• Social justice activists heckle Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley "What side are you on?" #blackliv
    110 replies, posted
This is what happens when you tolerate the vocal minority.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48240811]Why are they booing at a perfectly legitimate statement?[/QUOTE] Because they think any response other than complete agreement is a disagreement.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;48241008]these people hate actual solutions because it takes away their perceived right to bitch.[/QUOTE] This hits the issue smack in the head. It's ridiculous that they'd not seem to grasp the fact that Bernie was in favor of fixing issues like police brutality and such otherwise.
[QUOTE=Pelican;48241044]what does 'liberal' in america mean in australia it's the equivalent of a republican[/QUOTE] Liberal in the US is left to center-right, Conservative is right.
[QUOTE=JerryK;48241028]think you misunderstood my post[/QUOTE] No, the far right is very quick to dump their candidates if they don't stick to the far rights ideals even more so than the left because neocons expect personal judgment, intuition and character more than the left which expects more thought based or fact based legislation
[QUOTE=Pelican;48241044]what does 'liberal' in america mean in australia it's the equivalent of a republican[/QUOTE] in most of what i've read, 'liberal' means 'left-wing', while 'conservative' means 'right-wing'. australia is weird in that its conservative party is called 'the liberal party'. however, in the context of the definition above, labour would be a liberal party, while 'the liberal party' would be a conservative party.
[QUOTE=Pelican;48241044]what does 'liberal' in america mean in australia it's the equivalent of a republican[/QUOTE] A liberal in the U.S. is a social liberal, so they think liberty is achieved with a strong government role. A liberal in Australia and Europe is a classic liberal, close to what is a libertarian in the U.S. [editline]19th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=joes33431;48241211]in most of what i've read, 'liberal' means 'left-wing', while 'conservative' means 'right-wing'. australia is weird in that its conservative party is called 'the liberal party'. however, in the context of the definition above, labour would be a liberal party, while 'the liberal party' would be a conservative party.[/QUOTE] Our Liberal Party is a liberal party. It is economically liberal. It's the U.S. that's weird.
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48240760]So apparently the #blacklivesmatter crowd is planning on doing this during the entirety of the presidential campaign. I'm looking through twitter right now and getting pretty infuriated. Do these people even research anything at all? [IMG]http://i.gyazo.com/4b4c49383bf1449d8acaa983eadf5254.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] last time i checked, dylann roof's was a fringe case and not every evil whitey grabbed their fully-semi-automatic AK-15 assault gun and shot every good young black boy who was about to get his life on track to death. better education, more jobs, and smarter wages is the answer to the shit that these idiots are protesting about. anyone who takes a stance that far in either direction on the political spectrum is fucking retarded. neocons that want to "eliminate all traces of socialism" would have to start by disbanding law enforcement [I]because that's a socialist concept at heart along with a shitload of other good ideas.[/I] libs who tout nebulous things like "love", "equality", and "freedom", really want none of those things and will fuck everything up as bad as the neocons would. in the election, i'm voting for bernie, and in lieu of that, the only other person i can stand is rand. as long as jeb, ted, and hillary lose, we all lose less.
[QUOTE=plunger435;48240916]At my university we've had people sprinting through the halls and knocking on doors to try and start a walk out and people forming a human chain infront of the food court over blacklivesmatter, as if students are not the most liberal people already. All this stuff does is show that liberals are more interested in scoring points than actually changing anything.[/QUOTE] It's not liberals to blame, it's sheltered, stupid middle-upper class teenagers and young adults. We have similar people at our universities here but they identify as socialists instead.
[QUOTE=Velocet;48240817]That education and jobs will lead to African Americans living more prosperous lives and hopefully relieve some of the racial tensions in this country. What the hell are the #blacklivesmatter people trying to achieve? [B]Why target Bernie and these democrats who do believe that there is racism in this country and want to fix it?[/B] Go after the guys who believe racism doesn't exist at least.[/QUOTE] because, as you said, they are not well educated. most people who are up shit creek won't know what's good for them.
[QUOTE=Pelican;48241044]what does 'liberal' in america mean in australia it's the equivalent of a republican[/QUOTE] There's economically liberal, which is about Corporate freedom and the belief in the power of the market, which is what we talk about when we say liberal in most of the world, but then there's socially liberal, which is about social acceptance and progression. Somewhere along the way, people got confused about these meanings. In the US, when people say Liberal they are referring to the left wing, probably because along with social liberalism often comes left wing economic ideas, but not always.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48240811]Why are they booing at a perfectly legitimate statement?[/QUOTE] Well he didn't actually address the concern. Imagine someone asked him what he plans to do about young college graduates being saddled with unreasonable amounts of student loan debt and instead of actually responding to the specific issue he just made a general statement about how debt hurts people
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48241491]Well he didn't actually address the concern. Imagine someone asked him what he plans to do about young college graduates being saddled with unreasonable amounts of student loan debt and instead of actually responding to the specific issue he just made a general statement about how debt hurts people[/QUOTE] He addressed in the better way, challenging what actually gets them killed. An overzealous criminal justice system that's loaded with blood money from privately owned jails. He just didn't say the exact fucking tag line but he hit every point that those protesters would be saying and nailed it with support and information.
