How Many Would Put Themselves In The Middle of This Diagram
It seems obvious to me that most people would be in agreement on these 4 issues, but I'm curious if that is the case. Would you put yourself in the middle of this Venn diagram, or not? If not, please explain why.
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
4 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.The only people who would not be in the middle are those who are either racists and/or believe that order matters more than justice..
TomMcGiverin
Level 8
June 1, 2020
1
BD66:
Those that believe Social Justice matters more than law and order disagree with the lower right. I've seen a lot of posts on facebook today to that effect.
@BD66 I still have to agree with the lower right. See my comment below. Champions for social justice realize that fighting the system means respecting the rule of law as well and accepting the punishment that goes with breaking unjust laws or commiting civil disobedience if they lose in the courts. Doing so is part of maintaining the legitimacy of your cause and gaining public sympathy for it.
The looting and burning is an unfortunate byproduct of the uprising but I was happy to see that police precinct burn.
RoboGraham
Level 8
May 31, 2020
2
I can understand that feeling, but I have read a lot recently about the radical movements of the 60s and 70s and I don't feel the same anymore about the legitimacy or feasibility of waging violent revolution against the government. Those groups tried it in those days and it didn't work. Burning or blowing up police stations or other government buildings is not the way to go. Too much like Tim McVeigh for me, whether the buildings are empty or not. It is a slippery slope, in my mind, to burn an empty police station.
Yeah, non-violence is the best way. Mass noncooperation with authority.
Burning and looting is counterproductive. It labels the entire movement as violent and dangerous and gives them legitimacy in the violence they use to suppress it.
Still, I can't really blame them for doing it and I do enjoy seeing it burn.
@RoboGraham I agree with every word of your comment. We have to be strategic in how we act, because the bad guys own the media and have way more weapons than we do. The only chance we have for peaceful change is if we have the sympathy of the military and the overwhelming support of the people in the 99%.
That's the best case scenario. If it doesn't work, well, that's what the second amendment is for.
@RoboGraham I doubt a bunch of rednecks and their guns could beat the cops and military with their tanks, superior firepower and much superior communications systems, and, don't forget aircraft..
You a fan of The Clash? "Police and thieves in the street... Fighting the nation with their guns and ammunition..."
I doubt that too. But they don't need to win, they just need to continue to exist.
The Vietnamese didn't beat the Americans militarily. They tried during Tet and it failed. They won by having more determination and more endurance. The American public got war weary and the solders stopped trying to win.
The insurgency is just a thorn in the side of the authorities. The real fight is in the hearts and minds of the noncombatants.
@RoboGraham well stated!
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Related Groups More
Feline Fanatics
1562 members
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.