Read 2996 times

Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #80 on: November 24, 2021, 03:57:41 pm »
the problem isn't that he was armed; it's that he came from out of town looking for trouble.
OMG. he traveled to the town he worked and where his family lived and where he spent a significant amount of his life! That's as bad as me traveling from Seongnam to Seoul to protest! I mean we're talking the same amount of time it takes to get from Ilsan to Seoul. HOW DARE HE!!!!!!!!!

Quote
hat person acted in self defense, as you do when a gun is pointed at you
By further charging at them from a considerable distance when their weapon is already drawn???????

Quote
. there was no protection in place for this unarmed protestor
Well, aside from retreat in every single direction BUT at Kyle as well as ceasing to pursue....but yeah aside from those 360 alternatives, that was his only choice!

Quote
, signaling an effective end to the right to protest in areas where people are willing to kill you for it
Nothing of the sort has happened. Just that if you decide to charge someone holding a firearm and reach for it, they have the right to discharge it if they are not engaged in the commission of any other criminal act of aggression and did not start the altercation.

Quote
the reason protesters were outside and angry in the first place, is that police killed a man entirely unnecessarily
Jacob Blake was killed?

Quote
and that there's never any justice or rectification for these sorts of events.
The reason we're here is a combination of factors
1) Racism in America
2) Poor policing regulations
3) A media that goes for ratings over truth
4) The inability of most Americans/People to grasp legalese and legal concepts and to handle nuance
5) The inherent bias that exists in all homo sapiens
6) The inability of Americans/People to picture scenarios where the "team" is reversed and to analyze how they'd feel if that were the case, then come up with some sort of objective standard.
7) Low information, often due to reliance on partisan media


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #81 on: November 24, 2021, 03:59:18 pm »
all you've got is the idea that nothing can change or improve, and it's so boring. even if it turns out entirely futile (and it won't even if of course my dream society doesn't happen in my lifetime, which it won't) I'd rather spend my life working towards something good than sitting around trying to discourage those who do. good luck with your overall life satisfaction and your inevitable descent into alcoholism!
Maybe try working towards practicable goals? Maybe not viewing things as some sort of epic struggle?

Question- How old and experienced are you?


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #82 on: November 24, 2021, 04:04:16 pm »
745Sticky- Radical Right-Winger!

It's really sad what this case has done to some on the left. I was on Slate the other day and the people upset over the Rittenhouse trial literally called for the following- The end of Trial by Jury, The end of the obligation of the defense attorney to provide the best defense possible for the defendant, and that due process was racist. I really liked the "Rittenhouse's judge was biased, we need Trial by Judge" take.

I think this case is starting to take on QAnon levels of delusion for some on the left.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2021, 06:41:08 pm by Mr.DeMartino »


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #83 on: November 25, 2021, 03:06:51 am »
European people created and popularized the concept of distinct classes of people called "races" through the then-pseudo-scientific field of physical anthropology. There are earlier examples, especially in China, of the idea of "races" and therefore of racism, but they aren't particularly relevant to the timeline in question.

These pseudo-scientific classifications, which are now almost unanimously debunked thanks to the modern field of "genetics" (and also just some critical thought applied to early European anthropology's methods and conclusions), arose around the same time as colonization and slavery, and served as justifications for all sorts of atrocities. Other races were more "animalistic," naturally more subservient, in need of authority for their own good, and supposedly felt pain less than civilized European folks.

So yes, the slavery and genocide in question were are result of "whiteness" (again, these sorts of things also happened in China and elsewhere, but aren't really relevant to this discussion) as a social construct. As with any social construct, you can choose to participate in it or to reject it. Having white skin doesn't mean you have to participate in whiteness or white supremacy. This really shouldn't be a difficult concept to grasp. I have white skin, but reject "whiteness," as it shouldn't exist and is made-up to confer power to a group of people rather than allow power to be evenly saturated amongst all people. Slavery was an example of whiteness-as-power, and those who opposed it, white or not, opposed whiteness-as-power.