[QUOTE=Swilly;48241528]He addressed in the better way, challenging what actually gets them killed. An overzealous criminal justice system that's loaded with blood money from privately owned jails. He just didn't say the exact fucking tag line but he hit every point that those protesters would be saying and nailed it with support and information.[/QUOTE] That was Sanders. The guy who dodged the question was O'Malley. Sanders handled this perfectly and definitely has the best track record on civil rights out of all the presidential candidates
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48241491]Well he didn't actually address the concern. Imagine someone asked him what he plans to do about young college graduates being saddled with unreasonable amounts of student loan debt and instead of actually responding to the specific issue he just made a general statement about how debt hurts people[/QUOTE] Of course he addressed their concern, it just doesn't look that way because it doesn't provide the instant soothing sensation to their perpetually perturbed butts. A better example is if someone talked about unreasonable amounts of student loan debt and instead of responding to the specific issue he points out a standardized school system and culture obsessed with college for college's sake churning out a glut of kids with bachelor's degrees that have absolutely no job availability. Sure it's not answering the specific question, but it's bringing up the root cause of student loan debt, and since that's an issue not many people get into, or don't like getting into because they're in some way responsible (or personally invested) with it, it's not an answer many find appealing. [QUOTE=Zeke129;48241545]That was Sanders. The guy who dodged the question was O'Malley. Sanders handled this perfectly and definitely has the best track record on civil rights out of all the presidential candidates[/QUOTE] Well shit, thought you were talking about Sanders.
[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;48241303]There's economically liberal, which is about Corporate freedom and the belief in the power of the market, which is what we talk about when we say liberal in most of the world, but then there's socially liberal, which is about social acceptance and progression. Somewhere along the way, people got confused about these meanings. In the US, when people say Liberal they are referring to the left wing, probably because along with social liberalism often comes left wing economic ideas, but not always.[/QUOTE] Liberal on its own should mean liberal in both senses, but everyone got confused because they're idiots who can't see beyond left/right spectrum and now the word is meaningless so even though 'liberal' describes my beliefs very accurately I can't use it anymore
You have got to a serious idiot if you interrupt and shout at BERNIE FUCKING SANDERS as some sort of racial justice protest.
-snip-
So let me get this straight. A presidential candidate (not just any person, a potential president, someone who can be chosen to have the tools and power to make a difference) is trying to calm the waters by telling them that *all* human life takes precedence over ideological divides, probably also going as far as suggesting them that the best way to combat hatred is certainly not with more hatred... to a militant group. And they boo him for that? Shout "do not generalize this shit"? And he *apologized* for trying to bring some sense into the whole debate? Do they ever stop and realize how stubborn, hateful, and indocrinated they sound when they say that? Do they not want equality and change? As a non-American, the complete lack of humanity and overall lack of logic the American militant groups show, both pro-Confederate flag advocates and pro-"Black lives matter"... staggers me. All they do is make matters worse, bringing hate to a boiling point. [editline]19th July 2015[/editline] So basically, to them all lives matter, but black lives matter *more*? What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;48245277]So let me get this straight. A presidential candidate (not just any person, a potential president, someone who can be chosen to have the tools and power to make a difference) is trying to calm the waters by telling them that *all* human life takes precedence over ideological divides, probably also going as far as suggesting them that the best way to combat hatred is certainly not with more hatred... to a militant group. And they boo him for that? Shout "do not generalize this shit"? And he *apologized* for trying to bring some sense into the whole debate? Do they ever stop and realize how stubborn, hateful, and indocrinated they sound when they say that? Do they not want equality and change? As a non-American, the complete lack of humanity and overall lack of logic the American militant groups show, both pro-Confederate flag advocates and pro-"Black lives matter"... staggers me. All they do is make matters worse, bringing hate to a boiling point. [editline]19th July 2015[/editline] So basically, to them all lives matter, but black lives matter *more*? What the fuck is that supposed to mean?[/QUOTE] They were booing O'Malley because he gave a non-answer. The whole "black lives matter" thing isn't "black lives matter [I]more[/I]" it's "black lives matter [I]too[/I]" because nobody (sans Bernie) seems to be willing to address the concerns of minorities being killed by the police, they just say some vague feelgood answer like "all lives matter" and don't actually express any systematic change that could reduce police brutality. I think people have a right to be frustrated, what's changed since Rodney King?
