It'll definitely bring the issue of cost-benefit analysis into the picture. Is it cheaper to suppress an all out riot or just have your department purchase cameras? Is it better to have the goodwill of the citizens or have them paranoid they'll shoot you?
Ferguson: Police Officer Kills 18yo Michael Brown; Protests/Riots Continue
- Thread starter besada
- Start date
- Status
Last I heard its this sunday.
kame-sennin
Member
This isn't about winning hearts and minds. No one gives a shit what white liberals think about police brutality. They haven't lifted a finger for the last 400 years, people aren't holding their breath waiting for them to help now. This is a dispute between the state and the people of Ferguson. A riot is simply the expression of the people that there are consequences for unmitigated state violence. The New York Times can think whatever they want.
It's more logical than cynical. The state has no incentive to curb its use of violence against the citizens. We have the system we have because the wealthy benefit from it. As someone else said, riots present a cost/benefit argument to the ruling class, which is much more persuasive than an appeal to morality (the ruling class has none).
kame-sennin
Member
What in god's name are you talking about?
Random Painted HIghway
Member
You type this as if it wasn't the people of Ferguson who elected this police chief and this mayor who have been hiring folks like Wilson for years now setting the stage for what has been going on these past few months.
"No one gives a shit what white liberals think about police brutality. They haven't lifted a finger for the last 400 years". You included the damn Revolutionary War in a time period that you claim has no examples of "white liberals lifting a finger". Like, c'mon. You're really going to tell me liberal whites never once resisted police in the history of America? Nah, bro. Nah.
kame-sennin
Member
Why didn't anybody tell me I could stop white supremacy and capitalist exploitation by voting? This is huge!
I forgot I was on gaf where people don't know what "liberal" means.
Leftists, communists, socialists, anarchists, radical leftists, revolutionaries et al are NOT liberals. Liberals make up the political center. They are the moderate wing of the American power structure represented by the democrats, major newspapers, universities, and other "liberal institutions". Liberals have never and will never advocate for revolutionary change. The purpose of the liberal class is to moderate state violence and oppression to avoid revolt by the common people. The best example of this would be liberal FDR reforming capitalism to weaken the rhetorical power of the American communist movement. I think it was Richard Nixon who started labeling everyone who doesn't like as a "liberal".
kame-sennin
Member
Yea, I wrote the definition for the liberal class. A liberal is not a leftist, and a leftist is not a conservative, and a conservative is not a liberal. I'm sorry words have meanings.
Well, all I can tell you is that if people start rioting on Sunday, the police will use a liberal amount of force to deal with them.
I dunno dude. You're just throwing some half-baked Chris Hedges around though. That's fine, he's interesting and insightful and worthwhile. But even if we're going to take up his schema, in what way is FDR an example of liberals not "lifting a finger" now?
So what is your claim? That rioters/looters are justified but can't accomplish anything without "the liberal class" moderating their demands and unfortunately because this liberal class has failed recently we shouldn't expect them to step in?
Random Painted HIghway
Member
Voting out the bums in power in Ferguson will get those fine folks there much further than Internet militarism.
kame-sennin
Member
As an aside, I actually think Hedges' condemnations of violence are some of the most disdainful I've seen from the left.
As for FDR, his New Deal is often looked at as a boon to the working class. But in reality, the New Deal saved capitalism. In the early 20th century, communist groups (and socialists, anarchists et al) were surging in numbers and popularity. By reigning in the excesses of capitalism, FDR protected the American financial system from far more radical changes.
What I'm saying is that American liberals are not the ones who enact change. Whether it's workers rights, civil rights, women's rights, or anything else, it's always the radical groups on the fringes who instigate change and threaten the status quo. Once that threat becomes too great for the ruling class to ignore, and change is inevitable, liberals emerge to propose a moderate version of the demands for change that assuages the masses but does not threaten the status quo.
The quintessential example of this in American history would be slavery. It was extreme radicals like Nat Turner and John Brown who instigated the Civil War - and thus, the end of slavery - with their bloody slave revolts. John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry was ultimately the straw that broke the camel's back, terrifying the White South. Slave owners were certain that there was no way to stop abolitionists from instigating slave revolts on their plantations - save secession. The Civil War started less than a year later.
Of course, Lincoln and other liberals in Washington were not committed to ending slavery but to preserving the union (maintaining the status quo). Lincoln said as much himself. It wasn't until the war had decimated the South, crippling the military apparatus required to maintain a massive system of chattel slavery, that Lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation. Lincoln "freed the slaves" after they were already effectively free.
You sure showed me.
kame-sennin
Member
No worries. Misunderstanding on both ends.
Ferguson: video shows Darren Wilson arresting man for recording him
I know it's not as brutal as 'strong arm robbery' and all...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wAkbovfTeA
I know it's not as brutal as 'strong arm robbery' and all...
Should be a thread.
soundahfekz
Member
such a saint with wings. Where's his gofundme page?
I guess this means things will be popping off shortly?
edit: Also, seems to me like this is telegraphing the news...
Heh, judging by the way they handled everything, they'd probably just say "no charges will be filed" and not offer up any details.
They've released very little thus far and hopefully, if it does turn out they don't indict him, they release most or all of it soon after.
Exactly. I can see not releasing during an ongoing investigation to not poison the well or not if there is an indictment before trial. But they better try and explain the case if there are no charges.
what news? Officer getting off is past history as far as we're concerned. News would have been if he had to go to trial instead of getting back pay, hahahaha.
Looking at the chief, and the mayor and the prosecutor and then the governor, it wasn't ever much of a question.
Random Painted HIghway
Member
I am expecting a "no indictment by the grand jury, all evidence has been turned over to the doJ and pursuant to doj policy, nothing will be released until after their investigation is concluded."
I guess. =(
That could be, but according to that declaration of emergency they also expect the DOJ investigation results shortly.
Foxy Fox 39
Banned
My goodness
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
If he doesn't already have a book deal, one is in the works.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
"My Fight Against the Thug Menace*: The Darren Wilson Story"
*Certainly Not Racist in any way.
You forget the part where his last department was disbanded and the part where he had *just* gotten a commendation?
Jackben
bitch I'm taking calls.
Was MO one of those states that prohibited recording of law enforcement? I know IL was one of the states where you could be jailed for recording the police until struck down by the Supreme Court late last year.
Anyways, it seems likely there isn't anything to put away the officer and likely it's going to end up being a justified shooting because of all of the evidence in his favor.
timetokill
Banned
Yeah.... a state of emergency ahead of the announcement says all that needs to be said.
There will be no justice today.
There will be no justice today.
Business as usual.
- Status