The Walking Dead : Post deleted

Re: republicans

How have I placed a storefront ahead of life?

Re: republicans

Correct, it's not comparable, destroying billions of dollars worth of private property of innocent people for 4 months is far worse than occupying a government building for a few hours.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

Had the dumb fucks BLM just stuck to the police stations or other government buildings then fine, because fuck the state, but no, they had to go and loot private businesses and burn many of them down. Fuck them.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

We have different opinions.

Re: republicans

A government building is more important than tons and tons of private businesses, and a lot of that black run businesses? They didn't even burn the Capitol, they just occupied it for a few hours. And don't get me wrong, I was all for the National Guard coming in and shooting all of them, but how is that worse than all the lives and livelihoods destroyed by the other riots? Obviously Bentley and Spectre and Rob will say it is because they are partisan hacks, and if that's why you believe so then so be it, but any rational person can step back from politics and understand which is far worse.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

Occupying the Capitol violently and threatening lawmakers over something as frivolous as a blatantly cooked-up theory about voter fraud is much worse than destroying private property. First off, BLM was triggered by the killing of unarmed black men and women by police officers. The Capitol riots were triggered by the temper tantrums of an insane old white man. BLM's damage to property was symbolic of black Americans and their sympathizers' outrage at the callous indifference to the plight of black people and other people of colour. White supremacist rioters at the Capitol were arguably much more dangerous, as they were attacking the very fabric of democracy, and trying to make America into a fascist state.

Re: republicans

Nope, sorry, you lost the argument when you justified the destruction of private property owned by innocent people. You are a piece of shit and a partisan hack. Occupying a government building for a few hours is not even close to as bad as destroying people's businesses and livelihoods, $2bil worth. You are an awful person if you think otherwise. You worship government more than regular civilians, fuck you, you evil piece of shit.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

You need a to find a smart orangutan and practise your debating skills.

Re: republicans

Not an argument.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

True. I'm glad you've achieved insight at last.

Re: republicans

Yes, you have nothing. You do better as a cheerleader rather than trying to debate.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

I don’t want to compare the two events, but this doesn’t make sense to me. They destroyed property indiscriminately. Some of those businesses were owned by black people and many were owned by people sympathetic to their cause. So what’s the point? Someone sees their ruined “storefront” and immediately is understanding of how black people are hurting? If anything it made people less sympathetic.

You can support BLM without supporting this action in particular, or at least recognize that the innocent people affected by the damage were *actually affected* and not pretend it didn’t matter because who cares, they’re just “storefronts”

Re: republicans

I don't think you get how very American and ingrained (and irrational) such an attitude is. Nobody values property more than Americans. It's the only developed country in the world that accepts it as moral to shoot someone for trespassing. In most countries, that is seen as uncivilized behaviour. Property is much less valuable than human life. Property is only valuable insofar as we confer value on it. Western civilization is built on Greek rationality and Christian morality, and neither of those two traditions value property in itself (valuing law and order is different). The high valuation of property comes from British empiricism, from Hobbes, Locke and Adam Smith in particular. America was built on those values, and denies the values of Greek rationality and the Christian repudiation of greed and the profit-motive. So people who support BLM and don't worry too much about incidental property damage are appealing to a much older, and arguably much more valuable, set of traditions.

Re: republicans

I don't think you get how very American and ingrained
No, you don't.

"I am Kamala Harris, my pronouns are she and her, and I am a woman sitting at the table wearing a blue suit." -A fucking idiot

Re: republicans

ADHD. Comes from not breathing fresh air. Get your head out of his ass, I say!

Re: republicans

Perhaps I don't view property the same as way as people do in other countries, but these protests I'm referring to were in American cities and the protestors were American. So they likely view it the American way and knew they'd harm the innocent people who owned those businesses.

