of basic sustenance with any paying job, on the other, the 21st century individual has higher basic demands than a 19th century worker. "Clothes on your back, bread on the table and a roof over your head" don't really cut it anymore.

 

One thing is for sure, as long as neo-liberal dogma is controlling the distribution of wealth policy and allowing for uncontested accumulation of capital at the top - the part of the cake available to the rest gets smaller and smaller.

 

This is where I could post a wall of text explaining how in the US economy zero sum economics just does not apply. But no one would read it, it's OT anyway, and I just don't have the energy.

 

 

*shrug* What I know of political economy I learned at uni, but Stiglitz got a nobel prize for it, so he should know what he's talking about. His book is called "the price of inequality" and I'm currently reading it and recommend it to anyone. He has the benefit of being both a scientist and participating in politics and being quite frank about his experiences in the latter, which is quite rare. Usually people who actively participated in politics are notorious liars and their books (if they're even the ones who wrote them) are no better than toilet paper.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Drowsy Emperor

[Gromnir]

we, Americans, can't have useful dialogue about race. is a political and extreme polarizing issue. "racist" language instantly ends any useful dialogue, and even before that point is reached, those who espouse certain ideas is gonna be categorized as racist even if we don't hear people actually label somebody racist. each end o' the spectrum sees the other end as unable to see beyond race. our political leaders need even be more conscious o' race than the typical citizen. for the most part, a politicians #1 job is to get re-elected. how many politicians is gonna risk angering their respective constituencies by voicing unpopular or racist notions? not many. 

 

racism is a far different thing today than when Gromnir were young. is actual pretty freaking amazing just how much attitudes has changed in recent decades. 'course that don't mean that racism is non-existent. in fact, in some ways (not in most or even many ways) the situation is worse today because only the idiot racists is overt. 21st century American racism is more insidious than it has been in the past, and racism is often a legacy o' wrongs done decades or centuries ago. is tough to fix problems that seeming don't exist today. example: as old as Gromnir is, before we were born, America made it tough for black americans to own their own house. the impact of home ownership on current and future generations has been shown to be extreme. so, even if getting a home loan in 2014 is a color blind process, generations o' black americans were having their economic future, and the future o' their children and grandchildren, hamstrung. so, fix the problem. is there a problem that even needs be fixed if playing field is now level? 

 

sadly, the worst thing about the situation in ferguson is that it hinders any chance for meaningful dialogue. ferguson is proof to the average white american that black americans just don't get it. ferguson is proof to the average black american that white americans just don't get it. it ain't reasonable or rational, but both sides is gonna point to ferguson as proof o' what is wrong with America. 

 

is not funny.

[Walsingham]

What I find ludicrous, but unsurprising, is how emotive an issue like this can be without much reference to the facts. I'm not suggesting everyone who feels strongly about it is going off half ****ed. But is everyone out there basing their behaviour on analysis? Really?

 

I have a theory that many of the people who are quick to blame cops for being prejudiced and not thinking about situations are simply projecting their own bloody stupidity.

[Woldan]

Arrogance is a huge problem, the world is cramped full with people who talk about things they have ZERO first hand experience with or knowledge about yet they still think their opinion is superior to anyone elses. This happens all the time and it makes me sick. 

 

I bet 99,99% of that angry mob bashing that cop have never been in a potentially dangerous situation where they had to make a tough decision, so they have no idea whatsoever what they're talking about. They should all shut up and return to their normal lives because their opinions are completely invalid. 

Edited November 27, 2014 by Woldan

[Agiel]

I'm willing to bet at least a fair bit of those people on the streets are exploiting the cause of the legitimate protesters to satisfy some primal desire to torch a car and smash storefront windows, and have close to zero (if any at all) emotional investment in the cause of police brutality and racial bias, to the point that they probably couldn't have been bothered to learn the names of the parents of Michael Brown.

