BLM prevent elderly man from using the sidewalk because he has "white priviledge"

[Dextroden]

And today in, "The internet continues to get outrage boners over a largely trivial events."

So what? It's a protest, this is what happens at protests and it's not much of an imposition. It's kinda dickish, but given all the other shit going on in the US and globally, this rates pretty much on the bottom end of the, "Shit that actually matters" scale.

Another person who thinks crossing the protest line of the people against desegregation is wrong.

Yep yep. We are doomed to repeat everything.

[Bryntrollian]

I'm here to laugh about people actively supporting idiots that contributed to the Dallas PD shootings

Citation needed

[Tijuana]

So your argument is because BLM protest the police injustice they contributed the Dallas tragedy? Is the NRA responsible for gun violence?

EVERYONE is making that connection, not just this one poster. It's not exactly a strange thing.

[Edge-]

Another person who thinks crossing the protest line of the people against desegregation is wrong.

Yep yep. We are doomed to repeat everything.

I think this isn't even remotely the same and that the comparison is silly.

And that given all the actual major issues that we should be concerned about, focusing on trivial shit like this right now is a pointless distraction.

EVERYONE is making that connection, not just this one poster. It's not exactly a strange thing.

Everyone except for those actually investigating the shooting in Dallas and now Baton Rouge. Last I remember, neither investigation had tied direct links between the shooters and BLM. Tangential links, but nothing that would tie BLM (which is an organization anyone can claim to be a part of) directly to the shootings.

[Tijuana]

I think this isn't even remotely the same and that the comparison is silly.

And that given all the actual major issues that we should be concerned about, focusing on trivial shit like this right now is a pointless distraction.

Entertainment comes in many forms.

[Dextroden]

So your argument is because BLM protest the police injustice they contributed the Dallas tragedy? Is the NRA responsible for gun violence?

That's what people here tell me. People tell me the Republican party and Christianity is to blame for the abortion clinic bombings.

The group that gave haven to the vile fucks calling for the death of cops is just as guilty, going by the preordained logic.

[PACOX]

EVERYONE is making that connection, not just this one poster. It's not exactly a strange thing.

Last I remember the protesters in Dallas were peaceful and good terms with the police around them. How the hell they pull that one off?

[Dextroden]

I think this isn't even remotely the same and that the comparison is silly.

And that given all the actual major issues that we should be concerned about, focusing on trivial shit like this right now is a pointless distraction.



Everyone except for those actually investigating the shooting in Dallas and now Baton Rouge. Last I remember, neither investigation had tied direct links between the shooters and BLM. Tangential links, but nothing that would tie BLM (which is an organization anyone can claim to be a part of) directly to the shootings.

"NEVER CROSS A PROTEST!" That means the segregationists, too.

And BLM wastes time acting important for blocking a sidewalk.

[Edge-]

"NEVER CROSS A PROTEST!" That means the segregationists, too.

Have I said that you should never cross a protest line? Because I don't think I have anywhere, but you seem to have read that from one of my posts, please let me know where I unknowingly typed this.

I said this instance is trivial. It really doesn't fucking matter.

And BLM wastes time acting important for blocking a sidewalk.

Oh heavens, someone will have to take a few minutes to walk around them. OH THE IMPOSITION!

[Tijuana]

Last I remember the protesters in Dallas were peaceful and good terms with the police around them. How the hell they pull that one off?

I agree. Don't shoot the messenger, though. The reality we live in, is that the public thinks BLM is more dangerous than the cops they are wanting to change. But, lets not forget where this movement started, either. Chanting to kill cops and such in Ferguson got a lot of press. It's hard to undo a huge amount of negative press, especially when it involves your movement's origin. It would take a lot to undo that public perception; doubling down on more of the same isn't helping.

[Dextroden]

Have I said that you should never cross a protest line? Because I don't think I have anywhere, but you seem to have read that from one of my posts, please let me know where I unknowingly typed this.

I said this instance is trivial. It really doesn't fucking matter.



Oh heavens, someone will have to take a few minutes to walk around them. OH THE IMPOSITION!

See? I'm smiling because if a black person was blocked on a sidewalk, you and pacaox would be going on about systemic racism.

[Deleted]

Just fade away already.

[Edge-]

See? I'm smiling because if a black person was blocked on a sidewalk, you and pacaox would be going on about systemic racism.

I would be? I'm glad you know me so well!

Because spoilers: I wouldn't give a shit then, either.

[Dextroden]

I would be? I'm glad you know me so well!

Because spoilers: I wouldn't give a shit then, either.

And people told me treating people like shit based on their skin color was a bad thing. Then showed they were full of shit by treating white people like shit for being white.

You look like another equality liar.

[Tijuana]

I would be? I'm glad you know me so well!

