Ok, I've had it with OWS

[cablescavenger]

There are plenty of videos of OWS being antisemitic. Do you really want me to overload with videos to make it appear that OWS's main platform is to get rid of us?

No thank you, it wouldn't change my view.

 

[work in progress]

I would have responded to the rest of your post, but you lost me right here.

And you lost me somewhere in between posting strings of images linking black looters and park demonstrators and expressing the need for more oppressive law enforcement to deal with the symptoms of the problem, not the root problems which are leading to dissatisfaction and unrest. There is no mistaking the dog whistle implications of black demonstrator with looting. If they don't have an image on hand, they'll put one up from their image files to reassure low info viewers that the key problem is that blacks tend to be violent and uncivilized by nature.

Where are your pictures of cops beating demonstrators, and kettling crowds before offering an opportunity to disperse? Or are they filtered out in advance on rightwing news aggregator sites?

 

[Kathryn]

And you lost me somewhere in between posting strings of images linking black looters and park demonstrators and expressing the need for more oppressive law enforcement to deal with the symptoms of the problem, not the root problems which are leading to dissatisfaction and unrest. There is no mistaking the dog whistle implications of black demonstrator with looting. If they don't have an image on hand, they'll put one up from their image files to reassure low info viewers that the key problem is that blacks tend to be violent and uncivilized by nature.

Where are your pictures of cops beating demonstrators, and kettling crowds before offering an opportunity to disperse? Or are they filtered out in advance on rightwing news aggregator sites?

Surely you're not throwing the race card at MOI? Wow, that would be ironic.

First of all, I didn't say there was a need for MORE oppressive police presence in Oakland. To refresh your memory, what I said was this:

The city of Oakland is a hotbed of violence and known for it's destructive protests and street riots. A strong police presence is a "necessary evil" in Oakland. The people of that city have brought that upon themselves.

Note the phrase "necessary EVIL." A strong police force IS necessary in Oakland. An OPPRESSIVE police force is NOT necessary - anywhere.

Now - back to your race card. If you will actually TRY to be objective and take a second look at the slew of photos that I posted of riots and protests in Oakland, you will clearly see that I actually posted more photos of WHITE protesters than I did of black or hispanic protesters. Odd that you only seemed to notice the photos of black protesters.

What are you suggesting - that I leave out photos of black protesters? For what reason? Seems like reverse discrimination to me.

By the way - I posted photos of violent protests in Oakland to demonstrate that VIOLENT PROTESTS are not isolated, uncommon events in that city. I didn't say that the police force is a paragon of virtue there.

One final note - all these photos came from a Google image search.

 

[work in progress]

Surely you're not throwing the race card at MOI? Wow, that would be ironic.

First of all, I didn't say there was a need for MORE oppressive police presence in Oakland. To refresh your memory, what I said was this:

The city of Oakland is a hotbed of violence and known for it's destructive protests and street riots. A strong police presence is a "necessary evil" in Oakland. The people of that city have brought that upon themselves.

When these demonstrations began (including Oakland) the response by police was oppressive -- I would consider firing a tear gas canister directly into a crowd (instead of overhead), to be an obvious act of oppression and intimidation, since this is a common tactic used by police in Egypt and other brutal dictatorships. In that case in Oakland, the cop who fired the canister, hit an Iraq War veteran in the head, almost killing him, and an OWS medic who was trying to lend assistance was driven off by the cops wielding batons. Three men who at first fled the scene because of the gas, had to return to the scene where Scott Olsen was lying unconscious and pick him up and carry him to safety and get him taken to the hospital. NO ASSISTANCE OR ANY CONCERN FOR OLSEN'S CONDITION WAS OFFERED AT ANY TIME BY THE POLICE...and that fact alone is a big reason why OWS in Oakland is the one that everyone's looking at to break into open violence and rioting.

It's also worth noting, that you have to turn to the foreign media and small, alternative media in the U.S. to find out what is going on, as in one OWS demonstration after another, police deliberately arrested and assaulted reporters. The message is clear: only embedded journalists with the cops are guaranteed their safety, while others who get to close to the crowd have actually been targeted in spite of wearing press credentials...all by mistake of course! Going back in time, aside from Dan Rather at the 68 Democratic Convention, I'm not aware of any journalist being attacked by police during the Vietnam demonstrations back then. All this is part of the reason why Reporters Without Borders is now ranking the U.S. at 47th in the World in freedom of the press.