Edited November 27, 2014 by Agiel

[Gromnir]

am suspecting there is quite a few prejudiced cops. the thing is, the courts, and particularly the criminal courts, is a terrible tool for fixing social woes. our criminal justice system is designed so that defendants is difficult to prosecute if there is any reasonable explanation that might tend to suggest innocence. am admitting that the darren wilson confrontation with michael brown still strikes us as almost surreal, but there were eyewitness, black eye witnesses, who supported wilson's story. those witnesses clearly had enough credibility to convince the grand jury o' their veracity. also, the physical evidence, on its face, Arguably supports darren wilson's story. no doubt bob mccullough realized early that he had a serious uphill battle to be getting a conviction o' darren wilson. so, he played the role of pontius pilate and attempted to wash his hands o' the situation by letting the grand jury decide the matter? is not exactly shocking to us.  English jurist, William Blackstone, suggested that it would be, "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” Benjamin Franklin no doubt thought Blackstone numbers were wrong. Franklin suggested (two years before Blackstone's commentaries were published) “that it is better one hundred guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.” our system o' criminal justice is designed to let many guilty folks walk free. would it have been better for  mccullough to have secured a "ham sandwich indictment" that he could not successfully prosecute? in retrospect, perhaps.

 

am knowing that some tv pundits has suggested that the Federal Courts has always been the place where social injustices need be corrected. heck, we were taught in school (many times and at many levels) that brown v. board of education were a triumph o' social justice that improved educational opportunities for minorities in the US. we were taught wrong. brown v. board actual set back race relations in the US, particularly in the south. segregation actual Increased after brown and more than a few moderate politicians became hard-line segregationists because o' the popular resistance to the ruling. brown polarized the ordinary citizens o' this country. not surprising, brown also polarized politicians. for chrissakes, george wallace had NAACP endorsement during his first bid for the alabama governorship. it took TEN YEARS for Congress (Americans) to catch up to brown, and a great deal o' suffering occurred, unnecessarily, during those ten years.

 

racism is a problem in this country.  unfortunately (fortunately?) the problems o' continued racism in the USA will not be fixed by the courts. it has never been the job o' the courts to fix social problems. the courts ain't equipped to fix social problems. expecting the courts, particularly the criminal courts, to be fixing the race-related problems in this country is a lesson we were mistakenly taught in school.... which is kinda odd given that the same teachers that explained the separation o' powers doctrine to us also were convincing us that courts were capable o' ending segregation and unfair labor practices and a host o' other social ills.

 

HA! Good Fun! 

[BruceVC]

Normally I am very supportive of international news channels like CNN but I'm a little concerned about how they are covering this story

 

Its does seem a little  biased against the Police, for example they have Michael Browns parents in an interview and the journalist is asking questions like " do you think your son would argue or tell a Police officer to f***k off "

 

And obviously you have these two very sober parents responding like " no, our son would never do that. We don't believe a word of what Officer Wilson say "

 

In seems in the interests of creating a balanced story you inadvertently polarize the debate because you will have people watching this interview who already think the Police are completely wrong and these types of comments just harden the resolve of people who are already think the Police are murderers

 

So all the evidence that Brown wasn't completely innocent gets ignored

[HoonDing]

At this point I'm surprised Tomahawk helicopters aren't flying in to mow all the 'protesters' down.

Edited November 27, 2014 by HoonDing

[Gromnir]

well, is understandable that news folks would talk to the parents of brown. is not really the job o' cnn or other news agencies to make sure that they is giving equal opportunities to everybody... they is simply reporting "news."  a "no comment" from government officials is boring, so where is a 24/7 news source gonna turn to to fill in all that empty air time? can only have your "experts" bait each other for so long before that gets dull... and is too early for the dangerous christmas toys o' 2014 stories.

 

on the other hand, some o' the "journalists" at cnn and other news outlets has been editorializing more than folks did in the past, but is still not all that strange to us.  cnn is selling a product and they is competing with a multitude of reputable and sketchy organizations for advertising dollars. cnn is not a state run organization, or the mouthpiece of  _______________, but they IS a business entity, and they need you to keep watching. for some odd reason, the blogger attitude, while reviled by folks at cnn and elsewhere, has somehow become the norm. there is a few cnn reporters and anchors that is kinda transparent 'bout injecting their own opinions into the news they report, but if such becomes too much to stomach, one need only turn the channel.   am more a fan o' wsj and npr/pbs for our news, but is not as if those sources is free o' journalist bias neither. 

 

regardless, we don't expect cnn or other news agencies to explain to us that the parents o' mike brown might not be the most objective source regarding their son's character or 'bout the recent events in ferguson. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Meshugger]

The media does little to help in these situations really. They are more likely to beat the wardrums than anything else: https://archive.today/t7JPQ

[Bryy]

I have a theory that many of the people who are quick to blame cops for being prejudiced and not thinking about situations are simply projecting their own bloody stupidity.