I have a hard time believing people wouldn't care about their business being damaged in other countries. I did a cursory search about recent German and French riots and business owners were quoted as being quite upset about the damage. Have you ever lost a house or car to a fire? It's extremely upsetting even if you know insurance will pay for most of it. Perhaps people are more understanding than usual because of the righteous anger of the protestors, but it still hurts the business owners and I'm sure they aren't dismissing it as simply a "storefront." If the "storefronts" were no big deal why bother destroying them in the first place? They were sending a message. I understand when people are angry they might lash out in ways that don't make sense but I don't see the good in excusing the behavior when it's clearly wrong, or trying to pretend people's business don't matter.

Human life is absolutely more important than a business, but did you forget businesses support human lives too? And the businesses or businesses owners themselves weren't murdering people. Again, many of them supported the cause. You can have a righteous cause, it doesn't make whatever damage you do in the name of it righteous as well.

I am sympathetic to the protestors as police have far too much power and too little responsibility. I can even understand, to some degree, saying that while the property was important, the cause was more important than the property (even though that takes consent away from the property owners). I don't understand the condescension about "storefronts" though. It's like people don't realize you can appreciate the value of a person's business while also supporting the protests.

Re: republicans

As you point out, most businesses will have insurance coverage. It's not like having your house swept away by a flood in some Third World country, where it means you simply lose everything (and probably die as well).

It would be lovely if BLM could protest without damaging any property, but then they wouldn't be taken seriously at all. White America has all the power. One of the reasons black protestors damage property (and each other) is that they know what terrible violence will be inflicted on them if they actually kill a cop (or even an ordinary white person). So liberals such as myself simply assume property damage as collateral. The more important issue for us is: why are cops getting away with shooting unarmed black men? That's a million times more important than "storefront" damage. And it needs to be insisted on, in a materialistic and mercenary society like that of modern America.

Re: republicans

So the property damage didn’t matter because insurance, but it was also done because it was the only way to send the message? It was ineffective and effective at the same time?

I don’t think any thought was given to the damage, people were just lashing out. Whether that’s acceptable is a question I’m willing to entertain, whether the property rightfully mattered to people I am not.

Re: republicans

Merchant said... So the property damage didn’t matter because insurance, but it was also done because it was the only way to send the message? It was ineffective and effective at the same time?

I don’t think any thought was given to the damage, people were just lashing out. Whether that’s acceptable is a question I’m willing to entertain, whether the property rightfully mattered to people I am not.
expand
Those are not mutually inconsistent. No specific individuals need suffer (insurance) but a statement is being made that attacks American ideology very directly (you care more about property than human lives, so here's what we think of your property).

I think property is important, but far from being the most important thing in the world (which is what Americans believe). Property is theft. I think the high evaluation of private property will eventually destroy us as a species.

Re: republicans

I have a hard time believing people wouldn't care about their business being damaged in other countries. I did a cursory search about recent German and French riots and business owners were quoted as being quite upset about the damage.
Did you really look up the internet to check if German and French people get upset when they suffer property damage?

You shouldn’t indulge Bentley in this. He’s either winding you up or he has totally lost it.

Property damage is obviously never acceptable.

Re: republicans

Sure, I had assumptions but never having asked someone outside of America whether they care if their business was destroyed, I wanted to at least see something that confirmed it in case I was asked to provide proof.

I agree I’m wasting my time.

Re: republicans

Merchant said... Sure, I had assumptions but never having asked someone outside of America whether they care if their business was destroyed, I wanted to at least see something that confirmed it in case I was asked to provide proof.

I agree I’m wasting my time.
expand
I don’t think you would be able to find any person on this planet who would be ok with their property being randomly destroyed, but you’re a smart person and I know you’re being facetious.

Bentley, on the other hand, seems to be a little lost between trolling and confused desperation.

Re: republicans

Dildo Daggins said... I don’t think you would be able to find any person on this planet who would be ok with their property being randomly destroyed, but you’re a smart person and I know you’re being facetious.

Bentley, on the other hand, seems to be a little lost between trolling and confused desperation.
expand
Who is this moron? Sounds like Orson.
Top