Now - back to your race card. If you will actually TRY to be objective and take a second look at the slew of photos that I posted of riots and protests in Oakland, you will clearly see that I actually posted more photos of WHITE protesters than I did of black or hispanic protesters. Odd that you only seemed to notice the photos of black protesters.

What are you suggesting - that I leave out photos of black protesters? For what reason? Seems like reverse discrimination to me.

The black pictures were of looters in front of stores set on fire, and scary looking black guys...one wearing some garb that looks like an Arab terrorist on an episode of 24. While the whites...seriously, I don't care what that white girl has on her sign, would anyone be afraid of her? And the guys look like the typical football or hockey riot, that authorities tolerate more than peaceful protesters who are challenging the system. So, it's not a matter of whether there were more blacks or whites in unflattering photos...it's a matter of what they are doing, and more importantly -- how dangerous they look in those photos.

As they say: a picture is worth a thousand words. Why do you use pictures to make your arguments? Pictures such as these are used to generate a negative emotional response -- not cooler, reasoned logic. But, this is increasingly the pattern on rightwing blogs and news sites, regardless of whatever they're claiming. Most right wing ideas about economics, the environment, religion and science, and foreign policy have born bitter fruit when actually applied. So, to make the case now, the conservative doesn't talk like William F. Buckley; he goes on a rant and emotional tirade like O'Reilly and Beck...even Hannity is trying to learn how its done! And it's mostly done with pictures, not real facts or any effort to inform the audience. The objective is to make them afraid to question conservative wisdom of the last 30 years; so almost every right wing statement on every issue is designed to generate fear, loathing, envy or some other negative emotional response. We used to just see this from the religious right and their bloody picture signs of stillborn babies at their rallies (which they always claimed were aborted fetuses), and now their economic arguments sound and look like exactly the same thing.


Back in the days when Republican candidates were slightly more subtle about their appeals to white racial identity and fear and loathing of blacks, HW Bush's campaign in 88 was floundering, because the conservative right of the GOP looked on him as much the same as the right views Mitt Romney today - an opportunist who is trying to say the right things. And, despite all of the hero worship of Reagan, his tenure was not as brilliant as the right see it today in the rearview mirror! There were a lot of people who were sick of Republicans and wanted a change. Not that Dukakis was setting crowds on fire, but Bush Sr. was unable to gain any advantage in polling until Lee Atwater cooked up those Willy Horton ads that featured a brief video clip of Horton being arraigned after a murder or whatever else he was charged with at the time. Atwater said later that the image of Horton was much more effective than the narration about his release and his return to crime, which the ad blamed on Governor Dukakis. Most viewers got the message of murder and rape combined with the image of big, dark, hostile-looking, scary black man, and the actual message was superfluous. And that's why image is important. If every example of crime, drug use, welfare dependency, food stamps, public housing, and even 'government employee' has a black face attached to it, then a despicable clown like Gingrich doesn't have to connect the dots -- and Chris Matthews is right about something for once in his life that "the dog whistle has turned into an air-raid siren."

By the way - I posted photos of violent protests in Oakland to demonstrate that VIOLENT PROTESTS are not isolated, uncommon events in that city. I didn't say that the police force is a paragon of virtue there.

But, your solution to violent protests in Oakland is more police and more oppression of unrest by the authorities. At some point, my dissatisfaction with conservatism is because conservatives do not see underlying systemic causes that may be valid, and can only respond to unrest in the typical authoritarian manner.

Note the phrase "necessary EVIL." A strong police force IS necessary in Oakland. An OPPRESSIVE police force is NOT necessary - anywhere.

In this day and age, when torture is called "enhanced interrogation", abduction and illegal transfer to foreign nations is called "extraordinary rendition", I'm thinking that the language used by authoritarians is devoid of meaning, and is designed to make abominable practices more acceptable.

 

[Kathryn]

Please. First of all, I am not a conservative. I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I usually vote libertarian and am registered as an independent. There is not a single candidate for president that I can get excited about or inspired by. Without exception, they are all very disappointing to me. But I digress.