Even if people still had doubt about the Wilson verdict, the fact that his testimony includes these wonderful nuggets:

 

- referring to Brown as a demon, basically stopping short of saying he had a tail

- saying Brown was as strong as Hulk Hogan

- implying Brown wanted to be shot, that it only made him stronger

 

Should be enough for any sane (or non-vindicitive) person to stop and go "um, hey, wait a minute".

[Malcador]

Arrogance is a huge problem, the world is cramped full with people who talk about things they have ZERO first hand experience with or knowledge about yet they still think their opinion is superior to anyone elses. This happens all the time and it makes me sick. 

 

I bet 99,99% of that angry mob bashing that cop have never been in a potentially dangerous situation where they had to make a tough decision, so they have no idea whatsoever what they're talking about. They should all shut up and return to their normal lives because their opinions are completely invalid.

So opinions are only valid from other cops then, eh ? Heh, do love the "you wouldn't know what it's like" mantra cops truck out at times like this - or worse times when they kill people armed with staplers, or contained on a streetcar. If they screw up, well they screw up and should get screwed to a wall.

 

 

Even if people still had doubt about the Wilson verdict, the fact that his testimony includes these wonderful nuggets:

 

- referring to Brown as a demon, basically stopping short of saying he had a tail

- saying Brown was as strong as Hulk Hogan

- implying Brown wanted to be shot, that it only made him stronger

 

Should be enough for any sane (or non-vindicitive) person to stop and go "um, hey, wait a minute".

Hey man, cops get afraid. Afraid very easily it seems (remember the Dorner situation when they almost blew away two old ladies after thinking it was Space Marine Dorner coming for them?)

Edited November 27, 2014 by Malcador

[213374U]

Arrogance is a huge problem, the world is cramped full with people who talk about things they have ZERO first hand experience with or knowledge about yet they still think their opinion is superior to anyone elses. This happens all the time and it makes me sick. 

 

I bet 99,99% of that angry mob bashing that cop have never been in a potentially dangerous situation where they had to make a tough decision, so they have no idea whatsoever what they're talking about. They should all shut up and return to their normal lives because their opinions are completely invalid. 

 

"Their opinions are completely invalid"? Interesting viewpoint. Have you ever been a victim of unfair and abusive law enforcement practices? Have you ever had to endure racial discrimination? Are you and your loved ones under the poverty threshold with practically zero chance of moving up in life? Because otherwise, your opinion is completely invalid, by your own logic.

 

Don't get me wrong, I agree that people talk too much about things they know too little -I've been guilty of this myself- but you really know diddly squat about the lives of people you are directing your blanket statements at.

 

Also the suggestion that an opinion is "completely invalid" because its holder has never been under fire is patently, manifestly ****ing bat**** insane, to put it mildly. You DO realize that those charged with overseeing and ensuring the proper behavior of law enforcement (ie. members of the judiciary) have more in common with a member of academia than with a soldier, yes? This isn't by coincidence, it's by design. It's part of the so-called "checks and balances".

 

 

 

to satisfy some primal desire to torch a car and smash storefront windows

 

Please, tell us more about this primal desire to torch cars and smash storefront windows that you feel, seeing as it is a primal desire. I mean, if it's actually as you describe, it should be something that all human beings experience at one point or another, being part of basic human nature, right? If you aren't affected by these desires, please explain then what exactly makes you a fundamentally different being from those rioting.

Edited November 27, 2014 by 213374U

[Guard Dog]

Well, here's a new twist... fist fights over Michael Brown merchandise.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/26/Michael-Brown-s-Mother-Step-Father-Under-Investigation-For-Violent-Confrontation-Over-Justice-For-Mike-Brown-Merchandise

[Gorgon]

Yeah that's pretty tasteless. Either that or it''s the American way. When in Rome, make lemonade - or whatever. 

[Walsingham]

 

I have a theory that many of the people who are quick to blame cops for being prejudiced and not thinking about situations are simply projecting their own bloody stupidity.

Even if people still had doubt about the Wilson verdict, the fact that his testimony includes these wonderful nuggets:

 

- referring to Brown as a demon, basically stopping short of saying he had a tail

- saying Brown was as strong as Hulk Hogan

- implying Brown wanted to be shot, that it only made him stronger

 

Should be enough for any sane (or non-vindicitive) person to stop and go "um, hey, wait a minute".

 

 

Fair challenge. But I'd ask how may of these sorts of accounts you've read.

 

iirc you've read a bit of history. how many battlefield accounts would sound credible if you'd only read one?

[Drowsy Emperor]

Those things go more towards explaining the cops state of mind than anything else and supports the theory that he pulled the gun because he got scared.