It's a handy theory as, in a,white majority country, anything you don't agree with can be blamed on white power' or 'whiteness' in the same way some people used to talk continuously about evil capitalists. Even if non white people perpetrate something you don't approve of, you can claim they were influenced by whiteness.

In a more classless society, tapping  into the guilt people feel about slavery etc. Is more effective than banging on about class .E.g did you know the police force was first introduced to find run away slaves and is therefore a symbol of white power? Let's de-fund it. Averagely intelligent white guy thinks 'Yes slavery was bad, so the police must be as well, and let's also bring race into the Karl Rittenhouse case even though he's a white guy who killed 2 white guys .
« Last Edit: November 25, 2021, 06:18:53 am by grimlock2 »


  • T_Rex
  • Super Waygook

    • 253

    • April 23, 2019, 08:10:20 am
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #84 on: November 25, 2021, 06:21:46 am »
European people created and popularized the concept of distinct classes of people called "races" through the then-pseudo-scientific field of physical anthropology. There are earlier examples, especially in China, of the idea of "races" and therefore of racism, but they aren't particularly relevant to the timeline in question.

These pseudo-scientific classifications, which are now almost unanimously debunked thanks to the modern field of "genetics" (and also just some critical thought applied to early European anthropology's methods and conclusions), arose around the same time as colonization and slavery, and served as justifications for all sorts of atrocities. Other races were more "animalistic," naturally more subservient, in need of authority for their own good, and supposedly felt pain less than civilized European folks.

So yes, the slavery and genocide in question were are result of "whiteness" (again, these sorts of things also happened in China and elsewhere, but aren't really relevant to this discussion) as a social construct. As with any social construct, you can choose to participate in it or to reject it. Having white skin doesn't mean you have to participate in whiteness or white supremacy. This really shouldn't be a difficult concept to grasp. I have white skin, but reject "whiteness," as it shouldn't exist and is made-up to confer power to a group of people rather than allow power to be evenly saturated amongst all people. Slavery was an example of whiteness-as-power, and those who opposed it, white or not, opposed whiteness-as-power.
To reduce slavery to a racial issue is gross oversimplication. Blacks, whites, and Arabs were all complicit in the slave trade. The transatlantic slave trade would not have been possible without significant cooperation from the native populations of Africa. Europeans did not have any natural immunity to malaria. They were afraid to venture into the interior of Africa and waited on the coasts for African slave traders to bring the slaves to them. Slavery on a global scale was greatly reduced in the 19th Century because whites decided to take a strong, unprecedented moral stand against slavery. Britain ended slavery in its own colonies and pressured Brazil and the Ottoman Empire into no longer participating in the African Slave trade. The French and Germans ended slavery in their African colonies. The Americans ended slavery in the Philippines and the Dutch ended slavery in Indonesia.


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #85 on: November 25, 2021, 06:39:44 am »
Remember that Arabs technically count as white people when talking about the slave trade. But they when they invented something in history, they revert back to being POCs.  :smiley:


  • T_Rex
  • Super Waygook

    • 253

    • April 23, 2019, 08:10:20 am
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #86 on: November 25, 2021, 08:19:54 am »
Trump hosts Rittenhouse in Mar-a-Lago after the trial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQInr0Og2Ao

So the okay hand sign means white power? News to me.


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #87 on: November 25, 2021, 09:30:31 am »
Trump hosts Rittenhouse in Mar-a-Lago after the trial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQInr0Og2Ao

So the okay hand sign means white power? News to me.

What does the thumbs up gesture mean? It has to be some kind of dog whistle to the far right. Surely.


  • Savant
  • The Legend

    • 2814

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #88 on: November 25, 2021, 09:43:27 am »
You mean this white power sign?



  • Kyndo
  • Moderator LVL 1

    • I am a geek!!