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;48245277]So basically, to them all lives matter, but black lives matter *more*? What the fuck is that supposed to mean?[/QUOTE] We go over this every single time this comes up and somehow nobody ever pays attention or at the very least remembers what people mean. Are you all doing this on purpose or something? When people say "black lives matter" and somebody retorts with "no all lives matter" they are handwaving the issues aside. Yes, all lives do matter, that's fairly indisputable and therefore pretty meaningless to bring up as a response. People using "black lives matter" aren't calling for society to ignore white people, asian people, etc. and focus solely on black people, they are asking society to actually pay attention to black lives and the lingering problems. Black people in the US suffer a disproportionate amount of poverty, incarceration, uneducation, and negative representation. "Black lives matter" is a call to actually look at this shit and realise that despite people wanting to think racism is dead and buried, black people are still left to fix all the problems caused from segregation themselves rather than society working together to solve the problems faster.
[QUOTE=Pelican;48241044]what does 'liberal' in america mean in australia it's the equivalent of a republican[/QUOTE] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism[/url] By absolute definition, every party in the US is pretty much a type of liberal party. Usually in the US people mean social liberal (rather than economic liberal, which is the right wing) when they say liberal
Because saying "All Lives Matter" is basically saying "sure you guys may be disproportionately affected by police brutality but white people suffer from police brutality sometimes so shut up". (ed: not implying that that's what O'Malley was trying to say, but that's what the phrase "#whitelivesmatter" really means) Of course just look at the thread about men getting groped. FP is hella guilty of using examples of discrimination going in the "opposite direction" and using that to dismiss real problems. [editline]19th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Shibbey;48245531][url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism[/url] By absolute definition, every party in the US is pretty much a type of liberal party. Usually in the US people mean social liberal (rather than economic liberal, which is the right wing) when they say liberal[/QUOTE] Liberal, like basically all words, has different meanings depending on the context it' used in. It's kind of like the phrase "all lives matter" in that regard...
[QUOTE=Explosions;48244928]You have got to a serious idiot if you interrupt and shout at BERNIE FUCKING SANDERS as some sort of racial justice protest.[/QUOTE] Seems to me serious idiots seem to be the most angry at any political event.
-snip-
[QUOTE=Explosions;48244928]You have got to a serious idiot if you interrupt and shout at BERNIE FUCKING SANDERS as some sort of racial justice protest.[/QUOTE] Seriously, the dudes practically a modern day beatnik.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;48240811]Why are they booing at a perfectly legitimate statement?[/QUOTE] I'm not one of these people who go around, touting such stuff, but this is their viewpoint: Charles sees on the news and internet how black people are being wrongly killed. "This is terrible!" So, he goes on a spree of "BLACK LIVES MATTER!" to push people focusing on fixing black people being killed in these conflicts. These are obviously racially inspired conflicts, so focusing on how black lives matter, too, should work. Amy sees Charles and is confused. "...Yeah, they do. Along with everyone else's lives. Life matters, mate." Charles sees Amy's viewpoint as: All lives matter, white lives matter, etc... She's not going to do anything about white people, and she won't do anything about black people. In fact, she's flat out [I]comparing[/I] the struggles of white people to those black people who were murdered! Fuck off with her "BUT WHAT ABOUT TEH WHITE PEOPLE" bullshit. Black people need justice. ------- So, that's why they boo. They feel saying "white lives matter along with them" diminishes the focus.
Well of course, they see an old white man and they just immediately know he eats black babies. If the term SJW applies to anyone, it's those protestors.
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;48245316]They were booing O'Malley because he gave a non-answer. The whole "black lives matter" thing isn't "black lives matter [I]more[/I]" it's "black lives matter [I]too[/I]" because nobody (sans Bernie) seems to be willing to address the concerns of minorities being killed by the police, they just say some vague feelgood answer like "all lives matter" and don't actually express any systematic change that could reduce police brutality. I think people have a right to be frustrated, what's changed since Rodney King?[/QUOTE] o'malley did give real answers, though, he said he believed that every incident in which a cop kills someone and every complaint of police brutality should be heavily investigated, and when vargas asked what he thought of civilian control boards, he said he believed they should exist, too. he didn't just say "all lives matter" and leave it at that he gave solutions as well and people still booed and hijacked the q&a [quote]“I believe every police department in America should have to report in an open and transparent way all police-involved shootings, all discourtesy complaints, all brutality complaints,” O’Malley, a former Baltimore mayor, said. Asked by Vargas about civilian review boards, O’Malley added, “all departments should have civilian review boards.” That was roughly as specific as the protesters allowed O’Malley to get. He went on to say, awkwardly, “black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter,” sparking loud boos. [/quote] sure it isn't incredibly specific but it isn't a non-answer, just perhaps an unprepared one
these people deserve Jeb Bush or Donald Trump to become president, for they can learn to appreciate their candidates they don't deserve. That or Hillary Clinton wins and she goes Obama 2.0 aka nothing done about their problems at all for what could be end up 8 straight years in a row.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.