 

Letting him go without any consequences was a bad choice. In the political sense, its a no win situation regardless, but some sort of disciplinary action would have made it  look less one sided.

[Guard Dog]

Yeah that's pretty tasteless. Either that or it''s the American way. When in Rome, make lemonade - or whatever. 

Just when you think things can't sink lower, they do

[Gromnir]

 

I have a theory that many of the people who are quick to blame cops for being prejudiced and not thinking about situations are simply projecting their own bloody stupidity.

Even if people still had doubt about the Wilson verdict, the fact that his testimony includes these wonderful nuggets:

 

- referring to Brown as a demon,

- saying Brown was as strong as Hulk Hogan

 

 

Should be enough for any sane (or non-vindicitive) person to stop and go "um, hey, wait a minute".

 

fixed.

 

there were noticeable and amusing hyperbole in the account o' wilson, so there weren't need to embellish or do as did wilson did. is actual kinda funny that your criticism o' wilson fails for the same reasons you see his testimony as flawed. 

 

the thing that concerns us is that an unarmed man were shot after he ran away from a police vehicle. a defendant trying to convince us that he were afraid that the deceased were about to try and kill or seriously injure the defendant or some bystander is not making us go, "um, hey, wait a minute," precisely 'cause that is what all such defendants do if they know the law. 

 

however, the things that makes us go "um, hey, wait a minute" regarding the ferguson shooting is numerous. wilson and other witnesses claim that brown turned and charged wilson after he got some considerable distance from the police suv. additionally, for an event that started and ended very quick in the middle of the afternoon in a residential neighborhood, there were dozens o' witness who all claim to have seen pretty much the entire event. furthermore, while we is much aware that eye-witness testimony is compelling, even if it is unreliable, the amount o' variation in the eye-witness testimony were extreme... and wacky. one witness were a couple blocks away at the time o' the incident, but still claims to have seen everything. one witness claims that wilson attempted to use a taser on brown but missed. etc.

 

is lots o' head scratching issues, but the biggest questions we got will never be answered. wilson testimony, and numerous witnesses, suggests that after brown ran and were a considerable distance away from wilson, brown stopped, turned around, and advanced on the officer. brown had not been shot in the back, so am having difficulty making sense o' brown's actions as described by wilson. but again, there is not only physical evidence that supports wilson's claim, but there is eye witness testimony that similarly supports such a claim. if all we had were wilson's story and dorian johnson's testimony, and if there were no physical evidence, we would laugh in disbelief at wilson's claims. that ain't the situation, is it?

 

again, for government to get a conviction, they need to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. wilson testimony by itself is hardly compelling to us 'cause wilson don't wanna go to prison. however, there were presumably disinterested witnesses whose narrative were in-line with wilson's, and the physical evidence (particularly the blood trail) seems to support wilson's story... a story which continues to baffles us.  we don't necessarily believe wilson, but we also would hate to try and prosecute him. in an ordinary situation it is unlikely this would ever get grand jury treatment, 'cause the prosecutor would abandon it as unwinnable. try and get a conviction o' a cop who shot a strong-arm robbery suspect when numerous eye witnesses other than the cop support the cop narrative? 

 

we have difficulty believing wilson and the prosecutor didn't use the grand jury as is typical, but those is not actual important factors to us when we consider the end result. the case against wilson were poor. the grand jury were a crash-test dummy standing in for the prosecutor precisely 'cause the case were poor. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 27, 2014 by Gromnir

[Drowsy Emperor]

It seems beyond incredible for an unarmed man, who is running away to suddenly turn around and charge an armed police officer - after losing the only advantage in such a situation, that being close enough to potentially wrestle for the weapon. Many criminals are both violent and stupid but most have at least enough base cunning to not do something so senseless. 

Edited November 27, 2014 by Drowsy Emperor

[obyknven]

Meanwhile CIA used own pets for descridit protests in Ferguson.

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850442/We-hear-help-ISIS-tweets-support-Ferguson-protesters-reject-corrupt-man-laws-like-democracy.html

 

So silly attempt really, CIA disappoint me. Do they can't hide own activity by better way?

[Gorgon]

Daily mail...

 

Maybe we can get the history channel in on the action. I'm sure Hitler is to be found somewhere in the background pulling the strings. 

[HoonDing]

[Meshugger]

Whose faces are those?

 

//nvm, i thought i was in the funny pictures-thread, d'oh!

Edited November 28, 2014 by Meshugger