    • March 03, 2011, 09:45:24 am
    • Gyeongsangbuk-do
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #89 on: November 25, 2021, 11:10:36 am »
Why do people blank out the faces of members of hate groups?
Are there legal reasons for not naming and shaming them?


  • hangook77
  • The Legend

    • 4556

    • September 14, 2017, 09:10:12 am
    • Near Busan
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #90 on: November 25, 2021, 11:29:09 am »
Why do people blank out the faces of members of hate groups?
Are there legal reasons for not naming and shaming them?

Did members of the mob who attacked Kyle have their face blanked out or their identity concealed?  How dare he defend himself!!  Let's put out all his personal info, location, etc and encourage people to kill him now since he didn't die before.  Let's resort to demonizing him (character assassination) and use hate speech against anyone who believes in self defence or any basic concept of libertarianism or conservativism. 


It is yet to be determined if a man drove into a parade full of people due to hsi racial hatred against whites and disagreement that they should be allowed to defend themselves when attacked.  More info will come out soon, I would imagine. 
« Last Edit: November 25, 2021, 11:31:41 am by hangook77 »


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #91 on: November 25, 2021, 12:32:43 pm »
Why do people blank out the faces of members of hate groups?
Are there legal reasons for not naming and shaming them?
Proud Boys are not designated as an extremist group in the U.S. The Proud Boys are basically the right's version of ANTIFA- LARPers who have a variety of motives and are somewhat loosely organized and run the gamut in terms of their views.

Also, the OK symbol is NOT a white power gesture. It's basically done to troll the left/mainstream media, who have a tendency to freak out and label anything that isn't on their side as "white supremacist/Nazi/fascist" This was the one that caught on. People have attempted these such measures because they've realized that media, politicians and activist groups will respond like Pavlov's dog and it's done with the goal of making them look ridiculous.

Finally, Lin Wood, RIttenhouse's lawyer at the time, was fired pre-trial by Kyle and quite possibly was manipulating Kyle at the time, possibly with ulterior motives in mind.


  • Kyndo
  • Moderator LVL 1

    • I am a geek!!

    • March 03, 2011, 09:45:24 am
    • Gyeongsangbuk-do
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #92 on: November 25, 2021, 01:08:40 pm »
Did members of the mob who attacked Kyle have their face blanked out or their identity concealed?
Hopefully not. Break a law? Then one ought to face (pun) the consequences, (regardless of political affiliation, although that should go without saying).


It is yet to be determined if a man drove into a parade full of people due to hsi racial hatred against whites and disagreement that they should be allowed to defend themselves when attacked.  More info will come out soon, I would imagine.
Wrong topic post, I think?



Proud Boys are not designated as an extremist group in the U.S. The Proud Boys are basically the right's version of ANTIFA- LARPers who have a variety of motives and are somewhat loosely organized and run the gamut in terms of their views.
I didn't intend to imply that they were a terrorist organization, but most of what I hear about them indicates that they are very concerned with one particular race and culture. I was under the impression that most of what defines them as a group is being anti-other, and that they are outspokenly so.


Also, the OK symbol is NOT a white power gesture. It's basically done to troll the left/mainstream media, who have a tendency to freak out and label anything that isn't on their side as "white supremacist/Nazi/fascist" This was the one that caught on. People have attempted these such measures because they've realized that media, politicians and activist groups will respond like Pavlov's dog and it's done with the goal of making them look ridiculous.
I'm not certain what that is all about, actually. I just remembered that there were accusations that the kid was hanging out with white-supremacist groups before he did what he did, and I assumed this was a picture of him with said group. I'm also reminded that hate-speech, unlike in a lot of countries isn't actually a crime in the US...

  Incidentally, I *do* know that the okay sign means something *very* different in parts of the Middle-East. Don't do it there!




Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #93 on: November 25, 2021, 01:23:04 pm »
That picture was taken when he was out on bail and he claims the guys came up to him in a bar and he thought they were construction workers


  • Kyndo
  • Moderator LVL 1

    • I am a geek!!