Because spoilers: I wouldn't give a shit then, either.

I mean, you may not give a shit but, you are repeatedly posting in the thread. So....yeah....

[kendro1200]

Civil rights movements often work by inconveniencing people. Obviously being polite and quiet hasn't had any effect on the problems black lives matter is trying to change.

Yet all you have to do is look at the South right after the Civil War (the "Great Reform" period that had revolutionary social progress that we didn't see hints of again until the late 20th century, things like medicare, social security, fair opportunities to public offices, etc.) in the U.S. to know that violent and forceful approaches to try and invoke civil change have the absolute worst effects and will cause more social regression and harm than any temporary good. The Civil Rights movement did a lot of good, and it made a lot of long lasting change. The thing that people do not understand is that social change is something that moves very slowly. After a certain age, you really can't get people to change their minds and social views. They may tolerate something, but they won't agree with it. Tolerating a change is not the same as accepting a change, and if a change is too much of a change, then open rebellion against the change will occur. So all social change comes at one generation at a time. You peacefully teach children how they should behave when they are older, then they'll behave like that and integrate that social change as 'normal' for themselves, and when they are older they'll merely tolerate the next step of social change, as their own children are taught and view the next step as 'normal'. Movements like BLM that have violent protests are extremely counter productive because they are violent and children become terrified when directly exposed to violence, the points of the movement then become tainted by that impression left on them. Not to mention that the moral high ground is given to those being violently attacked.

Peaceful protest and inconveniencing people, but not harming people, is the best way to invoke a change. It frustrates people, puts them at an emotional state and they will be ashamed of getting into that state upon reflection later on. It's a universal method of making people more tolerant to change, facing emotion with logic, discipline and calm. If people had been violently protesting in the '60s then everything the police and state troops did would have been justified and the general population would not have sympathized with the protesters. People really shouldn't belittle the efforts from then either. The world was a much different place then. Let's put it this way. In the 50's women could not even discuss politics without a male supervisor. There were literally different utilities for people depending on their race. Two basic normalities of society back then that current generations today couldn't even consider being serious discussion, let alone be legal and social precedent.

[Edge-]

And people told me treating people like shit based on their skin color was a bad thing. Then showed they were full of shit by treating white people like shit for being white.

You look like another equality liar.

So basically, you're just making a whole host of assumptions about my views without bothering to engage in any kind of discussion.

Righto then, enjoy fantasyland.

I mean, you may not give a shit but, you are repeatedly posting in the thread. So....yeah....

I initially posted because I constantly see trivial bullshit like this getting tons of attention because people just enjoy feeling SO OUTRAGED over every minor thing, and I think it's stupid.

Others engaged in discussion, I stuck around. Am I not supposed to stick around to respond to folks? I'm confused as to what the posting etiquette is supposed to be here, apparently. How does me continuing to post in any way relate to my dismissal of this outrage bait bullshit?

[Dextroden]

So basically, you're just making a whole host of assumptions about my views without bothering to engage in any kind of discussion.

Righto then, enjoy fantasyland.



I initially posted because I constantly see trivial bullshit like this getting tons of attention because people just enjoy feeling SO OUTRAGED over every minor thing, and I think it's stupid.

Others engaged in discussion, I stuck around. Am I not supposed to stick around to respond to folks? I'm confused as to what the posting etiquette is supposed to be here, apparently. How does me continuing to post in any way relate to my dismissal of this outrage bait bullshit?

As opposed to the reality where people who complained about being discriminated against seem to have zero issue discriminating.

[Tijuana]

So basically, you're just making a whole host of assumptions about my views without bothering to engage in any kind of discussion.

Righto then, enjoy fantasyland.



I initially posted because I constantly see trivial bullshit like this getting tons of attention because people just enjoy feeling SO OUTRAGED over every minor thing, and I think it's stupid.

Others engaged in discussion, I stuck around. Am I not supposed to stick around to respond to folks? I'm confused as to what the posting etiquette is supposed to be here, apparently. How does me continuing to post in any way relate to my dismissal of this outrage bait bullshit?

It's just a simple joke. You don't understand why people care about the topic, but you are posting about how you don't care about the topic, which is even less relevant (and less interesting, I might add) than the topic. I am guilty of the same thing. I find the discussions here, when you can find an actual one, are pretty entertaining and enjoyable. Unfortunately it's mostly "source pls" and "no, you said this before I said that but it was interference to what he said over there", etc.

[Edge-]

As opposed to the reality where people who complained about being discriminated against seem to have zero issue discriminating.

Yep, I find the hypocrisy of folks that do that simultaneously hilarious and awful. Discrimination against someone because of their race/gender/sexuality etc. isn't acceptable no matter which way it goes.