Secondly, I never stated that "the solution to violent protests in Oakland is more police and more oppression of unrest by the authorities." I didn't say this because I don't believe it. What my point is, is that in areas that are prone to violence, more of a police force is necessary. I don't like violent protests and wanton destruction of property (both fairly common occurrences in Oakland and, to contrast, events that simply don't happen much in most areas), and I don't like oppressive police forces either. I want no part of either scenario - and unfortunately the two seem to go together. They feed off each other.

As for your continued references to my "racism," I'd say that you're entirely off mark there. I posted photos of actual events in Oakland - actual people doing actual things. These events HAPPENED. These people - men, women, black, white, hispanic - did these things. It's called reality.

 

[work in progress]

Please. First of all, I am not a conservative. I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I usually vote libertarian and am registered as an independent. There is not a single candidate for president that I can get excited about or inspired by. Without exception, they are all very disappointing to me. But I digress.

Okay, but my comments about your use of pictures are not directed at you personally, but the conservative strategists who advocate using this approach, and promote it in their think tanks and disseminate to their followers. I think I have started off on the wrong foot by failing to make a distinction more clearly between personal character and some ideas and a style of using images that is being used all across the blogosphere that was originally designed to take advantage of peoples' fears and feelings of resentment.

I don't thing anyone who reads or listens to a significant quantity of right wing media can avoid copying a lot of what they are doing because it becomes normalized. So I am not claiming that you are motivated by racism or are engaging in race-baiting; but you are likely using some ideas and attitudes you read and hear about and take for granted as normal.

A big problem today is that people are falling into media silos where they only hear the kind of messages that their general group presents. Even Google and Yahoo have designed the software in their search engines to feed our prejudices. So, I have to tune in to conservatives or climate contrarians every once in a while to see if there's anything new from the other side, because Google or Yahoo are going to give me the first ten selections that link to sites that I frequent, or are close to them, as long as I'm on my computer and using the same IP address.

Secondly, I never stated that "the solution to violent protests in Oakland is more police and more oppression of unrest by the authorities." I didn't say this because I don't believe it. What my point is, is that in areas that are prone to violence, more of a police force is necessary. I don't like violent protests and wanton destruction of property (both fairly common occurrences in Oakland and, to contrast, events that simply don't happen much in most areas), and I don't like oppressive police forces either. I want no part of either scenario - and unfortunately the two seem to go together. They feed off each other.

I don't think anyone is going to make an argument that riots and violence are good things; but my contention is that when a system allows all of its institutions, including government, to be bought by the highest bidders, and peaceful protest is suppressed -- first, with some outright unconstitutional bylaws denying and marginalizing protests, while systemic problems get worse -- the violence that follows can only be regarded as a symptom of the problem, not the cause. In medicine, you can either treat the illness or treat the symptoms (like taking anti-histamine drugs) -- seems like a similar problem here.

As for your continued references to my "racism," I'd say that you're entirely off mark there. I posted photos of actual events in Oakland - actual people doing actual things. These events HAPPENED. These people - men, women, black, white, hispanic - did these things. It's called reality.

I will try to take a different approach, and I am sorry I came across too strong and gave you the impression I was calling you a racist. I'll try to consider my responses more carefully in the future, so I don't come across as making personal attacks on your character.

 

[YmirGF]

I will try to take a different approach, and I am sorry I came across too strong and gave you the impression I was calling you a racist. I'll try to consider my responses more carefully in the future, so I don't come across as making personal attacks on your character.

Oy vey.

 

[Magic Man]

Oy vey.

He says to the guy taking responsibility for something that might or might not have been his fault in an effort to promote a more civilized discussion. Well done, Ymir!

 

[YmirGF]

He says to the guy taking responsibility for something that might or might not have been his fault in an effort to promote a more civilized discussion. Well done, Ymir!

Indeed. Heaven forbid people actually think about what they are saying. What was I thinking?

 

[Magic Man]

Indeed. Heaven forbid people actually think about what they are saying. What was I thinking?

Yes, hopefully next time you'll remember to think about what you're saying before you post, so you don't come off like that again.

 

[Rakhel]

A Brooklyn house trashed by Occupy Wall Street is a symbol of a movement that failed to capitalize on public anger - NYPOST.com
with a link to pictures of what they did to this guy's home.