• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Protesting the Inauguration of Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.

jstripes

Banned
It's safe to assume that most of the protesters destroying things aren't there to protest Trump. Most protests of that nature attract idiots who are just looking for an excuse to rampage.
 

jph139

Member
Blanket statements like "violence is bad" are way too simplistic. Violence against innocent people? Bad. Violence against property? Not so much.

When the government is doing the former, we shouldn't be clucking our tongues at the latter.
 
while i can't agree with a dumb absolutist statement like that, i certainly haven't said otherwise in this thread, so kindly fuck off

What's with all the language fella? Cool your jets. The funny thing is you thought your little line was oh-so-witty and sharp that you felt the need to repost it here. You've got no class.
 

Guileless

Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Blanket statements like "violence is bad" are way too simplistic. Violence against innocent people? Bad. Violence against property? Not so much.

When the government is doing the former, we shouldn't be clucking our tongues at the latter.

This is the logic abortion opponents use to burn down abortion clinics.
 

jph139

Member
This is the logic abortion opponents use to burn down abortion clinics.

Would you argue that violence is never justifiable in any circumstance? I wouldn't. My objection to burning down abortion clinics isn't that violence is being used but that it's being used to do more harm (threatening doctors and women in need of help) than good (protecting fetuses, which I do not consider human life).

In this case, I think the harm (damage to businesses and homes) probably outweighs the good as well (attention for our political objections). But that's not an objection to the fundamentals, just the application.

I'd like to live in a world where no one uses violence at all, but that's just not how humans work. Breaking things is easier than fixing them.
 

MIMIC

Banned
Uh, you're the teacher. You aren't required to show it.

Sub. But it came over the PA system to tune into the inauguration stream. But the network was overloaded and no one could log in, so....yay? 😄

Most of my students (like 99%) didn't want to watch it (one even yelled out "10 minutes until America's funeral!") so nothing of value was lost.
 

Afrodium

Banned
I fully support protests when they're in my history book and against things that society now accepts as unjust, but anyone protesting today is clearly a crybaby.
 

Sulik2

Member
Where's this idea that Riots don't spur change? You don't even have to go back to the founding of the country.

Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated on April 4th, 1968. Hundreds of riots erupted in nearly every major US city. The Civil Rights Act of 1968 was signed on April 11th, 1968.

Now I will not equivocate black people being frustrated at Dr. Kings death with white anarchists, but this ahistorical view that "destroying people's property is ineffective" just highlights how many of you are stupid when it comes to history.

In this capitalistic, materialistic society that routinely values property and physical assets over human lives, breaking shit en masse is, and has been an effective way to effect change, regardless if you want to sit from your ivory tower and "take the high road"

Yup. Looking at it from a historical context riots and violence are one of the most sure fire ways to cause change. Whether change for the good or the bad, that's a coin flip. Under a dictator a lot of people will die. In a still democratic country, you might get a civil rights act. But violence absolutely has an effect.
 

Basketball

Member
Blanket statements like "violence is bad" are way too simplistic. Violence against innocent people? Bad. Violence against property? Not so much.

When the government is doing the former, we shouldn't be clucking our tongues at the latter.

Nice Logic there pal
 

UberTag

Member
Sub. But it came over the PA system to tune into the inauguration stream. But the network was overloaded and no one could log in, so....yay? 😄

Most of my students (like 99%) didn't want to watch it (one even yelled out "10 minutes until America's funeral!") so nothing of value was lost.
Seems like your students have some good heads on their shoulders. Take heart in that.
 

Dalibor68

Banned
You should absolutely harm as many fascists as possible, as badly as possible.

Who are the facists in that sentence? The police? Because that's who they threw rocks at in the earlier stream. Also, you don't have the right to physically harm someone because of a label you applied on them.
 

Orayn

Member
Who are the facists in that sentence? The police? Because that's who they threw rocks at in the earlier stream. Also, you don't have the right to physically harm someone because of a label you applied on them.

Known neo Nazi Richard Spencer getting punched is a good start.
 

Angel_DvA

Member
Violence is never ok, you'll lose the fight when you come to it, especially in our time, be civilizated and don't hurt other people or business, that is not ok.
 
Violence is never ok, you'll lose the fight when you come to it, especially in our time, be civilizated and don't hurt other people or business, that is not ok.

That's the assumption that the people you are protesting against are reasonable. People don't voluntarily give up power, it has to be forced away from them. Robbed if at all possible.
 

-Ryn

Banned
You might want to read the shit he has been saying. Putting a disclaimer at the end saying "totally not generalising guysssssss" doesn't fucking work. It's like saying a racial slur and saying "I'm not racist" after it.
They can still not be a racist because of context. That however is another conversation entirely.

It seems to me more that they were making a point about how the protest is coming across to people due to what's happening and how they're going about it. I'm not sure how you can have such an issue with generalization however when you make a statement such as the following...

Well, not all protesters destroy stuff. In fact, they are a very tiny minority.

Meanwhile 99.9% of Trump voters are racist bigoted fuckwits.
I can only assume you're joking.

There's no truth to this at all.