    • March 03, 2011, 09:45:24 am
    • Gyeongsangbuk-do
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #94 on: November 25, 2021, 02:25:18 pm »
So it was basically a photo-op for said groups? Pretty disgusting on their part.


  • CO2
  • Waygook Lord

    • 7541

    • March 02, 2015, 03:41:14 pm
    • Uiwang
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #95 on: November 25, 2021, 03:05:37 pm »
Well known people with "undesirables" having their picture taken with them is such a non-issue.

You know how many selfies they have taken with them everyday and do you know how unrecognisable some fringe KKK guy is gonna be? 

Ted Bundy could pass me on the street and I wouldn't bloody know. It's absurd to think that anyone would recognise any white nationalist person.

Unless their heiling Hitler or holding up the Nazi flag, it's so hard to tell.


  • tylerthegloob
  • The Legend

    • 2952

    • September 28, 2016, 10:46:24 am
    • Busan
    more
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #96 on: November 25, 2021, 03:13:54 pm »
very true. but on the other hand if my sole claim to fame was killing some people (whether it was in self-defense or otherwise) i probably wouldn't be taking pictures with anyone (never mind smiling and throwing up an "OK" sign)
more gg more skill


  • CO2
  • Waygook Lord

    • 7541

    • March 02, 2015, 03:41:14 pm
    • Uiwang
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #97 on: November 25, 2021, 03:16:38 pm »
very true. but on the other hand if my sole claim to fame was killing some people (whether it was in self-defense or otherwise) i probably wouldn't be taking pictures with anyone (never mind smiling and throwing up an "OK" sign)
Oh, fair play. I can agree with that, too.

Peterson got some hate back cuz some random MGTOW youtuber took their pic with him and it's like, "The guy has a meet and greet after every event. He literally has his photo taken with 5000 people a week."

It's impossible to tell. My point is that it's certainly no "smoking gun." People will look for ANY excuse to go after someone they don't like and I think it's counter-productive.


Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #98 on: November 25, 2021, 03:53:53 pm »
I remember when the father of the Orlando nightclub shooter was somehow placed behind Hillary Clinton at one of her rallies. A bunch of RWers leapt on that as evidence of Clinton being in league with Islamic terror or some other nonsense crap like that. Same with Trump-Russia when people were like "Michael Flynn once met with the Russian Ambassador! He also lied to authorities when he said he never met Russian so-and-so when actually he met him for 30 seconds at some gala event. Checkmate!" Even funnier was when a Dem Senator was like "I've never met with any Russians. I'd remember!" And shortly after tweeting that, someone dug up a photo and an event where she he'd met some Russians.

Like do people not realize how much contact famous people have with random people? Do you really think they remember every single person they've met? Do people not understand how people are introduced to you when you're in the public eye? Random handlers will just shove random people in front of you. Then some photographer might guide you and be like "Okay everyone BIG SMILES!!!! Show me you're doing okay! Great! Now look friendly, come on give each other a hug!" At which point something happens and for a split second you're photographed looking at cleavage or with a dopey expression.

The fact that people even fall for this is sad.


  • Kyndo
  • Moderator LVL 1

    • I am a geek!!

    • March 03, 2011, 09:45:24 am
    • Gyeongsangbuk-do
Re: Rittenhouse trial
« Reply #99 on: November 26, 2021, 07:16:17 am »
Well known people with "undesirables" having their picture taken with them is such a non-issue.

You know how many selfies they have taken with them everyday and do you know how unrecognisable some fringe KKK guy is gonna be? 

Ted Bundy could pass me on the street and I wouldn't bloody know. It's absurd to think that anyone would recognise any white nationalist person.

Unless their heiling Hitler or holding up the Nazi flag, it's so hard to tell.
To clarify, I meant disgusting on the part of the guys taking the picture, not on the kid's part. As you say, it's pretty unlikely that he had any idea what those guys represented.