The modern world was shaped by violence, both as a resistance to movements and as a tool of fear and subjugation. Of course, you already know that, but ultimately people like you are fine with things as they are, and are more concerned with order than liberation.
You're missing the point of the statement. Much has indeed come of violence, but at a great cost. One that leaves both sides in a state of loss.

The world was also shaped through peaceful discourse and resolution. Order is (or at least can be) the result of people fighting for a world in which violence isn't a requirement for progress. What liberation does violence achieve here that could not be resolved with peaceful methods? Violence has been a necessary evil in the past yes, but is it necessary now within the US?
 

slit

Member
Violence is never ok, you'll lose the fight when you come to it, especially in our time, be civilizated and don't hurt other people or business, that is not ok.

If that's the case then the whole world would be living under totalitarian egomaniacal murders. Also I don't know what the time we happen to live in would have to do with anything.
 

Goro Majima

Kitty Genovese Member
That was sickening to watch. They didn't even give the woman/person with disabilities a chance to move once they sprayed.. just kept spraying even though there were people who were (very clearly) trying to move them out of the way.

Yeah that was really shocking.

Like what's the thought process there? "welp, they're not moving so I should just stand here and keep spraying it in their face"
 

Got

Banned
violence is never okay, unless it's against the protestors. then it's okay to fuck their shit up cuz they're protesting, apparently
 

Tall4Life

Member
Violence is never ok, you'll lose the fight when you come to it, especially in our time, be civilizated and don't hurt other people or business, that is not ok.
Tell the Jews in 1930's Germany and the Armenians in the 10's that they should nonviolently resist their oppressors and see how that works out.
 

mdubs

Banned
Boston-Tea-Party-Hero-AB.jpeg

"These damn protestors! Nothing good will come out of this!"
 
You're missing the point of the statement. Much has indeed come of violence, but at a great cost. One that leaves both sides in a state of loss.

The world was also shaped through peaceful discourse and resolution. Order is (or at least can be) the result of people fighting for a world in which violence isn't a requirement for progress. What liberation does violence achieve here that could not be resolved with peaceful methods? Violence has been a necessary evil in the past yes, but is it necessary now within the US?

I'm not missing the point of anything.

Violence is fine when it suits the needs of the powerful, when it's used as a tool to silence the oppressed, and when it's used to preserve the status quo.

Miss me with the idea of "peaceful resolution" while people in my country have and continue to wage war on me and people who look like me, and people who claim to be advocates of peace do nothing to stop it.
 

sphagnum

Banned
Have there ever been mass peaceful protests for equality/rights and did they ever work?

Civil rights movement? It worked, but not fully, and partially because it had the threat of more radical movements popping off if the CRM'S demands weren't listened to.
 

necrosis

Member
I'm not missing the point of anything.

Violence is fine when it suits the needs of the powerful, when it's used as a tool to silence the oppressed, and when it's used to preserve the status quo.

Miss me with the idea of "peaceful resolution" while people in my country have and continue to wage war on me and people who look like me, and people who claim to be advocates of peace do nothing to stop it.

preach
 

slit

Member
The world was also shaped through peaceful discourse and resolution. Order is (or at least can be) the result of people fighting for a world in which violence isn't a requirement for progress. What liberation does violence achieve here that could not be resolved with peaceful methods? Violence has been a necessary evil in the past yes, but is it necessary now within the US?

Those examples are few and far between. Despite what you may think/hope humans are nowhere near the level of harmony with their instincts, urges and emotions that you are preaching for. It'll be a long time before they are.
 

necrosis

Member
Who are the fascists you're talking about? Shit man, I didn't think NeoGaf would condone a user telling others to go out and commit mass serious assaults, but here we are.

he mentioned richard spencer (who, along with all his nazi fanboys, absolutely deserved to get punched in the fucking face)
 

MUnited83

For you.
They can still not be a racist because of context. That however is another conversation entirely.

It seems to me more that they were making a point about how the protest is coming across to people due to what's happening and how they're going about it. I'm not sure how you can have such an issue with generalization however when you make a statement such as the following...


I can only assume you're joking.


You're missing the point of the statement. Much has indeed come of violence, but at a great cost. One that leaves both sides in a state of loss.

The world was also shaped through peaceful discourse and resolution. Order is (or at least can be) the result of people fighting for a world in which violence isn't a requirement for progress. What liberation does violence achieve here that could not be resolved with peaceful methods? Violence has been a necessary evil in the past yes, but is it necessary now within the US?

If you vote for a racist bigot fuckwit, i will call you a racist bigot fuckwit. If you vote for Hitler, I will call you a Nazi. That's not generalising, that's looking at the shit you've done and telling the kind of garbage you are for doing it.
 

Orayn

Member
Who are the fascists you're talking about? Shit man, I didn't think NeoGaf would condone a user telling others to go out and commit mass serious assaults, but here we are.

By "fascists" I mean "fascists." People who espouse and act on a fascist ideology. Donald Trump is very popular among them under their new sanitized branding of "alt-right."

Since fascists operate on violence and intimidation, I generally find myself cheering for the brave souls willing to go out and use the same tactics against them. I do indeed think it's morally right (or at least not morally wrong) to beat up Nazis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom